NHRC Gets Sidetracked In Red-Shirt Riot Probe

[webfact]

BURNING ISSUE

NHRC gets sidetracked in riot probe

By Avudh Panananda

The Nation

The National Human Rights Commission has stepped into the limelight for the wrong reason - its report on last year's riots is drawing flak for defending the anti-riot operations instead of focusing on rights violations.

Although the NHRC claims its report was leaked because of office politics, the leakage should serve as a lesson that partial truth would drive a deeper wedge into a society already plagued by divisiveness.

With testimony from 28 state officials, 54 red shirts and 26 witnesses, the NHRC-appointed panel might have overreached itself trying to draw a conclusion on what happened at the red-shirt rallies between March 12 and May 19, 2010.

A full inquiry is being conducted by the Truth for Reconciliation Commission led by jurist Kanit na Nakorn. A major part of the leaked NHRC report seemed to duplicate Kanit's work.

In the face of the limited evidence and testimony at its disposal, the NHRC-sponsored panel report might have erred by trying to apportion blame between the red shirts and the security forces.

Of the nine major incidents in connection with the rallies, the report held the red shirts accountable for the eruption of violence but failed to shed light on human-rights offences and how to resolve the issue or prevent a repeat.

During the April 10, 2010, bloodshed on Rajdamnoen Avenue, the report noted the involvement of "men in black" to assist the red shirts in repelling the crowd-control operations.

It drew the conclusion that the protests were not peaceful - but fell short of addressing such crucial questions as who the "men in black" were and how they were linked to the red shirts.

In regard to the mysterious deaths at Wat Pathum on May 19, it cited a lack of evidence and witnesses to re-enact how the six victims were shot dead. And forensic evidence indicated that not all six were killed inside the temple.

It is understandable why the red shirts were furious at the report, which put them in a bad light while absolving the government for cracking down on protesters.

Any attempt to apportion the blame related to politically motivated violence would be counterproductive. The NHRC should be devoting its attention to remedies and restoration for victims of rights abuses. The task of uncovering the truth on the bloodshed should be left to the Kanit commission.

If national reconciliation is to materialise, then it is imperative that the probes into the bloodshed piece together differing slices of truth to form a whole picture.

Various investigations conducted by the Kanit commission, police, the Department of Special Investigation and other law-enforcement agencies should leave no stone unturned, otherwise the country will find no closure to the bloodletting.

The investigations have made significant progress on re-enacting activities involving the red shirts and the retaliatory measures of the security forces. But that is not enough.

One of the unanswered questions is the involvement of the men in black. If the red shirts strongly deny any links, then who are the men in black? And why did these armed men show up to defend the reds on several occasions?

The next question is why the red leaders turned a blind eye to armed guards, who happened to dress in black, at Lumpini.

The red leaders owe an explanation as to why their armed guards could raid Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital without their consent.

After the hospital raid, the armed guards refused to relocate from Lumpini to Sarasin. Why did the red leaders fail to rein in the guards?

-- The Nation 2011-07-26

[WhizBang]

Any report that does not whitewash red activity and responsibility will never be accepted by the red hoard.

[SomTumTiger]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

[scorecard]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

Excellent question.

[jayboy]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

I'm not sure why you're asking me (since I have avoided pointless speculation about violence on the streets where I can contribute little) and the honest answer is that I have no idea, nor do I know why they were armed as they were.

Mysteriously the government/security forces never identified let alone captured any of the MIB.That they should melt away without trace is scarcely credible.The redshirt leadership (the part on the streets) was however captured and interrogated.Did they have anything to say on this subject? We have heard nothing

I suggest your question is better put to Khun Abhisit and the army leadership (or the faction in charge of the crackdown; there were -significantly - other factions sidelined).

Some on this forum jump to conclusions which have no basis in fact.Some take it for granted the MIB were in the pay of or directed by Thaksin, a highly improbable proposition.If you asked me to take an informed guess I would suspect an internal military faction sympathetic to the redshirts possibly but more likely equally resentful at power shifts within the army.But who knows for sure.The investigation into these events was slovenly and incompetent, and the army as always refused to co-operate.

The question to pose in murky matters like this is - who benefits or who thought they could benefit? All for discussion by reasonable people but no substitute for a rigorous and exhaustive investigation.

[SomTumTiger]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

I'm not sure why you're asking me (since I have avoided pointless speculation about violence on the streets where I can contribute little) and the honest answer is that I have no idea, nor do I know why they were armed as they were.

Mysteriously the government/security forces never identified let alone captured any of the MIB.That they should melt away without trace is scarcely credible.The redshirt leadership (the part on the streets) was however captured and interrogated.Did they have anything to say on this subject? We have heard nothing

I suggest your question is better put to Khun Abhisit and the army leadership (or the faction in charge of the crackdown; there were -significantly - other factions sidelined).

Some on this forum jump to conclusions which have no basis in fact.Some take it for granted the MIB were in the pay of or directed by Thaksin, a highly improbable proposition.If you asked me to take an informed guess I would suspect an internal military faction sympathetic to the redshirts possibly but more likely equally resentful at power shifts within the army.But who knows for sure.The investigation into these events was slovenly and incompetent, and the army as always refused to co-operate.

The question to pose in murky matters like this is - who benefits or who thought they could benefit? All for discussion by reasonable people but no substitute for a rigorous and exhaustive investigation.

Well, I am sure we can count on Yingluck to get the answers then, right? 555

[jayboy]

Well, I am sure we can count on Yingluck to get the answers then, right? 555

I'm not sure she can contribute much because I suspect she will be as cautious with the army leadership as Abhisit was.

[SomTumTiger]

Well, I am sure we can count on Yingluck to get the answers then, right? 555

I'm not sure she can contribute much because I suspect she will be as cautious with the army leadership as Abhisit was.

That is one theory. Mine is - her big brother already paid them to disappear, until needed again.

[animatic]

Any report that does not whitewash red activity and responsibility will never be accepted by the red hoard.

Right to the point here, for sure.

[jayboy]

Well, I am sure we can count on Yingluck to get the answers then, right? 555

I'm not sure she can contribute much because I suspect she will be as cautious with the army leadership as Abhisit was.

That is one theory. Mine is - her big brother already paid them to disappear, until needed again.

I made a comment that Yingluck could be as constrained as Abhisit.It's not a theory.

As to your theory I've heard it before though don't agree with it.A question you might like to consider - if your theory has anything to it - is why the combined forces ranked against Thaksin have not been able to come up with one piece of evidence to support it.

[OzMick]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

You might also like to wonder why they chose to initiate the violence. The killing of the army commander on the scene was obviously a well-planned operation.

[pedro01]

A quick google of "Avudh Panananda" will tell you all you need about this article.

[landofthefree]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

You might also like to wonder why they chose to initiate the violence. The killing of the army commander on the scene was obviously a well-planned operation.

Obviously, and then the red shirts, suicide squad division, stole the Army's guns and uniforms and shot themselves!

[backtonormal]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

Excellent question.

Surely you watched the movies. Tommy Lee Jones and Will Smith

[backtonormal]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

You might also like to wonder why they chose to initiate the violence. The killing of the army commander on the scene was obviously a well-planned operation.

According to the amsterdam report the chances of any red shirt hurling that kind of munition the distance shown on the video was not possible. More truth in another soldier rolling it in from the side and standing behind the APC. It had the desired effect, it made the soldiers fire more bullets.

[backtonormal]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

Just my tuppence. They may have had automatic weapons and grenades because they were issued them from the army stores. Just a thought

[OzMick]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

You might also like to wonder why they chose to initiate the violence. The killing of the army commander on the scene was obviously a well-planned operation.

Obviously, and then the red shirts, suicide squad division, stole the Army's guns and uniforms and shot themselves!

MOST of the deployed soldiers were in crowd control mode, not all, and I have no doubt that those armed returned fire. But if you can accept that the army commander was killed in a planned move to initiate conflict, the obvious aim is to make the army look like they over-reacted. For such a result, the casualties HAVE to be higher on the protester's side. So yes, you are nearly right; but sacrificial pawns rather than suicide squad.

I am quite sure that k. Thaksin considered the loss of a few supporter's a small price to achieve his long term goals. It seems to have worked so far.

[OzMick]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

You might also like to wonder why they chose to initiate the violence. The killing of the army commander on the scene was obviously a well-planned operation.

According to the amsterdam report the chances of any red shirt hurling that kind of munition the distance shown on the video was not possible. More truth in another soldier rolling it in from the side and standing behind the APC. It had the desired effect, it made the soldiers fire more bullets.

"According to the amsterdam report........." You consider that a reliable source? The man is a spin doctor and obfuscator, and anybody that believes anything he puts out is an idiot.

It certainly would be impossible to hurl a HAND grenade the required distance, but as he was killed with an M-79 which is fired from a launcher, max. range nearly 400m. The projectiles from the two types are quite different/distinctive, the M-79 uses buckshot, hand grenades flattened wire nicked to break apart into ~1/2" lengths. As there were also reports of him being targetted with a laser pointer, it makes Amsterdam's report sound like the smoke and mirrors crap that he normally issues.

"It had the desired effect, it made the soldiers fire more bullets." Absolutely correct. Now ask yourself WHY was that the desired effect.

[OzMick]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

Just my tuppence. They may have had automatic weapons and grenades because they were issued them from the army stores. Just a thought

Add a ha'penny - Seh Daeng

[backtonormal]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

You might also like to wonder why they chose to initiate the violence. The killing of the army commander on the scene was obviously a well-planned operation.

According to the amsterdam report the chances of any red shirt hurling that kind of munition the distance shown on the video was not possible. More truth in another soldier rolling it in from the side and standing behind the APC. It had the desired effect, it made the soldiers fire more bullets.

"According to the amsterdam report........." You consider that a reliable source? The man is a spin doctor and obfuscator, and anybody that believes anything he puts out is an idiot.

It certainly would be impossible to hurl a HAND grenade the required distance, but as he was killed with an M-79 which is fired from a launcher, max. range nearly 400m. The projectiles from the two types are quite different/distinctive, the M-79 uses buckshot, hand grenades flattened wire nicked to break apart into ~1/2" lengths. As there were also reports of him being targetted with a laser pointer, it makes Amsterdam's report sound like the smoke and mirrors crap that he normally issues.

"It had the desired effect, it made the soldiers fire more bullets." Absolutely correct. Now ask yourself WHY was that the desired effect.

I managed to stop the video at the point of explosion and had a full screen of what looked like molten metal. Is that an M79, sorry no arms expert. It may not be a reliable source but its more reliable than anything else that has been published to this date. The report was made by a military expert, not Amsterdam himself and are we to doubt his credentials or his he also selling his reputation for a few thaksin dollars.

As for the desired effect, only my opinion, to justify some of the actions of those present. Justification comes from which side of the fence you are.

Edited July 26, 2011 by backtonormal

[creck]

Why does everybody seem to be ignoring the arson over much of Bangkok following the army action? That was a riot; far more than the redshirt demonstration. No cctv/witnesses? No investigation? It did seem to be targeted and not a mob out of control. It was a very costly destruction; I have never heard of any action to find those responsible. – was there any?

[Bakseedaa]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

I'm not sure why you're asking me (since I have avoided pointless speculation about violence on the streets where I can contribute little) and the honest answer is that I have no idea, nor do I know why they were armed as they were.

Mysteriously the government/security forces never identified let alone captured any of the MIB.That they should melt away without trace is scarcely credible.The redshirt leadership (the part on the streets) was however captured and interrogated.Did they have anything to say on this subject? We have heard nothing

I suggest your question is better put to Khun Abhisit and the army leadership (or the faction in charge of the crackdown; there were -significantly - other factions sidelined).

Some on this forum jump to conclusions which have no basis in fact.Some take it for granted the MIB were in the pay of or directed by Thaksin, a highly improbable proposition.If you asked me to take an informed guess I would suspect an internal military faction sympathetic to the redshirts possibly but more likely equally resentful at power shifts within the army.But who knows for sure.The investigation into these events was slovenly and incompetent, and the army as always refused to co-operate.

The question to pose in murky matters like this is - who benefits or who thought they could benefit? All for discussion by reasonable people but no substitute for a rigorous and exhaustive investigation.

Some of the Men in Black were caught and questioned... answers should come out soon.. But if I remember correctly, they were ex Border Control Guards, recruited by general,Khattiya Sawatdiphol, and trained in Cambodia.. I think they spilled the beans at that time...

[jayboy]

Some of the Men in Black were caught and questioned... answers should come out soon.. But if I remember correctly, they were ex Border Control Guards, recruited by general,Khattiya Sawatdiphol, and trained in Cambodia.. I think they spilled the beans at that time...

I didn't know that.Can you refer me to the report/s concerned?

On the face of it it seems odd that no news has emerged of the results of the interrogation when - if the MIB rumours are true - this could only have been to the benefit of the Democrats, the army, indeed the whole existing establishment.

[Thai at Heart]

Some of the Men in Black were caught and questioned... answers should come out soon.. But if I remember correctly, they were ex Border Control Guards, recruited by general,Khattiya Sawatdiphol, and trained in Cambodia.. I think they spilled the beans at that time...

I didn't know that.Can you refer me to the report/s concerned?

On the face of it it seems odd that no news has emerged of the results of the interrogation when - if the MIB rumours are true - this could only have been to the benefit of the Democrats, the army, indeed the whole existing establishment.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/37606/the-first-men-in-black-finally-arrested-but-what-will-this-mean/

One of the big headlines in several Thai newspapers during the past few days has been that of “the arrest of MiB (Men in Black)”. The news mentions the arrest of Surachai Thewarat, a close aide to the late Seh Daeng, Maj Gen Khattiya Sawasdipol. Surachai was arrested at a hotel in Lopburi Province on May 15, 2010. The police said Surachai had actually fled to Cambodia, but has returned because he could not stand the hardship there

Love the bit about the hardship of living in Cambodia.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/Alleged-black-shirt-man-arrested-by-DSI-30146821.html

Investigators of the Department of Special Investigation have arrested a 'man in black' for having allegedly fired at troops at the Kokwua Intersection on April 10.

DSI Director-General Tharit Pengdit alleged that Manop Charnchangthong, 48, was one of men in black who fired at troops on April 10.

Whether anyone has got anything out of him to put into this enquiry is another issue. It all adds to the intrigue. That said, the army aren't a unified bunch, and the amount of skullduggery that goes on vis a vis corruption and investigation in there, no one would dare to touch it.

As an opinion, I think they were disaffected ex or current army hired hands who were part of the red-shirt plan. Who actually engaged them and paid them is all pure speculation, and proving it is nigh on impossible.

Edited July 26, 2011 by Thai at Heart

[jayboy]

I didn't know that.Can you refer me to the report/s concerned?

As an opinion, I think they were disaffected ex or current army hired hands who were part of the red-shirt plan. Who actually engaged them and paid them is all pure speculation, and proving it is nigh on impossible.

Thanks for the link.It does seem incredible a year on that nothing has emerged on the interrogation, when the establishment had so much to gain from the disclosures.

I fully agree your last comment.

[phiphidon]

http://asiancorrespo...will-this-mean/

One of the big headlines in several Thai newspapers during the past few days has been that of "the arrest of MiB (Men in Black)". The news mentions the arrest of Surachai Thewarat, a close aide to the late Seh Daeng, Maj Gen Khattiya Sawasdipol. Surachai was arrested at a hotel in Lopburi Province on May 15, 2010. The police said Surachai had actually fled to Cambodia, but has returned because he could not stand the hardship there

Love the bit about the hardship of living in Cambodia.

http://www.nationmul...I-30146821.html

Investigators of the Department of Special Investigation have arrested a 'man in black' for having allegedly fired at troops at the Kokwua Intersection on April 10.

DSI Director-General Tharit Pengdit alleged that Manop Charnchangthong, 48, was one of men in black who fired at troops on April 10.

Whether anyone has got anything out of him to put into this enquiry is another issue. It all adds to the intrigue. That said, the army aren't a unified bunch, and the amount of skullduggery that goes on vis a vis corruption and investigation in there, no one would dare to touch it.

As an opinion, I think they were disaffected ex or current army hired hands who were part of the red-shirt plan. Who actually engaged them and paid them is all pure speculation, and proving it is nigh on impossible.

See this thread for more information

http://www.thaivisa....ok/page__st__25

As usual full of misinformation, conspiracy theories and complete supposition but if you wade through it you might come to the conclusion that not a lot has happened or been proved.

Tharit being the nice man that he is decided that to help Surachai with his confession by threatening to implicate his wife and mother in an arms buying allegation - thankfully the UDD Lawyers stepped in then and no more was heard - I presume he is still being held under suspicion. I understand that Manop is the only one found guilty and that was for having illegal firearms, nothing about firing on troops.

So presumably all 500 of Abhisit and Sutheps "Men in Black" are still out there. Perhaps Tharit will enlighten the public at some point about how all his investigations are going, including the one about the Palm Oil hoarding, but I digress.

[Thai at Heart]

http://asiancorrespo...will-this-mean/

One of the big headlines in several Thai newspapers during the past few days has been that of "the arrest of MiB (Men in Black)". The news mentions the arrest of Surachai Thewarat, a close aide to the late Seh Daeng, Maj Gen Khattiya Sawasdipol. Surachai was arrested at a hotel in Lopburi Province on May 15, 2010. The police said Surachai had actually fled to Cambodia, but has returned because he could not stand the hardship there

Love the bit about the hardship of living in Cambodia.

http://www.nationmul...I-30146821.html

Investigators of the Department of Special Investigation have arrested a 'man in black' for having allegedly fired at troops at the Kokwua Intersection on April 10.

DSI Director-General Tharit Pengdit alleged that Manop Charnchangthong, 48, was one of men in black who fired at troops on April 10.

Whether anyone has got anything out of him to put into this enquiry is another issue. It all adds to the intrigue. That said, the army aren't a unified bunch, and the amount of skullduggery that goes on vis a vis corruption and investigation in there, no one would dare to touch it.

As an opinion, I think they were disaffected ex or current army hired hands who were part of the red-shirt plan. Who actually engaged them and paid them is all pure speculation, and proving it is nigh on impossible.

See this thread for more information

http://www.thaivisa....ok/page__st__25

As usual full of misinformation, conspiracy theories and complete supposition but if you wade through it you might come to the conclusion that not a lot has happened or been proved.

Tharit being the nice man that he is decided that to help Surachai with his confession by threatening to implicate his wife and mother in an arms buying allegation - thankfully the UDD Lawyers stepped in then and no more was heard - I presume he is still being held under suspicion. I understand that Manop is the only one found guilty and that was for having illegal firearms, nothing about firing on troops.

So presumably all 500 of Abhisit and Sutheps "Men in Black" are still out there. Perhaps Tharit will enlighten the public at some point about how all his investigations are going, including the one about the Palm Oil hoarding, but I digress.

Sorry to question, but has anyone ever suggested 500? or was that just to add emphasis.

I would think there were probably only 25

[hellodolly]

Yes - who WERE the men in black? I would love to hear the answer - Jayboy? Geriatrickid? Anyone? Who were they? And why were they carrying automatic weapons, and grenades...

I wonder...

I'm not sure why you're asking me (since I have avoided pointless speculation about violence on the streets where I can contribute little) and the honest answer is that I have no idea, nor do I know why they were armed as they were.

Mysteriously the government/security forces never identified let alone captured any of the MIB.That they should melt away without trace is scarcely credible.The redshirt leadership (the part on the streets) was however captured and interrogated.Did they have anything to say on this subject? We have heard nothing

I suggest your question is better put to Khun Abhisit and the army leadership (or the faction in charge of the crackdown; there were -significantly - other factions sidelined).

Some on this forum jump to conclusions which have no basis in fact.Some take it for granted the MIB were in the pay of or directed by Thaksin, a highly improbable proposition.If you asked me to take an informed guess I would suspect an internal military faction sympathetic to the redshirts possibly but more likely equally resentful at power shifts within the army.But who knows for sure.The investigation into these events was slovenly and incompetent, and the army as always refused to co-operate.

The question to pose in murky matters like this is - who benefits or who thought they could benefit? All for discussion by reasonable people but no substitute for a rigorous and exhaustive investigation.

Good post jayboy you managed to turn the tide and make a try to make the red shirts look good and the army bad.

What do you expect the army to say they were defending Thailand from armed terrorists. That is part of their job. Not there fault there opposition had inept leaders who spent most of their time trying to figure out where to invest the money that they were receiving.

I am sorry but even the village idiot would know you do not illegally seize public domain build up defensive barriers around it hire armed thugs and extort the crowd to burn the city down. Not to mention the hospital invasion and rockets into transit centers filled with people going about there legal business.

Actually I think you are going to have to work a bit more on your cover story.

[phiphidon]

Sorry to question, but has anyone ever suggested 500? or was that just to add emphasis.

I would think there were probably only 25

Army spokesmen Sansern Kaewkamnerd on Friday said there were an estimated 500 armed "terrorists" among the thousands of protesters in the city.

http://mobile.reuter...14?i=1&irpc=932 dated 14th May 2010

This has been further ratified and more details added in an article written by one of the military officers involved that " appears in the Army Training Command's Senathipat Journal, Vol 59, Issue 3, September–December 2010, as part of the army's guidelines and case studies on military operations to solve urban unrest." as reported by Matichon online. This interestingly points out that "CRES intelligence" had it that "there were about 500 armed terrorists among the red shirts, and they were equipped with war weapons including M79s, M16s, AK47s and Tavor-21s."

Despite my opinion about "CRES" and "intelligence" being polar opposites, it would appear that the outgoing government have been somewhat tardy in rounding up these "500" and their supposed weapons inventory, if they existed in those numbers (weapons of mass destruction excuses come to mind).

Two far more interesting points in that article which may have ramifications later are that:

1. Despite Suthep claiming he gave the order to the Army for the crackdown the article clearly points out that is was Abhisit who did so (as would be expected, him being the man ultimately "in charge") and

2. "the government always had a clear policy to use military measures to pressure the red shirts, and the policy of 'tightening the circle' was to end the demonstrations, not to open a dialogue." It adds that this policy contributed to the rejection of "a group of senators to offer themselves as mediators on the night of 18 May…".

[TAWP]

'500 armed terrorists' is accurate, they didn't say there was 500 MiB nor 500 armed with specifically AKs etc, but including war-weapons, weapons, bows, slingshots etc. Maybe we should write '500 non-unarmed nutters' for you to get it...

Edited July 26, 2011 by TAWP