Police Explain Why Journalists Detained: Pitak Siam Rally

[ridkun]

It's very clear that it was journalist's fault not to put the badge on because police would never assault journalists, they only do that with innocent Thai people.

[Nickymaster]

Santi Tae-tia, 50, a cameraman for ASTV and Tosarit Wattanarat, cameraman for T-News, both anti-government television stations, lodged complaints at Nanlerng Police Station yesterday, saying they were assaulted by police, detained and had their cameras destroyed.

Santi said he showed his press card and journalist badge to no avail and was attacked by police. He added that he was forced to lie on the ground and kicked in the face, but he was able to protect himself with his hands. Santi said another journalist was assaulted. He and Tosarit were held in a detention van for more than an hour.

His camera and notebook computer were damaged and his camera was confiscated.

This is a straightforward story and the police are dead wrong. What a coincidence that it happened within 2 hours after the protest started and that one journalist works for ASTV. What a coincidence guys!

PURE intimidation by the police…Nothing less!

And then there are guys on those forum saying..yes..yes..but..but..in 2010 bla bla.. I honestly believe that many guys posting here don’t want Thailand to improve. They seem to be intelligent guys but as long as their party wins its ok. All about winning. Very dangerous people.

I have no idea about this case, other than what is reported here (the same as you i presume), but you could quite simply turn your statement around. Oh what a surprise, one 'unbiased ASTV' reporters surprise surprise make unfounded allegation of police despite being involved in the protest.

Interesting that you choose to believe the reporters version. Its simply one/two persons word against another group of people.

The whole situation was all over the news within minutes of it happening.

And the police already tried to cool down the situation by saying it was a mistake (do some research if you don't believe me). Another honest mistake.. And you don't smell anything fishy here. I am not surprised.

You may well be right, I don't know. I just find it strange you jump into the story based on the article and you write as if you are 100% correct and it is all factual already, when really you know nothing about it other than whats on here, and some other article which it appears you are again making assumptions that the are trying to 'cool' the situation. I just prefer to be a little bit more circumspect until all facts are actually known.

Like I said, please do some research on the issue and you will come to the same conclusion.

Edited November 28, 2012 by Nickymaster

[Moruya]

As if "censorship" of any kind was new to Thailand!

So some of you get all tingly in their underwear about that?

Ever do anything else on the internet, other than Thai Visa? (NO, I am not talking about porn!)

So it bothers you, that one journalist got his camera removed?

Yeah...that sure is borderline fascism!

There were 2 journalists.

Nothing "new" to Thailand? Show me other cases of journalist abuse and camera confiscation

Not sure where you are coming from with your "tingly underpants" comments and allusion to "porn" but I'm sure this type of stuff is best kept to yourself.

Maybe if the journalists had actually worn the Green TJA arm bands instead of the yellow Pitak Siam party ones, then they would have been easier to distinguish, and would not have been mistook for protesters.

You know that for a fact?

No green arm band = kicking on the floor?

[smutcakes]

As if "censorship" of any kind was new to Thailand!

So some of you get all tingly in their underwear about that?

Ever do anything else on the internet, other than Thai Visa? (NO, I am not talking about porn!)

So it bothers you, that one journalist got his camera removed?

Yeah...that sure is borderline fascism!

There were 2 journalists.

Nothing "new" to Thailand? Show me other cases of journalist abuse and camera confiscation

Not sure where you are coming from with your "tingly underpants" comments and allusion to "porn" but I'm sure this type of stuff is best kept to yourself.

Maybe if the journalists had actually worn the Green TJA arm bands instead of the yellow Pitak Siam party ones, then they would have been easier to distinguish, and would not have been mistook for protesters.

You know that for a fact?

No green arm band = kicking on the floor?

It was reported in the other paper, so i would assume its as believable as the rest of the reported 'facts' of the case. I have no issue with this case and think its entirely plausible that the police acted improperly. However i just took issue with Nickymaster who was unequivocal that the police were 100% wrong based solely on the information in this and the other paper article. He obviously ignored minor details like the reporters allegedly not wearing TJA bands, but the yellow ones of the party organizers which although does not justify improper behavior by the police, it does raise the question as to whether it is quite as clear cut as Nickymaster and Asiawatcher made out.

[Ferangled]

As if "censorship" of any kind was new to Thailand!

So some of you get all tingly in their underwear about that?

Ever do anything else on the internet, other than Thai Visa? (NO, I am not talking about porn!)

So it bothers you, that one journalist got his camera removed?

Yeah...that sure is borderline fascism!

There were 2 journalists.

Nothing "new" to Thailand? Show me other cases of journalist abuse and camera confiscation

Not sure where you are coming from with your "tingly underpants" comments and allusion to "porn" but I'm sure this type of stuff is best kept to yourself.

Maybe if the journalists had actually worn the Green TJA arm bands instead of the yellow Pitak Siam party ones, then they would have been easier to distinguish, and would not have been mistook for protesters.

You know that for a fact?

No green arm band = kicking on the floor?

Why, do you know for a fact it doesn't? What a random comment...

It would seem a prudent step though; distinguish yourself from the protesters and make it clear to authorities that you are actually a working journalist and not a protester that happens to have a job as a journalist... let's face it which, given the neutrality of their employer, would seem more believable?

[Ferangled]

The foreign press. Those on the street. They must be right. They are never in dangerous places they should not be or are not allowed to be. They always obey orders from authorities. They never go the extra mile for that 1 special picture. They are saints and are always right. Just like Mr. Santi.

And we should not take into account that a headline like Army shoots innocent protestors sells better then Violent protestors shoot at Thai authorities.

Please try not to be so blinkered in your posts.

Nicky please read back this post and compare and contrast with your others on this thread. They make truly fascinating reading!

[metisdead]

Remember, this topic is about the Pitak Siam rally of this past weekend and not the events of 2010.

[Nickymaster]

The foreign press. Those on the street. They must be right. They are never in dangerous places they should not be or are not allowed to be. They always obey orders from authorities. They never go the extra mile for that 1 special picture. They are saints and are always right. Just like Mr. Santi.

And we should not take into account that a headline like Army shoots innocent protestors sells better then Violent protestors shoot at Thai authorities.

Please try not to be so blinkered in your posts.

Nicky please read back this post and compare and contrast with your others on this thread. They make truly fascinating reading!

You just don't get it. Santi was put in there for a purpose. Nevermind.

[khunken]

Let me get this straight. The red-shirt supporters on this thread are defending the police for acting like thugs because one of the journalists was from the wrong side.

Well the TJA (only one-sided in defending journalists) are not impressed & stated the obvious - that the police overreacted.

Silencing journalists is the modus operandi of forces that don't want their violent behaviour to be seen or reported. Thaksin tried it when in power (locally) but he shot himself in the foot. The police have done the same, spoiling a mostly well organised suppression of the rally.

[KKvampire]

Journalists and their newspapers in Thailand dont print the FACTS and TRUTH and dont investigate corruption for fear of retribution. PERIOD

How often is their a major corruption scandal uncovered by the media and is in the news, when the whole country knows it's going on?

Edited November 28, 2012 by KKvampire

[Ferangled]

Remember, this topic is about the Pitak Siam rally of this past weekend and not the events of 2010.

My apologies metisdead, I fear I have contributed to derailing this thread.

It's difficult not to draw comparisons between this serious assault on the freedom of the independent press in Thailand and those pesky foreign Red Shirt propaganda merchants shooting themselves willy nilly to further their journalistic careers in 2010...

[smutcakes]

Let me get this straight. The red-shirt supporters on this thread are defending the police for acting like thugs because one of the journalists was from the wrong side.

Well the TJA (only one-sided in defending journalists) are not impressed & stated the obvious - that the police overreacted.

Silencing journalists is the modus operandi of forces that don't want their violent behaviour to be seen or reported. Thaksin tried it when in power (locally) but he shot himself in the foot. The police have done the same, spoiling a mostly well organised suppression of the rally.

As far as I can see, no one in this thread is supporting inappropriate police behavior.

[Nickymaster]

Remember, this topic is about the Pitak Siam rally of this past weekend and not the events of 2010.

My apologies metisdead, I fear I have contributed to derailing this thread.

It's difficult not to draw comparisons between this serious assault on the freedom of the independent press in Thailand and those pesky foreign Red Shirt propaganda merchants shooting themselves willy nilly to further their journalistic careers in 2010...

Come on. This was your first sentence.

"Very selective memory bordering on total BS. Never occurred during the 2010 protests?! Really, there was total press freedom was there?"

[Ferangled]

Remember, this topic is about the Pitak Siam rally of this past weekend and not the events of 2010.

My apologies metisdead, I fear I have contributed to derailing this thread.

It's difficult not to draw comparisons between this serious assault on the freedom of the independent press in Thailand and those pesky foreign Red Shirt propaganda merchants shooting themselves willy nilly to further their journalistic careers in 2010...

Come on. This was your first sentence.

"Very selective memory bordering on total BS. Never occurred during the 2010 protests?! Really, there was total press freedom was there?"

Nicky, please leave it alone. You're yet again taking a reply to another member totally out of context. The post is there for all to read, you're doing yourself no favours mate.

[Ferangled]

Let me get this straight. The red-shirt supporters on this thread are defending the police for acting like thugs because one of the journalists was from the wrong side.

Well the TJA (only one-sided in defending journalists) are not impressed & stated the obvious - that the police overreacted.

Silencing journalists is the modus operandi of forces that don't want their violent behaviour to be seen or reported. Thaksin tried it when in power (locally) but he shot himself in the foot. The police have done the same, spoiling a mostly well organised suppression of the rally.

As far as I can see, no one in this thread is supporting inappropriate police behavior.

I second that and similarly can't see anyone being overly supportive of the red shirts. I don't think by putting this incident in perspective and showing up the double standards of certain members of this forum that anyone should be labelled as a supporter of anything other than impartiality.

To clarify I personally condemn police brutality and suppression of the press... but not solely when it suits my personal agenda. I also like to maintain a healthy perspective between this incident and other more lethal methods of suppression we've seen in use in Thailand's recent history.

[khunken]

Let me get this straight. The red-shirt supporters on this thread are defending the police for acting like thugs because one of the journalists was from the wrong side.

Well the TJA (only one-sided in defending journalists) are not impressed & stated the obvious - that the police overreacted.

Silencing journalists is the modus operandi of forces that don't want their violent behaviour to be seen or reported. Thaksin tried it when in power (locally) but he shot himself in the foot. The police have done the same, spoiling a mostly well organised suppression of the rally.

As far as I can see, no one in this thread is supporting inappropriate police behavior.

Refer to posts nos 8, 23 (yours) & 27. Supporting as in deflecting, questioning the journalist's position & attempting to put the blame on the journalist.

[Nickymaster]

Remember, this topic is about the Pitak Siam rally of this past weekend and not the events of 2010.

My apologies metisdead, I fear I have contributed to derailing this thread.

It's difficult not to draw comparisons between this serious assault on the freedom of the independent press in Thailand and those pesky foreign Red Shirt propaganda merchants shooting themselves willy nilly to further their journalistic careers in 2010...

Come on. This was your first sentence.

"Very selective memory bordering on total BS. Never occurred during the 2010 protests?! Really, there was total press freedom was there?"

Nicky, please leave it alone. You're yet again taking a reply to another member totally out of context. The post is there for all to read, you're doing yourself no favours mate.

Your first comment in this thread was: But in 2010.... It just caught my attention and I thought: "Again?" That's all.

I will leave it here. No problem.

Favours..

[khunken]

Let me get this straight. The red-shirt supporters on this thread are defending the police for acting like thugs because one of the journalists was from the wrong side.

Well the TJA (only one-sided in defending journalists) are not impressed & stated the obvious - that the police overreacted.

Silencing journalists is the modus operandi of forces that don't want their violent behaviour to be seen or reported. Thaksin tried it when in power (locally) but he shot himself in the foot. The police have done the same, spoiling a mostly well organised suppression of the rally.

As far as I can see, no one in this thread is supporting inappropriate police behavior.

I second that and similarly can't see anyone being overly supportive of the red shirts. I don't think by putting this incident in perspective and showing up the double standards of certain members of this forum that anyone should be labelled as a supporter of anything other than impartiality.

To clarify I personally condemn police brutality and suppression of the press... but not solely when it suits my personal agenda. I also like to maintain a healthy perspective between this incident and other more lethal methods of suppression we've seen in use in Thailand's recent history.

I don't believe that for a minute. You have gone out of your way to deflect the thread from the Op. Your perspective (meaning your total bias) is to defend any group supporting the PTP, Red-shirts, red-police & Thaksin.

[asiawatcher]

With all the rhetoric and conflict of this thread, it still remains, press were manhandled, beaten and equipment smashed or confiscated by police, not protestors. Why? Nothing to hide, no need to smash and confiscate, a kicking they may justify but not destruction of evidence. And trying to compare to the lame antics and police ignoring directives in 2010 by the then government shows where their sympathies and support lie now PTP and Reds are in. The police are a disgrace - simply mafia in brown uniforms.

[smutcakes]

Let me get this straight. The red-shirt supporters on this thread are defending the police for acting like thugs because one of the journalists was from the wrong side.

Well the TJA (only one-sided in defending journalists) are not impressed & stated the obvious - that the police overreacted.

Silencing journalists is the modus operandi of forces that don't want their violent behaviour to be seen or reported. Thaksin tried it when in power (locally) but he shot himself in the foot. The police have done the same, spoiling a mostly well organised suppression of the rally.

As far as I can see, no one in this thread is supporting inappropriate police behavior.

Refer to posts nos 8, 23 (yours) & 27. Supporting as in deflecting, questioning the journalist's position & attempting to put the blame on the journalist.

My post 23 was in response to Nickymaster's, I was pointing out that anyone can make assumptions like he was doing, and it can be done from both perspectives if someone wished. I was indicating that we should maybe wait for the situation to become clearer before making sweeping statements.

I did not mean it in anyway to condone improper police behavior. More questioning why one person would automatically accept the journalist viewpoint without question, over the other party without more details on the case.

[Ferangled]

Let me get this straight. The red-shirt supporters on this thread are defending the police for acting like thugs because one of the journalists was from the wrong side.

Well the TJA (only one-sided in defending journalists) are not impressed & stated the obvious - that the police overreacted.

Silencing journalists is the modus operandi of forces that don't want their violent behaviour to be seen or reported. Thaksin tried it when in power (locally) but he shot himself in the foot. The police have done the same, spoiling a mostly well organised suppression of the rally.

As far as I can see, no one in this thread is supporting inappropriate police behavior.

Refer to posts nos 8, 23 (yours) & 27. Supporting as in deflecting, questioning the journalist's position & attempting to put the blame on the journalist.

Since when did questioning the validity of an article or actually more appropriately to this thread, questioning the conclusions others have drawn from this article, indicate support of anything other than rational thought process and impartiality?

[khunken]

Let me get this straight. The red-shirt supporters on this thread are defending the police for acting like thugs because one of the journalists was from the wrong side.

Well the TJA (only one-sided in defending journalists) are not impressed & stated the obvious - that the police overreacted.

Silencing journalists is the modus operandi of forces that don't want their violent behaviour to be seen or reported. Thaksin tried it when in power (locally) but he shot himself in the foot. The police have done the same, spoiling a mostly well organised suppression of the rally.

As far as I can see, no one in this thread is supporting inappropriate police behavior.

Refer to posts nos 8, 23 (yours) & 27. Supporting as in deflecting, questioning the journalist's position & attempting to put the blame on the journalist.

My post 23 was in response to Nickymaster's, I was pointing out that anyone can make assumptions like he was doing, and it can be done from both perspectives if someone wished. I was indicating that we should maybe wait for the situation to become clearer before making sweeping statements.

I did not mean it in anyway to condone improper police behavior. More questioning why one person would automatically accept the journalist viewpoint without question, over the other party without more details on the case.

OK. But you did ignore the TJA position & I think that anyone who has had dealings with the police here (like myself) won't be very willing to believe anything they say.

[marstons]

With all the rhetoric and conflict of this thread, it still remains, press were manhandled, beaten and equipment smashed or confiscated by police, not protestors. Why? Nothing to hide, no need to smash and confiscate, a kicking they may justify but not destruction of evidence. And trying to compare to the lame antics and police ignoring directives in 2010 by the then government shows where their sympathies and support lie now PTP and Reds are in. The police are a disgrace - simply mafia in brown uniforms.

Police do the same in the west, protesters, jurno's all get it at G8 meetings. Even HM was seen doing to a guys camera in Pattaya, he was not a BIB.

[Ferangled]

Let me get this straight. The red-shirt supporters on this thread are defending the police for acting like thugs because one of the journalists was from the wrong side.

Well the TJA (only one-sided in defending journalists) are not impressed & stated the obvious - that the police overreacted.

Silencing journalists is the modus operandi of forces that don't want their violent behaviour to be seen or reported. Thaksin tried it when in power (locally) but he shot himself in the foot. The police have done the same, spoiling a mostly well organised suppression of the rally.

As far as I can see, no one in this thread is supporting inappropriate police behavior.

I second that and similarly can't see anyone being overly supportive of the red shirts. I don't think by putting this incident in perspective and showing up the double standards of certain members of this forum that anyone should be labelled as a supporter of anything other than impartiality.

To clarify I personally condemn police brutality and suppression of the press... but not solely when it suits my personal agenda. I also like to maintain a healthy perspective between this incident and other more lethal methods of suppression we've seen in use in Thailand's recent history.

I don't believe that for a minute. You have gone out of your way to deflect the thread from the Op. Your perspective (meaning your total bias) is to defend any group supporting the PTP, Red-shirts, red-police & Thaksin.

Well I guess that's your prerogative Ken!

If you could actually substantiate your claims with a single quote supporting the red shirts, PTP or Thaksin your rantings may carry some validity, as it is they don't. Every post I have made on this thread has been in response to another post. I have questioned some very dubious assumptions and misinformed statements, and backed these questions up with sources and points that support my position.

Total bias is certainly evident here but I'll leave it up to other readers to discern who by.

[DocN]

I don't get it: you are all talking, as if Thailand was the beacon of free press until last weekend!

There is all kinds of material available of that rally.

What about the thought, that these two special journalists may have actually done something wrong and had their stuff confiscated?

Just because they were journalists a) doesn't make everything they did okay and b ) doesn't mean that Thailand is now on a downward- slop towards a totalitarian regime!

We all agree (hopefully) that freedom of press and freedom of expression is not the highest on Thailand's agenda and that also didn't happen overnight on last Saturday!

[khunken]

Let me get this straight. The red-shirt supporters on this thread are defending the police for acting like thugs because one of the journalists was from the wrong side.

Well the TJA (only one-sided in defending journalists) are not impressed & stated the obvious - that the police overreacted.

Silencing journalists is the modus operandi of forces that don't want their violent behaviour to be seen or reported. Thaksin tried it when in power (locally) but he shot himself in the foot. The police have done the same, spoiling a mostly well organised suppression of the rally.

As far as I can see, no one in this thread is supporting inappropriate police behavior.

Refer to posts nos 8, 23 (yours) & 27. Supporting as in deflecting, questioning the journalist's position & attempting to put the blame on the journalist.

Since when did questioning the validity of an article or actually more appropriately to this thread, questioning the conclusions others have drawn from this article, indicate support of anything other than rational thought process and impartiality?

Since your attempt to deflect this thread. Rational thought & impartiality? Neither. In fact you have contributed very little to the thread which, as a reminder, is about police thuggery against journalists.

[Ferangled]

Since when did questioning the validity of an article or actually more appropriately to this thread, questioning the conclusions others have drawn from this article, indicate support of anything other than rational thought process and impartiality?

Since your attempt to deflect this thread. Rational thought & impartiality? Neither. In fact you have contributed very little to the thread which, as a reminder, is about police thuggery against journalists.

Rather than make baseless assumptions about other members of this forum do you think you could actually engage in the debate. Pick a post, quote it and counter the content point by point.

Your digs come across in a distinctly trollish fashion and have a noticeable lack of actual substance.

[khunken]

Well I guess that's your prerogative Ken!

If you could actually substantiate your claims with a single quote supporting the red shirts, PTP or Thaksin your rantings may carry some validity, as it is they don't. Every post I have made on this thread has been in response to another post. I have questioned some very dubious assumptions and misinformed statements, and backed these questions up with sources and points that support my position.

Total bias is certainly evident here but I'll leave it up to other readers to discern who by.

The note about your total bias includes your stance in numerous other threads as well as this one, where your inference is: police-innocent & journalist-guilty. It's not rocket science to discern one's stance & you are only making a mockery of the word 'impartiality'.

My stance in this case is that the journalists (& TJA) are far more credible than the Thai police who lead the way in non-credibility in Thailand.

[Ferangled]

The note about your total bias includes your stance in numerous other threads as well as this one, where your inference is: police-innocent & journalist-guilty. It's not rocket science to discern one's stance & you are only making a mockery of the word 'impartiality'.

My stance in this case is that the journalists (& TJA) are far more credible than the Thai police who lead the way in non-credibility in Thailand.

Rather than simply casting false assertions about people and leaping to addled conclusions, pick a post, even a part of a post, a statement, quote it and respond. It's really easy Ken, you can do it!

[khunken]

Since when did questioning the validity of an article or actually more appropriately to this thread, questioning the conclusions others have drawn from this article, indicate support of anything other than rational thought process and impartiality?

Since your attempt to deflect this thread. Rational thought & impartiality? Neither. In fact you have contributed very little to the thread which, as a reminder, is about police thuggery against journalists.

Rather than make baseless assumptions about other members of this forum do you think you could actually engage in the debate. Pick a post, quote it and counter the content point by point.

Your digs come across in a distinctly trollish fashion and have a noticeable lack of actual substance.

No baseless assumptions - opinion based on having suffered through many of your posts which support the main proponents of thuggery (& worse) in Thailand.

You have contributed nothing of substance to this thread. If fact all you've done is reply to other people's posts. That's closer to trolling.

I have stated my opinion of the article. Any conflict between the BIB & anyone else is almost always strains the BIB's credibility. In the case of a journalist or two, it's no contest.