Slain Thai activist's family arrested over leaflet protest

[tbthailand]

This boy was someone's son.

And?

Edit ... do you want me to find some photos of soldiers being shot or blown up by the red shirt protesters?

that is such an obtuse and out of touch statement that it makes me wonder if you and that guy rubl are related.

I haven't seen so many cold-hearted posters on a forum in a long long time. Ok, maybe never.

What was the point of showing that photo?

Do you really think a judge would look at and say "oh dear. That's terrible. You must be guilty."

People were killed, on both sides. Just because "he was someone's son" doesn't make any difference to the discussion and is a pretty lame debating tactic.

you really are just trolling, aren't you.

If you can't read the general level of comments on this topic and understand why showing a picture representing the core issue and concern of this family and their struggle for some kind of justice, then I cannot do anything to help you understand.

[whybother]

you really are just trolling, aren't you.

If you can't read the general level of comments on this topic and understand why showing a picture representing the core issue and concern of this family and their struggle for some kind of justice, then I cannot do anything to help you understand.

Everyone understands what the core issue is. People were killed and their families want justice.

But this thread is about the families being arrested for handing out pamphlets. They're unhappy that the murder cases against Abhisit and Suthep were dismissed.

What does showing photos of dead protesters do to add to that discussion? Do you want to rehash all the details of their deaths again?

[khunken]

Anybody see what's wrong with this article's byline: "The father of a 17-year-old boy who was murdered during the 2010 military crackdown on anti-government protesters has been charged with littering after he distrusted leaflets demanding justice for his son on Sunday."?

Calling it a murder means that there was proof that someone had premeditated intent to kill the teen, and that there is no claim of privilege. I don't think Khaosod has a clue about the actual elements to prove a case for murder. Redshirt journalism at its best. Not material to its story, they could have just used the term "killed" as they do later in the story.

the army's actions on that day were planned, premeditated, or what ever you want to call it.

murder is a very good word for the killing of this boy - shot in the head - not to mention the death of the other young woman killed in the Wat.

Were you there? If not then you have no idea whether it was planned, accidental or just reacting to mistaken threats. In other words you are making it up based on nothing but bias.

If you are a witness and privy to what the army were doing then, and only then, would your post not be considered just conspiracy creation.

thanks for that verdict.

you should get a job on a Thai court

What verdict? You're the one pronouncing guilt without any apparent real knowledge of the incidents. You certainly don't belong in a court, except maybe a kangaroo one.

You made accusations that the death was premeditated or planned (same thing) and it was murder. Prove it.

I gave various possibilities regarding what happened because I wasn't there and wasn't prepared to speculate.

Making spurious allegations is not very clever.

Edited September 1, 2014 by khunken

[sweatalot]

Crackdown Victims Families Demand Ex-Leaders Tried In 'People's Court'

By Khaosod English

BANGKOK — The relatives of a 17-year-old boy and a volunteer nurse who were murdered during the 2010 military crackdown on Redshirt demonstrators staged a protest in defiance of the junta's ban on public gatherings.

The protest followe

-- Khaosod English 2014-09-01

people's court?

Looks like they mean a lynch "court"

[See the bears]

Anybody see what's wrong with this article's byline: "The father of a 17-year-old boy who was murdered during the 2010 military crackdown on anti-government protesters has been charged with littering after he distrusted leaflets demanding justice for his son on Sunday."?

Calling it a murder means that there was proof that someone had premeditated intent to kill the teen, and that there is no claim of privilege. I don't think Khaosod has a clue about the actual elements to prove a case for murder. Redshirt journalism at its best. Not material to its story, they could have just used the term "killed" as they do later in the story.

the army's actions on that day were planned, premeditated, or what ever you want to call it.

murder is a very good word for the killing of this boy - shot in the head - not to mention the death of the other young woman killed in the Wat.

Were you there? If not then you have no idea whether it was planned, accidental or just reacting to mistaken threats. In other words you are making it up based on nothing but bias.

If you are a witness and privy to what the army were doing then, and only then, would your post not be considered just conspiracy creation.

Read the reports (link below) and then try to justify soldiers firing into a first aid tent inside a temple designated as a safe zone. Dozens of witnesses all said soldiers on the BTS tracks fired at unarmed people inside the temple, including nurse Kamolkate inside the tent.

If they were firing at black shirted terrorists they were extremely bad shots weren't they.

http://www.prachatai3.info/journal/2010/12/32440

[khunken]

Anybody see what's wrong with this article's byline: "The father of a 17-year-old boy who was murdered during the 2010 military crackdown on anti-government protesters has been charged with littering after he distrusted leaflets demanding justice for his son on Sunday."?

Calling it a murder means that there was proof that someone had premeditated intent to kill the teen, and that there is no claim of privilege. I don't think Khaosod has a clue about the actual elements to prove a case for murder. Redshirt journalism at its best. Not material to its story, they could have just used the term "killed" as they do later in the story.

the army's actions on that day were planned, premeditated, or what ever you want to call it.

murder is a very good word for the killing of this boy - shot in the head - not to mention the death of the other young woman killed in the Wat.

Were you there? If not then you have no idea whether it was planned, accidental or just reacting to mistaken threats. In other words you are making it up based on nothing but bias.

If you are a witness and privy to what the army were doing then, and only then, would your post not be considered just conspiracy creation.

Read the reports (link below) and then try to justify soldiers firing into a first aid tent inside a temple designated as a safe zone. Dozens of witnesses all said soldiers on the BTS tracks fired at unarmed people inside the temple, including nurse Kamolkate inside the tent.

If they were firing at black shirted terrorists they were extremely bad shots weren't they.

http://www.prachatai3.info/journal/2010/12/32440

First of all, if you want to post a source for your opinion, use a credible one. Prachathai is NOT a credible source but a blog (similar to TV) with a very biased agenda.

Secondly, if you bothered to read my previous posts on this thread, I didn't deny that the soldiers fired at apparently unarmed people. I never mentioned 'black shirted terrorists' either.

My argument is with the unproven speculation that the killings were premeditated and murder. There is no credible proof that they were either of those.

Before answering a post, try and look as what the original poster said and not what you are making up. I doubt that you even bothered to read any previous posts in this thread - just like a troll.

Edited September 1, 2014 by khunken

[Bluespunk]

"2010 Political Violence

Slain activist's family arrested over leaflet protest"

When did she come to be regarded as an activist? I always understood she was a volunteer medic.

[metisdead]

This topic is not an invitation to rehash the events of 2010, the topic is about slain Thai activist family members arrested over a leaflet protest.

[scorecard]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

This boy was someone's son.

And?

Edit ... do you want me to find some photos of soldiers being shot or blown up by the red shirt protesters?

that is such an obtuse and out of touch statement that it makes me wonder if you and that guy rubl are related.

I haven't seen so many cold-hearted posters on a forum in a long long time. Ok, maybe never.

Why do you talk like that. The other posters are making logical and valid points, why don't you react to their specific points instead of silly (and deliberate) over-reaction.

Or perhaps reaction to their specific points will not generate the reaction your specifically looking for?

[See the bears]

Read the reports (link below) and then try to justify soldiers firing into a first aid tent inside a temple designated as a safe zone. Dozens of witnesses all said soldiers on the BTS tracks fired at unarmed people inside the temple, including nurse Kamolkate inside the tent.

If they were firing at black shirted terrorists they were extremely bad shots weren't they.

http://www.prachatai3.info/journal/2010/12/32440

First of all, if you want to post a source for your opinion, use a credible one. Prachathai is NOT a credible source but a blog (similar to TV) with a very biased agenda.

Secondly, if you bothered to read my previous posts on this thread, I didn't deny that the soldiers fired at apparently unarmed people. I never mentioned 'black shirted terrorists' either.

My argument is with the unproven speculation that the killings were premeditated and murder. There is no credible proof that they were either of those.

Before answering a post, try and look as what the original poster said and not what you are making up. I doubt that you even bothered to read any previous posts in this thread - just like a troll.

If you had bothered to check the source you would have realised that it was the Department of Special Investigations Investigation Report, not an article from Prachathai.

Secondly, I can't stand small minded people who in the absence of sufficient intelligence resort to calling other people trolls or even better being on Thaksin's payroll.

[khunken]

Read the reports (link below) and then try to justify soldiers firing into a first aid tent inside a temple designated as a safe zone. Dozens of witnesses all said soldiers on the BTS tracks fired at unarmed people inside the temple, including nurse Kamolkate inside the tent.

If they were firing at black shirted terrorists they were extremely bad shots weren't they.

http://www.prachatai3.info/journal/2010/12/32440

First of all, if you want to post a source for your opinion, use a credible one. Prachathai is NOT a credible source but a blog (similar to TV) with a very biased agenda.

Secondly, if you bothered to read my previous posts on this thread, I didn't deny that the soldiers fired at apparently unarmed people. I never mentioned 'black shirted terrorists' either.

My argument is with the unproven speculation that the killings were premeditated and murder. There is no credible proof that they were either of those.

Before answering a post, try and look as what the original poster said and not what you are making up. I doubt that you even bothered to read any previous posts in this thread - just like a troll.

If you had bothered to check the source you would have realised that it was the Department of Special Investigations Investigation Report, not an article from Prachathai.

Secondly, I can't stand small minded people who in the absence of sufficient intelligence resort to calling other people trolls or even better being on Thaksin's payroll.

The link was to prachathai which I don't bother to check due to it's agenda. As for a DSI report - that's just as bad considering the chameleon Tarit was just doing PTP's bidding.

Well I can't stand even smaller minded people who invent things that I didn't post, don't answer what I posted and are simple minded to think that using biased sources they are in any way factual.

BTW the 'Thaksin's payroll' is yet more invention as it didn't come from me. Two posts here from you, both dishonest - and neither on topic. Worse than trolling - detracting from the thread.

[metisdead]

A post irrelevant to this topic has been removed.

[See the bears]

Read the reports (link below) and then try to justify soldiers firing into a first aid tent inside a temple designated as a safe zone. Dozens of witnesses all said soldiers on the BTS tracks fired at unarmed people inside the temple, including nurse Kamolkate inside the tent.

If they were firing at black shirted terrorists they were extremely bad shots weren't they.

http://www.prachatai3.info/journal/2010/12/32440

First of all, if you want to post a source for your opinion, use a credible one. Prachathai is NOT a credible source but a blog (similar to TV) with a very biased agenda.

Secondly, if you bothered to read my previous posts on this thread, I didn't deny that the soldiers fired at apparently unarmed people. I never mentioned 'black shirted terrorists' either.

My argument is with the unproven speculation that the killings were premeditated and murder. There is no credible proof that they were either of those.

Before answering a post, try and look as what the original poster said and not what you are making up. I doubt that you even bothered to read any previous posts in this thread - just like a troll.

If you had bothered to check the source you would have realised that it was the Department of Special Investigations Investigation Report, not an article from Prachathai.

Secondly, I can't stand small minded people who in the absence of sufficient intelligence resort to calling other people trolls or even better being on Thaksin's payroll.

The link was to prachathai which I don't bother to check due to it's agenda. As for a DSI report - that's just as bad considering the chameleon Tarit was just doing PTP's bidding.

Well I can't stand even smaller minded people who invent things that I didn't post, don't answer what I posted and are simple minded to think that using biased sources they are in any way factual.

BTW the 'Thaksin's payroll' is yet more invention as it didn't come from me. Two posts here from you, both dishonest - and neither on topic. Worse than trolling - detracting from the thread.

The report contains 41 witness interviews, documentary and physical evidence and opinions of investigators. Please do tell us where you get your wonderfully unbiased sources from.

Small minded people dismiss anything that doesn't fit with their preconceived convictions... "which I don't bother to check"... Hope you're happy in your ignorant bliss.

[khunken]

First of all, if you want to post a source for your opinion, use a credible one. Prachathai is NOT a credible source but a blog (similar to TV) with a very biased agenda.

Secondly, if you bothered to read my previous posts on this thread, I didn't deny that the soldiers fired at apparently unarmed people. I never mentioned 'black shirted terrorists' either.

My argument is with the unproven speculation that the killings were premeditated and murder. There is no credible proof that they were either of those.

Before answering a post, try and look as what the original poster said and not what you are making up. I doubt that you even bothered to read any previous posts in this thread - just like a troll.

If you had bothered to check the source you would have realised that it was the Department of Special Investigations Investigation Report, not an article from Prachathai.

Secondly, I can't stand small minded people who in the absence of sufficient intelligence resort to calling other people trolls or even better being on Thaksin's payroll.

The link was to prachathai which I don't bother to check due to it's agenda. As for a DSI report - that's just as bad considering the chameleon Tarit was just doing PTP's bidding.

Well I can't stand even smaller minded people who invent things that I didn't post, don't answer what I posted and are simple minded to think that using biased sources they are in any way factual.

BTW the 'Thaksin's payroll' is yet more invention as it didn't come from me. Two posts here from you, both dishonest - and neither on topic. Worse than trolling - detracting from the thread.

The report contains 41 witness interviews, documentary and physical evidence and opinions of investigators. Please do tell us where you get your wonderfully unbiased sources from.

Small minded people dismiss anything that doesn't fit with their preconceived convictions... "which I don't bother to check"... Hope you're happy in your ignorant bliss.

Still refusing to answer any of the points I made and, particularly, why you have to make inventions created from your warped mind.

This is 2014 (in case you didn't notice), four years after the incidents that you use false information from. There have been hundreds, if not thousands of articles from many sources - too many to list just for your education.

I'm happy with the information from credible sources & if you want to call not using biased sources 'ignorant bliss' so be it. You stick to your biased sources which tends to leave one ignorant, biased and very incapable of making a half-decent argument. Sort of ignorant irritability.

BTW you have not posted one iota of opinion, bias, comment or half-sensible remark about the topic - the 'activist's' family demo.

[Trouble]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

these unfortunate people got caught up in a situation were there were armed gunmen all around them engaging the army, the sad reality is if they had removed themselves from the area this would never have happened, if they really want justice they need to ask the man in the sand and those on the stages why they placed armed terrorists into the crowd, did they think the army were just going to stand there and be shot at

The questions that should be asked are -

- Did the army have a right to be there ? well of course they did

- Were there armed terrorists amongst the crowd of red protestors ? by all accounts it seems there were

- Did the red leaders give orders to shoot at the authorities ? by all accounts it seems they did

- Did the army have the justification to return fire ? by all accounts it seems they did

- Were people not wanting to be involved given the opportunity to leave the area ? by all accounts it seems they were

- Are these victims still being used as Thaksins pawns ? unfortunately it seems they are

The whole argument around these unfortunate casualties hinges on one thing, were there armed gunmen firing at the police and army amongst the red protestors - if the answer to that question is "yes" then case closed

I think you are losing this one event in amongst the wider scenario and I disagree with your last sentence. And I am fully in support of the Government and Army's actions at the time. This particular shooting of this nurse was away out of line. This was not in the early days of Thaksin's attack on Bangkok where soldiers were rightfully scared of the Black ronin snipers. This was late in the piece with the final push and mop up, the Black ronins gone and the Red mob well beaten. The Army was in total control and had the temple secured and sealed off. The Army had their troops come snipers elevated and looking down into the temples grounds and through binoculars and rifle scopes that young nurse would have stood out as plain as day. I have been a hunter gather all my life and am used to taking out deer at 400 meters with a 25/08 and basic scope that I could clearly define what I was shooting at. The soldier who pulled that trigger had a clear view of the scenario beneath them, at that stage of the mop up had no threats to their safety and minimial to those who were to ground storm the temple and should have been if wanting to lay down cover fire been able to pick a combat target which at that stage their were very few of, and not a nurse given of the situation who was there showing compassion. The same as the murders of the Army colonel and his staffers that was so wrong at the start of this mess and for which Thaksin and his thugs should be getting held to account this suspected murder (and that is what it is) at the end of it is also so wrong.

While I can agree that the family are debating about the wrong court I can see their point of view where their daughter was butchered and where someone should be held to account namely the Army soldier who pulled the trigger, or the ones immediately above them who gave them the order to shoot at will at any target they wished, because they were right out of control on this count. And that should be by the Army Courts. Sadly for these parents that will never happen.

And edited to add. It would be someone with a pretty black heart to agree with and then lay changes against this family regardless of their actions being seen as a violation against the criminal court. Thailand may need a leader right now with an iron fist to do what needs to be done but patience and compassion is also a prerequisite for a great leader. And that is what is needed in spades for this family.

the point is, she should not have been there if she is not willing to take the risk of being accidently caught up in the crossfire, it's a bit like a journalist entering a conflict zone - they know the risks and are willing to take them

I don't think the army targeted some of these people - they just got in the way in a live fire zone, it happens

The Coroner should have concluded "Accidental Death" unless they have evidence to suggest the army targeted unarmed people or were ordered to - as far as I am aware this did not happen and no such order existed

TBH considering what was going on at the time I'd have expected the death toll to be much higher than it was

Already mentioned above in a rare time I agree with Chooka - the police should take a considerable part of the blame here for not doing their sworn duty from the start, there could also be a case to answer were the police refused to protect the peaceful PDRC while they were being constantly attacked forcing them to arm themselves - the police have a lot to answer for in both cases - don't forget nearly 30 people died the first 6 months of this year while the police sat back and did absolutely nothing

The real POINT here is not about what happened during the chaos of that time but whether these individuals should have the freedom and right to protest the court's action. It seems in the Thailand of today there is no freedom to protest, even in a completely innocuous way, government actions. Thailand at this moment in time is nothing more than a military dictatorship working under the guise of a civil government. Many here on TV may praise the actions of Gen. P but to me he is a man who has taken it upon himself to make over Thailand in a way only he defines as correct. While all the statements look good on the surface, and cleaning up the beaches "looks" good, corruption runs a lot deeper than these superficial attempts at whitewashing deeper problems. Sure we all know that Thailand is a mess in so far as corruption and party politics but seizing the government and taking over is nothing other than what it is, a new military dictatorship, allowing another group to plunder Thailand. As we all can see none of these people have declared their assets so they certainly are not starting off setting much of an example to the people. If there was a thorough investigation of the good General we would probably find dirt swept under the carpet as no one gets to that kind of position (in Thailand) without cronyism. Sorry that's the way I see it. When there is no criticism allowed for fear of arrest or confinement, in the end you only have a dictatorship.

[Emptyset]

If you had bothered to check the source you would have realised that it was the Department of Special Investigations Investigation Report, not an article from Prachathai.

The link was to prachathai which I don't bother to check due to it's agenda. As for a DSI report - that's just as bad considering the chameleon Tarit was just doing PTP's bidding.

Well I can't stand even smaller minded people who invent things that I didn't post, don't answer what I posted and are simple minded to think that using biased sources they are in any way factual.

BTW the 'Thaksin's payroll' is yet more invention as it didn't come from me. Two posts here from you, both dishonest - and neither on topic. Worse than trolling - detracting from the thread.

Yes, Prachatai does have an agenda* - the promotion of liberal democratic ideals. This is obviously not synonomous with a pro-TS agenda and Prachatai made its name with critical reporting on state actions in the Deep South in 04/05 (e.g. the Tak Bai massacre). As with some other liberals though, they cleaved more to the 'red' side of things after the 06 coup, which I think is largely due to it's anti-royalist/anti-LM stance. It also reports on things other media sources often don't report on - for instance, the recent issue of the gold mine in Loei and how the millitary "resolved" the conflict. Actually, looking at it's news section now, it's just very straightforward reporting of recent things that would interest Prachatai readers: new LM cases etc. Of course, most of the news items are not casting the junta in a positive light, but they are nevertheless factual reports of things that have actually happened.

Personally I rather think it a positive thing that there are still news sources that report on these things; after all, amidst all the relentless positivity, there will still be people that have genuine grievances (like those in Loei) and are their opinions worth less than those who are satisified with the outcome? Also, biased doesn't mean inaccurate. I'm sure mistakes and inaccuracies can be found in Prachatai's news reporting over the years but probably not more so than the rest. I think The Nation is biased but I still read it as a source of daily news, exactly the same way I read Prachatai. Following various sources is really the only way to get a somewhat near accurate picture of the situation since no one source can be fully relied upon to provide impartial, wide-ranging coverage of news.

It's also valuable in itself to consider different perspectives, both to gain a broader understanding of what's happening, and to challenge your own opinions/theories. That's why I read Michael Yon during the PDRC protest and also the main reason I contribute to Thaivisa. I have changed my views somewhat over the years, and that's partly due to the discussions here.

That aside, the document See the bears posted is the leaked DSI document from December 2010 (therefore nothing to do with Tharit doing 'PT's bidding', people forget he was very much considered biased towards the Democrats at that point), also reported in The Nation & Reuters and widely discussed on here at the time. If you google something like 'leaked DSI documents wat pathum' you should be able to find more details, including a translation. If you read it, you'll see that it looks like they tried to investigate the case properly.

*As is fully disclosed on the 'About Prachatai' page on the website

[Emptyset]

"2010 Political Violence

Slain activist's family arrested over leaflet protest"

When did she come to be regarded as an activist? I always understood she was a volunteer medic.

That's right. Her brother Nattapat described her as having "pure humanitarian intentions". He said she had helped both red shirts and yellow shirts as a volunteer nurse. See article in BKK Post 'Victim's kind challenge unity efforts' from early 2012 which discusses Nattapat's opposition to amnesty and his concerns that justice would be overlooked by PT in order to bring about an amnesty which benefits Thaksin (which is of course exactly what happened).

[Emptyset]

By Khaosod English

...

after he distrusted leaflets

Can someone who know's Khaosod's version of English please explain what this means?

I think it was supposed to be distributed.

[Emptyset]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Disagree , the Army do not have a right to open up indiscriminately into a mass of people because they are being fired upon. Unless of course we are employing Israeli logic

Yes, I agree with that.

The point here is that these people have a valid point about lack of justice. Unfortunately they were 'got at' by the UDD and, apparently, Amsterdam to brainwash them with the lie that Abhisit & Suthep gave orders for the army to shoot innocent bystanders (or medics).

Their target should be the lying Tarit who absolved the army from any blame when it is pretty obvious that some were killed by wanton revenge/negligence/fear/whatever by a few army personnel.

They know that they are breaking some current laws - assembly, littering, defamation - but IMO the police didn't handle them harshly but broke up their demo. Not exactly a big deal.

Payao called for Tarit's resignation and wanted him to be amongst those prosecuted: ''Payao explained that if other CRES members were found guilty, there is no reason why Tarit should not be held responsible as well.

"[Tarit] knew everything about 2010 [crackdown]. All of them should be held responsible," she said.''

She also said: '"If we don't prosecute soldiers now, then they will end up engaging in such 'operations' again and again," Payao said.' http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/609428-slain-nurses-mother-seeks-action-against-thailands-d-s-i-chief-tarit/

Looking over some of the other articles about Payao and Nattapat during the last few years, it seems pretty clear that they're well aware of the self-serving nature of the last govt:

'"Three years have passed, but where is justice? What we have instead is an attempt to pass an amnesty bill. We're like a piece of political meat that can be exploited by anyone.

"An attempt by Deputy Premier Chalerm Yoobamrung to introduce a blanket amnesty [for people involved in the unrest] is like throwing acid on people like me."'

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Your-say--30206454.html

And were also not too happy about the role of the UDD leaders in all of this:

'Nattapat said the government and red-shirt leaders never asked for his opinion before proposing their bills. "They never asked us how we feel before they proposed the law, not even when they decided to draft it. "We feel like being a political piece of meat, that we have no meaning to them - they're just using us if they feel they want to."

He wanted every person who committed crimes to be punished, including soldiers. And his message for the military was "I'm not afraid of you". The family confirmed they still go to demonstrations with the red shirts, if asked, but prefer to stick with their group and not join any activity with others. Right now all they want is the truth, as people who want to know what happened, not just get money - to help "cure" their minds.'

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Family-of-nurse-Kate-opposes-both-amnesty-bills-30207258.html

I actually think many of the red shirts are more skeptical about the leadership than people realize. There's been a lot of disappointment over the last couple of years particularly, at least amongst what I'd suspect is a large minority, if not a majority. But they're hardly going to join hands with AV, Suthep and the military in opposing TS. I think they'd rather still give tacit - if not active - support to Thaksin, despite his betrayals, than do that.

[smedly]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

the point is, she should not have been there if she is not willing to take the risk of being accidently caught up in the crossfire, it's a bit like a journalist entering a conflict zone - they know the risks and are willing to take them

I don't think the army targeted some of these people - they just got in the way in a live fire zone, it happens

The Coroner should have concluded "Accidental Death" unless they have evidence to suggest the army targeted unarmed people or were ordered to - as far as I am aware this did not happen and no such order existed

TBH considering what was going on at the time I'd have expected the death toll to be much higher than it was

Already mentioned above in a rare time I agree with Chooka - the police should take a considerable part of the blame here for not doing their sworn duty from the start, there could also be a case to answer were the police refused to protect the peaceful PDRC while they were being constantly attacked forcing them to arm themselves - the police have a lot to answer for in both cases - don't forget nearly 30 people died the first 6 months of this year while the police sat back and did absolutely nothing

The real POINT here is not about what happened during the chaos of that time but whether these individuals should have the freedom and right to protest the court's action. It seems in the Thailand of today there is no freedom to protest, even in a completely innocuous way, government actions. Thailand at this moment in time is nothing more than a military dictatorship working under the guise of a civil government. Many here on TV may praise the actions of Gen. P but to me he is a man who has taken it upon himself to make over Thailand in a way only he defines as correct. While all the statements look good on the surface, and cleaning up the beaches "looks" good, corruption runs a lot deeper than these superficial attempts at whitewashing deeper problems. Sure we all know that Thailand is a mess in so far as corruption and party politics but seizing the government and taking over is nothing other than what it is, a new military dictatorship, allowing another group to plunder Thailand. As we all can see none of these people have declared their assets so they certainly are not starting off setting much of an example to the people. If there was a thorough investigation of the good General we would probably find dirt swept under the carpet as no one gets to that kind of position (in Thailand) without cronyism. Sorry that's the way I see it. When there is no criticism allowed for fear of arrest or confinement, in the end you only have a dictatorship.

I cannot disagree with your fundamental point but - this country has seen protests and polarisation since 2007, all it has done is promote unrest anger and violence fuelled by those evil people wanting to exploit every chance they have

So yes under a normal social landscape people should be allowed to voice and protest as they see fit, but lets be honest - Thailand was heading for a serious conflict before the good General stepped in and declared enough is enough, care must be taken to avoid an escalation or catalyst that would see rival factions take to the streets, 2010 and 2014 saw Thai people almost to the brink, it must not be allowed to happen again, it is undeniable that Thaksin provided funds to promote hate and division amongst the people, while spouting about reconciliation the exact opposite was going on (fact)

I have absolutely no doubt that Thaksin;s main agenda has not changed, if only these people could see they are being bought and used

If these people really want justice then they should insist that the man that has funded and caused most of the conflict with the Thai people should jump on the next flight from Dubai and explain himself in person

[chooka]

Gezz have some compassion, arresting someone for this. Let's drive a wedge between the haves and have nots. This is a bad move and will only divide the country again and not bring it together. They could have been handled more sensitively and not arrested.

Do you mean they could have been handled more "sensibly"? I have no idea of what the foreigners, on this forum, are expecting from the Thai gov't. You do have your (no hassle to get) visas, allowing you to set-up residence, and remain in this country. Why can't you blokes just enjoy the "broad" parameters of the foreign expat life, and stay OUT of the business of Thai politics? I guess you blokes will not be satisfied, until you totally "piss-off" the Immigration authorities (who constantly monitor this forum). For heaven sake, get a farang life, and then mind your own business, for a change. Whew!

So are you having a go at Thaivisa for posting this topic for discussion or the people who are discussing it. Take it up with Thaivisa admin and ask them to close the site if you don't like it or simply log off.

[khunken]

If you had bothered to check the source you would have realised that it was the Department of Special Investigations Investigation Report, not an article from Prachathai.

The link was to prachathai which I don't bother to check due to it's agenda. As for a DSI report - that's just as bad considering the chameleon Tarit was just doing PTP's bidding.

Well I can't stand even smaller minded people who invent things that I didn't post, don't answer what I posted and are simple minded to think that using biased sources they are in any way factual.

BTW the 'Thaksin's payroll' is yet more invention as it didn't come from me. Two posts here from you, both dishonest - and neither on topic. Worse than trolling - detracting from the thread.

Yes, Prachatai does have an agenda* - the promotion of liberal democratic ideals. This is obviously not synonomous with a pro-TS agenda and Prachatai made its name with critical reporting on state actions in the Deep South in 04/05 (e.g. the Tak Bai massacre). As with some other liberals though, they cleaved more to the 'red' side of things after the 06 coup, which I think is largely due to it's anti-royalist/anti-LM stance. It also reports on things other media sources often don't report on - for instance, the recent issue of the gold mine in Loei and how the millitary "resolved" the conflict. Actually, looking at it's news section now, it's just very straightforward reporting of recent things that would interest Prachatai readers: new LM cases etc. Of course, most of the news items are not casting the junta in a positive light, but they are nevertheless factual reports of things that have actually happened.

Personally I rather think it a positive thing that there are still news sources that report on these things; after all, amidst all the relentless positivity, there will still be people that have genuine grievances (like those in Loei) and are their opinions worth less than those who are satisified with the outcome? Also, biased doesn't mean inaccurate. I'm sure mistakes and inaccuracies can be found in Prachatai's news reporting over the years but probably not more so than the rest. I think The Nation is biased but I still read it as a source of daily news, exactly the same way I read Prachatai. Following various sources is really the only way to get a somewhat near accurate picture of the situation since no one source can be fully relied upon to provide impartial, wide-ranging coverage of news.

It's also valuable in itself to consider different perspectives, both to gain a broader understanding of what's happening, and to challenge your own opinions/theories. That's why I read Michael Yon during the PDRC protest and also the main reason I contribute to Thaivisa. I have changed my views somewhat over the years, and that's partly due to the discussions here.

That aside, the document See the bears posted is the leaked DSI document from December 2010 (therefore nothing to do with Tharit doing 'PT's bidding', people forget he was very much considered biased towards the Democrats at that point), also reported in The Nation & Reuters and widely discussed on here at the time. If you google something like 'leaked DSI documents wat pathum' you should be able to find more details, including a translation. If you read it, you'll see that it looks like they tried to investigate the case properly.

*As is fully disclosed on the 'About Prachatai' page on the website

I do respect your views Emptyset unlike some of the others on this thread.

I was having an argument with a poster about whether the army shooting into the temple was premeditated & murder. The other blockhead came into the correspondence with totally irrelevant crap and tried to put words in my post that I didn't write. As you can see the topic is about the demo and he didn't even try and address the topic.

Ah Prachathai. If it made any attempt to be fair and independent I'd use it as a source - but it doesn't. Khaosod is often the source of articles in the forum and they certainly counteract any bias from the Nation. Prachathai goes further with it's bias (which you admit) and provides links to Khaosod (ok) and Bangkokpundit who is a beyond redemption opinionated &lt;deleted&gt;.

Yes it is valuable to consider different perspectives and, despite the bias of the Nation and the Bangkok Post, both do print articles and letters which cover a very wide spectrum of viewpoints. Also some knowledgeable articles appear from time to time in the Guardian & Independent. You'll notice that I don't consider any Murdoch media as a source.

I should mention that my general political views are left of centre and am very sympathetic to those in the Op as well as victims of oppression in Thailand and outside.

I don't need the 'leaked' document as I already have accepted that the most likely scenario was that the army opened fire, possibly having been shot at or perceiving that armed militants were in the Temple, and shot innocent people. I don't accept that it was in any way premeditated or planned & those responsible should be brought to trial. But, as we know, Tarit made it clear that they wouldn't be held accountable & if the demonstrators had been left to their own devices (& not got at by the UDD & Amsterdam), it's Tarit that they should be demonstrating against.

[chotthee]

These parents have no right to stir up through and clause hate among Thai people.

Now, under the Great Supreme Leader General Prime Minister Pruyuth, all Thai should be equal and live under happiness.

Who don't want to see unity and happiness may not be real Thai people.

[whybother]

These parents have no right to stir up through and clause hate among Thai people.

Now, under the Great Supreme Leader General Prime Minister Pruyuth, all Thai should be equal and live under happiness.

Who don't want to see unity and happiness may not be real Thai people.

Here I was thinking that trolls got banned from TV.

[rubl]

Yes, I agree with that.

The point here is that these people have a valid point about lack of justice. Unfortunately they were 'got at' by the UDD and, apparently, Amsterdam to brainwash them with the lie that Abhisit & Suthep gave orders for the army to shoot innocent bystanders (or medics).

Their target should be the lying Tarit who absolved the army from any blame when it is pretty obvious that some were killed by wanton revenge/negligence/fear/whatever by a few army personnel.

They know that they are breaking some current laws - assembly, littering, defamation - but IMO the police didn't handle them harshly but broke up their demo. Not exactly a big deal.

Payao called for Tarit's resignation and wanted him to be amongst those prosecuted: ''Payao explained that if other CRES members were found guilty, there is no reason why Tarit should not be held responsible as well.

"[Tarit] knew everything about 2010 [crackdown]. All of them should be held responsible," she said.''

She also said: '"If we don't prosecute soldiers now, then they will end up engaging in such 'operations' again and again," Payao said.' http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/609428-slain-nurses-mother-seeks-action-against-thailands-d-s-i-chief-tarit/

Looking over some of the other articles about Payao and Nattapat during the last few years, it seems pretty clear that they're well aware of the self-serving nature of the last govt:

'"Three years have passed, but where is justice? What we have instead is an attempt to pass an amnesty bill. We're like a piece of political meat that can be exploited by anyone.

"An attempt by Deputy Premier Chalerm Yoobamrung to introduce a blanket amnesty [for people involved in the unrest] is like throwing acid on people like me."'

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Your-say--30206454.html

And were also not too happy about the role of the UDD leaders in all of this:

'Nattapat said the government and red-shirt leaders never asked for his opinion before proposing their bills. "They never asked us how we feel before they proposed the law, not even when they decided to draft it. "We feel like being a political piece of meat, that we have no meaning to them - they're just using us if they feel they want to."

He wanted every person who committed crimes to be punished, including soldiers. And his message for the military was "I'm not afraid of you". The family confirmed they still go to demonstrations with the red shirts, if asked, but prefer to stick with their group and not join any activity with others. Right now all they want is the truth, as people who want to know what happened, not just get money - to help "cure" their minds.'

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Family-of-nurse-Kate-opposes-both-amnesty-bills-30207258.html

I actually think many of the red shirts are more skeptical about the leadership than people realize. There's been a lot of disappointment over the last couple of years particularly, at least amongst what I'd suspect is a large minority, if not a majority. But they're hardly going to join hands with AV, Suthep and the military in opposing TS. I think they'd rather still give tacit - if not active - support to Thaksin, despite his betrayals, than do that.

None of this explains why they didn't hand out pamphlets when the "blanket amnesty bill" was in the second and third reading, in all its amended glory? Surely no fear to be arrested by the Yingluck Government? I can understand they might be reluctant to join the anti-government protesters with Suthep involved, but they did, well what did they?

Even those "skeptical red shirts" easily forgot that one of their leaders tuned party list MP voted for the amnesty which included Abhisit/Suthep. Almost two dozen 'normal

red shirt MPs voted in favour. No pamphlets? Was there some rumour that "of course it won't apply to Abhisit/Suthep", was the distraction with "Yingluck in danger, election stolen" sufficient to forget about justice?

Well, that Nattapat phased it correctly it would seem "We feel like being a political piece of meat, that we have no meaning to them - they're just using us if they feel they want to."

[Emptyset]

None of this explains why they didn't hand out pamphlets when the "blanket amnesty bill" was in the second and third reading, in all its amended glory? Surely no fear to be arrested by the Yingluck Government? I can understand they might be reluctant to join the anti-government protesters with Suthep involved, but they did, well what did they?

Even those "skeptical red shirts" easily forgot that one of their leaders tuned party list MP voted for the amnesty which included Abhisit/Suthep. Almost two dozen 'normal

red shirt MPs voted in favour. No pamphlets? Was there some rumour that "of course it won't apply to Abhisit/Suthep", was the distraction with "Yingluck in danger, election stolen" sufficient to forget about justice?

Well, that Nattapat phased it correctly it would seem "We feel like being a political piece of meat, that we have no meaning to them - they're just using us if they feel they want to."

How do you know they didn't "hand out pamphlets"? After all, as you say, they wouldn't have been arrested, so a couple of people handing out flyers might not have been top of the news agenda that day given everything else that was going on at the time. I'm not sure why their anti-amnesty credentials are still in doubt after what I posted above, but here's some more news items involving Payao I found after a quick google:

Prachatai notes: "Phansak and Payao have been very active in fighting for justice for the victims of the crackdown and have become political activists. They were very vocal against the blanket amnesty bill proposed by the Pheu Thai Party, whose de facto leader is former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. The bill was aimed at whitewashing all kinds of wrongdoers in political conflicts, including the 2010 crackdown." http://www.prachatai.com/english/node/4311

A protest on June 11th 2013 - 'Ms. Payao said that it′s been 3 years since the crackdown but the current government does not display its sincerity in finding out the truth or in speeding up the judicial process. She′s also displeased to see 163 MPs of the ruling Pheu Thai Party supporting a draft amnesty bill that will absolve all those involved in the political violence, including the authorities at the time. She said she she′s very worried to see that the willingness to oppose the bill from neither the Redshirts′ main body the National United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) nor the government.'

http://www.khaosod.co.th/en/view_newsonline.php?newsid=TVRNM01UQXpPRGsxTXc9PQ==

Oct 24th, submitted a protest note against amnesty bill to house panel: 'Also on today, Mrs Payao Akhard, mother of Nong Kade who was shot dead by security forces during the red-shirt protest in 2010 near Ratchaprasong, and relatives of the dead victims submitted to protest note against the revised bill to the House panel vetting the amnesty bill. They alleged that the revised bill was meant only to benefit Thaksin.' http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/house-panel-stays-put-revised-amnesty-bill/

Nov 2nd, quoted on ABC radio report condemming amnesty bill: http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2013/s3882646.htm

Nov 12th, quoted in the Nation condemning amnesty bill: 'Phayao Akhad, mother of a paramedic killed during 2010 crackdowns, called for Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra to issue an apology for have "betrayed the people" by pushing for a blanket amnesty that would cover those responsible for the crackdowns.

"Supporters of amnesty acted like thieves calling for help to shield the government after being caught trying to steal from the people," she said. Phayao urged the red shirts not fall prey to protect the government, which had been insensitive to the people's feelings.'

Nov 18th, appeared at FCCT event condemning amnesty bill: Phil Robertson ‏@Reaproy

Payao, mother of nurse Kate, at #FCCT - #Thailand govt paases amnesty bill like thieves in night http://instagram.com/p/g4eaOiMzfC/

Obviously, as you indicate, they were never going to join Suthep, but there was the red shirt anti-amnesty protest in early Nov: http://www.demotix.com/news/3191139/red-shirts-rally-against-controversial-amnesty-bill-bangkok#media-3191051 Don't know if they were there, but it seems likely.

I think it's pretty clear that they haven't just "popped up" from nowhere to attack the junta over this. They've been campaigning consistently since the crackdown. Going back to the Tarit issue that khunken raised, I also found this:

'Ms. Payao Akhard, who lost her daughter on the last day of the unrest said today that it is unacceptable that Mr Tharit Pengdit, the DSI chief, is pursuing those charges against Mr. Abhisit and Mr. Suthep while exempting himself from the legal action, since Mr. Tharit was also a member of the Centre for Resolution of Emergency Situation (CRES) which oversaw the crackdown. "I don't want him to use my daughter's case as a political tool," Ms. Payao told reporters.' http://en.khaosod.co.th/detail.php?newsid=1395925507&typecate=06&section=

Obviously there were also plenty of red shirts who supported the amnesty, Rubl. But I think the drop in support for the red shirts (which was shown by the declining numbers attending their events) had a lot to do with the amnesty and Thaksin's statement back in 2012 in which he thanked the red shirts for their help but said he'd have to take the rest of the road by himself. I was at the rally myself and there was - sometimes wild - cheering during *every* speech except that one. He tried to backtrack on his words but I think the damage was already done.

Edited September 2, 2014 by Emptyset

[DonThaiToMe]

these unfortunate people got caught up in a situation were there were armed gunmen all around them engaging the army, the sad reality is if they had removed themselves from the area this would never have happened, if they really want justice they need to ask the man in the sand and those on the stages why they placed armed terrorists into the crowd, did they think the army were just going to stand there and be shot at

The questions that should be asked are -

- Did the army have a right to be there ? well of course they did

- Were there armed terrorists amongst the crowd of red protestors ? by all accounts it seems there were

- Did the red leaders give orders to shoot at the authorities ? by all accounts it seems they did

- Did the army have the justification to return fire ? by all accounts it seems they did

- Were people not wanting to be involved given the opportunity to leave the area ? by all accounts it seems they were

- Are these victims still being used as Thaksins pawns ? unfortunately it seems they are

The whole argument around these unfortunate casualties hinges on one thing, were there armed gunmen firing at the police and army amongst the red protestors - if the answer to that question is "yes" then case closed

What complete BULL!! I was there in 2010, you were obviously not!