No order to shoot, army didn’t kill anyone!

Former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and the Army brass have repeatedly claimed that someone else killed and wounded thousands of people in April and May 2010. If the lives and health of people weren’t involved we could make a , Fawlty Towers-like joke of arrogant men blaming others for their errors and refusing to take responsibility for them.

At PPT we have long noted that Abhisit is skilled with untruths and he seems at it again. At The Nation he is reported at the Truth for Reconciliation Commission saying that he “denied his government had ordered troops to open fire on the crowds in connection with the bloodshed at Rajdamnoen Avenue on April 10, 2010.”

How could that denial be read? That the Abhisit government sent troops with loaded weapons to the demonstrations cannot be denied. That these troops were ordered to clear the demonstrators is also undeniable.

Abhisit says they lugged loaded weapons about because “the Centre for the Resolution of the Crisis Situation gave the green light for riot forces to be armed for self-protection and safeguard the people’s lives…”.

Abhisit’s tale seems to be that the Army lads were just milling about, safeguarding people’s lives when they were attacked. His line has long been that unknown, never apprehended others, dressed in black, attacked them. Hence, the Army either fled in panic or fired on the crowds in acts of self protection.

Many royalists believe this story because one of their heroes of anti-red shirt action was killed. Of course, the men in black angle has been widely canvassed. Most recently, Army sources have said that internal Army conflicts led to military-on-military fighting.

But back to Pinocchio Abhisit. When asked about the later public declaration of live fire zones, he answered that “the true purpose was to deter the crowds from joining the protests.” Even those who believe the men in black line would have difficulty accepting this pathetic concoction.

We can’t wait to hear more of this kind of manipulation when former Deputy PM Suthep Thaugsuban gives his statement on 27 June.

Meanwhile, at the Bangkok Post, the Army bosses have decided to continue with their remarkably stupid denial that they killed anyone with their weapons. In particular, they have “insisted soldiers did not kill people at Wat Pathum Wanaram during the crackdown on red shirts on May 19, 2010 after police testifying in court had implicated the army.”

Deputy army spokesman Colonel Winthai Suwari made the claim while stating that the “bullets and firearms used to kill the people in the temple had been stolen during the riots [sic.]” in April 2010. The colonel is apparently referring to the Army’s loss of Tavor and M16 rifles, shotguns and hundreds of bullets.

The Army regularly “loses,” sells and steals its own weapons and sells them to others, so there are indeed former Army weapons floating about. In addition, Thailand is a heavily armed society. We also know that some ordinance was dumped when troops fled before the crowds on 10 April 2010, with some even said to have been returned to the Army.

Colonel Winthai then makes a remarkable claim that the Army has “proof that the stolen firearms and bullets were used during the unrest.” We look forward to seeing that presented in courts.

The colonel gets more fantastical when he says that there were no soldiers beyond the Chaloem Phao junction and the Siam BTS station “because they had been held back by men in black firing at them. Security forces were not positioned along the entire length of the skytrain track because they were obstructed by men in black.”

It is interesting that all the video and other evidence we have seen contradicts this. But evidence is never a big deal in such cases of soldiers killing civilians because soldiers always have impunity when acting to protect the royalist elite.

Deadly army bullets

Readers will be interested in a report at the Bangkok Post which has police investigators confirming that “five of the six people killed at Wat Pathum Wanaram during the crackdown on red shirts on May 19, 2010 were shot with bullets normally used by military forces.”

Testifying in court, the deputy chief of the Metropolitan Police Bureau’s Division 6, said: “the bullets were .223 calibre, which are used with M16 and Tavor rifles, which are for military use. All of the victims were shot from an elevated spot…”.

While queueing up to use a temple toilet, Suwan Sriraksa, 30, a farmer was shot. Atthachai Chumchan, 28, a law school graduate was shot while crossing the road to the temple. Rop Suksathit, 66, a driver and Mongkol Khemthong, 36, a rescue worker, were shot at the temple entrance. Akkahad, 25, a volunteer nurse; and Akkharadej Khankaew, 22, a day laborer “were shot while trying to flee…”.

Only Atthachai was not shot by a .223 calibre bullet and the report doesn’t say anything more about his case.

The policeman stated that his investigators team had questioned soldiers based at the Sayam Skytrain station and while they claimed so-called men in black had fired at them from the ground, “ballistic tests showed no bullets had been fired from ground level…”.

Inquests and court hearings are continuing.

Updated: Prayuth as tough guy

Was there anyone who didn’t know that Army boss Prayuth Chan-ocha had no regrets about the deaths of civilian red shirt demonstrators in 2010? Probably not. But just to confirm his position, the Bangkok Post reports that Prayuth “has rejected a call by the mother of a volunteer medic killed during the political violence in 2010 for him to apologise.”

PPT was sure that Prayuth would do this. He has shown no remorse; indeed, his position has been hard and unsympathetic to red shirts from the beginning. We assume he hates every one of them.

Responding to Phayao Akkahad, mother of volunteer nurse Kamolkate who was shot and killed inside Wat Pathum Wanaram on May 19, Prayuth declared that as he “had already expressed his condolences to those directly affected by the political violence from March to May in 2010,” so there was nothing else for him to do.

As usual, the loudmouthed general managed to bellow that: “… among the victims were soldiers. Is there anyone who wants to apologise to them?” He apparently “insisted soldiers were simply doing their job during the operations.”

In a truly unfortunate sense that’s true as the Army has, over several decades, repeatedly gunned down civilians and had impunity for its murderous ways.

Update: A reader points out that PPT should mention one attempt to assess the military’s murder toll in its efforts to defeat political opponents. The PDF 60 Years of Oppression and Suppression in Thailand is a compilation of political assassinations and extra-judicial killings since 1947.

On the anniversary of Abhisit’s crackdown III

PPT has never been particularly supportive of the Democrat Party. It is a party that has never really deserved its own name, for it was a royalist party when first established and has always been a conservative party. More recently, with its love affair for the activist People’s Alliance for Democracy and other ultra-royalists, it has moved even further to the political right.

One of the Democrat Party’s leaders who has actively associated with the more extremist political right is Korn Chatikavanij. It seems almost natural that great privilege, Thai elitism, and the Eton-Oxford incubator should produce a politician of the right who supports anti-democratic and illegal activism that is sometimes racist and always ultra-royalist and ultra-nationalist.

Royalist elite chums

Readers can grasp Korn’s political arrogance here and here, his elite position here, and see one of may posts on his political extremism here.

So it is that no one should be surprised when Korn engages in acts of deep political nastiness.

At the Bangkok Post it is reported that Korn led Democrat Party supporters in a supposed act of “remembrance of the violence and tragedy related to the protest” of May 2010, while his buddies in the “multi-coloured group” did the same.

That is, Korn decided to lead a group to “commemorate” the orders by his elitist chum Abhisit Vejjajiva that was an order to kill civilian protesters.

Korn dressed up this political provocation as an attempt “to urge all parties concerned to refrain from violence and instead seek the truth” as he led Democrat Party “MPs to release 500 white balloons and make merits at Wat Pathum Wanaram.” Of course, this temple is one of the most significant sites where unarmed red shirts and medical staff were deliberately targeted and shot by soldiers.

Korn then gets on a ridiculous soap box:

He also called on the public not to to point the finger at any person or group for what had happened. Society as a whole should review its role and take responsibility…. [He adds:] “By assigning blame to others, we fail to avoid conflicts.”

Don’t blame me! Neither Korn nor Abhisit accept any responsibility for the deaths. What a lame statement from one who was amongst the decision makers who launched the Army against the red shirts.

His supporters amongst the ultra-royalist multi-coloured group led by the woolly-headed Tul Sitthisomwong staged activities at Lumpini Park that mimicked the Democrat Party and vice versa. In a further act of political provocation, this group of neo-fascists didn’t commemorate events they believe associated with red shirt violence on the anniversaries of those events, but chose to be provocative, targeting the red shirt commemoration.

When the Democrat Party and ultra-royalists get together and coordinate their political activities the political tone is far right, dogmatic and deliberately provocative. Korn sees himself as a future leader of the royalist party and actions like this – for which he has a long track record – suggest that Korn is a future political travesty waiting to happen in Thailand.

At Robin is a comment to link to.

Puea Thai failing red shirts on justice II

In the first part of this post PPT outlined red shirt challenges to Yingluck Shinawatra’s Puea Thai government as the government has shown amoebic political backbone as it betrays basic notions of justice and announces its political decision to capitulate to the royalist elite. We continue that story here.

It seems that Yingluck is, if not deaf to red shirt criticism, then conveniently hard of hearing, for she and three of her deputies slithered off to visit Privy Council President General Prem Tinsulanonda.

At The Nation it is reported that Yingluck “requested permission to consult … Prem … in the future on affairs of state…”. No, not hard of hearing, but deaf and dumb.

Photo from The Nation

Yingluck apparently met Prem for about 15 minutes with her three deputies and then was treated another 30 minutes with the grand old almost-devaraja.

Readers will be pleased to know that the “elder statesman smiled while sending off his visitors…”. But what was he thinking?

There was a lone protester outside Prem’s free digs. He carried a placard “calling for action over the deaths of 91 people killed during the 2010 unrest and riots. Police asked him to leave and there was no outbreak of violence.” No outbreak of violence? PPT imagines that the only violence would have been if authorities beat him up. What sort of “reporting” is this?

After the visit, Yingluck apparently really was dumb, refusing to answer “a reporter’s question on whether her meeting with Prem went well. She simply smiled and waved cheerfully to reporters while walking away.” But waht was she thinking?

According to one of the deputies, “Yingluck had told him she had offered more government assistance to Prem’s charity projects, including those aimed at residents of the deep South.” More taxpayer’s money down the drain, this time just for an almost royal rather than a real one.

Just like a royal, “General Prem gave his blessing to the prime minister and wished her good health. He also asked her to take good care of the people…”. And the royalist reckoned that Thaksin sought to act like a royal!

Of course, the deputy dolts continued to claim that the meeting “had no political significance.”

Perhaps they mean that focusing on Thaksin Shinawatra’s recall to the royalist elite after 6 years in the sin bin isn’t in any way political, just personal.

Puea Thai failing red shirts on justice I

It is well-known that lese majeste detainees and convicts have been effectively abandoned by the Puea Thai government led by Yingluck Shinawatra. The government has shown no political backbone on the existing cases. But others are now being betrayed – along with basic notions of justice – as Puea Thai gets cosy with the royalist elite.

At The Nation a group of relatives of a slain medical volunteer are planning to ensure that political amnesia is prevented in their search for justice.

Phayao and son Nattapat Akkhad are campaigning not just for their daughter and sister who was gunned down by Army troops at Wat Pathum Wanaram on 19 May 2010, but all those who lost their lives during the Battle for Bangkok.

On Thaksin Shinawatra’s call for “national reconciliation,” Phayao says: “We have sacrificed enough. It cost the life of a child…”. Further, “[h]er son went on to say that Thaksin should not be using people’s lives as a bargaining chip for his amnesty.” And they have a message for “then-premier Abhisit Vejjajiva, his deputy Suthep Thaugsuban and the Army:

Politicians make mistakes. When they have made a mistake and it led to the loss of lives, they should take responsibility like a man … they are already suspects in society.

Phayao and two other families “are still actively pursuing justice.” They are not getting any help from the Puea Thai government, but are resolute:

Our fight is about setting a precedent. Those who ordered the killings must be taken to justice and serve their penalties. The truth can reveal who the mastermind was and who had carried out [the killings]. If you ask me if the country would move forward once the truth is uncovered, I would say yes! Nobody has been punished [for killing protesters in the past], but this time they must be punished….

Phayao said that “she and her son would keep a watchful eye on the issue and be ready to stand in opposition if the administration fails to find justice for those killed in 2010.”

At the Bangkok Post, the story is a little different, with Phayao quoted as stating that:

it was indecent for parliamentarians to ask the red shirts to forget what happened. It’s ridiculous that some MPs are suggesting to us to let bygones be bygones and that [red shirts] should help move the country forward….

She “rebutted the notion that the red shirt movement was divided as the Yingluck government appeared to be leaning toward Gen Prem [Tinsulanonda].”

What might be missed in understanding the significance of this challenge to the Puea Thai government is contained in a separate Bangkok Post report, as “[a]bout 200 red shirt supporters and political prisoners advocates gathered at Ratchaprasong intersection yesterday to commemorate the 27th birthday of … [Kamolkade]…”. It is pointed out that:

The gathering, held on the footpath opposite the Police General Hospital, coincided with the meeting between the Yingluck cabinet members and Privy Council president Prem Tinsulanonda.

Phayao, speaking for the group, read a four-point demand:

• the government grant amnesty to political offenders since the Sept 19, 2006 coup;
• speed up investigation into the killings of more than 90 people during the April/May 2010 crackdowns on red shirt demonstrators;
• pay compensation to those affected by the political demonstrations since the Sept 19 coup; and
• follow the recommendations of the Nitirat group which called for all judicial decisions that were a consequence of the coup to be nullified.

The post continues to look at Yingluck’s political decision to announce the s apparent capitulation of her government, party and family to the power of the royalist elite.

Some red shirt deaths go to inquest

At last, after almost 2 years, both AFP and the Bangkok Post report that inquests have finally begun into the deaths of 16 of the 94 people who died during a bloody military crackdown or from their injuries, carried out on the orders of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his deputy Suthep Thaugsuban in April and May 2010.

Prosecutor Varidsanee Manyawut is reported by AFP as stating that red shirt supporter Channarong Polsrila, shot dead at Soi Rangnam, and “identified as likely to have been caused by the security forces’ operation,” will be the the first case to go to an inquest. The Post states that Channarong was “shot in his stomach and right arm by high-velocity weapons on May 15…”.

An initial hearing was held on Monday but the examination of 41 witnesses will begin in June. AFP reports that Thailand’s Criminal Procedure Code allows prosecutors “to submit for inquest any deaths believed related to or involving the authorities…”.

The Post adds further detail, noting that the inquest is required to hear evidence and decide “on the identity of the deceased, the place of death, the cause and its circumstances, and whether the death was caused by an action of a particular person.”

The Bangkok Post also provides some useful background, noting that last year, the “Department of Special Investigation initially concluded that of the 91 people killed during the crackdown, 13 cases might be the result of authorities’ operations.” The Puea Thai government then “put the investigation files into police hands and inquest procedures have been accelerated with three more cases from the Wat Pathum Wanaram shootings being included.”

Of course, all cases need to be investigated, but at least there is a beginning to a process that might see further light shed on those dark days.

Updated: Good news for some red shirts

Some of the red shirts detained since May 2010 are finally receiving support from the Yingluck Shinawatra-led government.

The Nation reports that the cabinet has “approved Bt46 million to bail out 57 red-shirt activists and supporters remanded in connection with the 2010 political unrest and riots.” Four others have been acquitted. The cabinet decision was required as the so-called Justice Fund had insufficient funds.

Those receiving assistance are said to be “common members of the red-shirt movement and ordinary protesters detained at eight prisons … on charges ranging from violating the emergency decree to rioting, committing arson and pursuing terrorism.”

The report states that “21 are in Bangkok, 13 in Mukdahan, nine in Maha Sarakham, five in Chiang Mai, four in Ubon Ratchathani, two each in Nonthaburi and Udon Thani and one in Nakhon Ratchasima.”

What isn’t clear is if these are the same “about 50″ political prisoners identified in an earlier report or how this number is related to the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship claim claim that there remain more than 100 of their number in jail.

At the same time, according to the Bangkok Post, cabinet has also approved a 2 billion baht compensation fund “for victims of all the political violence which took place between 2005, and the riots [sic. this is PostSpeak] in Bangkok in 2010.” The government states the scheme was in line with suggestions from the Truth for Reconciliation Commission. Included are “protesters, state officials, journalists and private individuals…”.

The figures provided by the Post are not expressed entirely clearly, but it appears that the family of each slain victim will be entitled to 4.5 million baht plus 250,000 baht to pay for funeral expenses and an “additional 3 million baht for the psychological trauma caused.” Lower amounts will be provided to the injured.

Of course, not all victims will find the financial compensation adequate for the loss of sons, daughters, husbands, wives and relatives. Payao Akkhahad is quoted. She is:

the mother of 25-year-old nurse Kamolkade, who was shot dead in Wat Pathum Wanaram during the military crackdown on May 19, 2010, said she did not care about the money and did not feel happy about the news.

“Losing my beloved daughter can’t compare with that money. The life of my daughter is greater than that, even though it is such a lot of money,” said Mrs Payao.

She demands that the government bring “those who killed their loved ones to justice.”

The report concludes by stating that others “entitled to payments include victims who were imprisoned but were later acquitted of any wrongdoing, and victims who were wrongly imprisoned.”

Update: The Nation reports that there have been mixed reactions to the proposal for compensation. PPT already mentioned Payao’s comments above. Meanwhile, some yellow shirts “slammed the package in a heated debate on social media…”.

Abhisit (again) claims he did not order any shootings

Former Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva is in the news again, claiming “… he did not order the army to shoot at people…”. The Bangkok Post has the report of his “fiery” meeting with a Senate committee investigating the deaths of 92 in April and May 2010.

Interestingly, the Post reporters - Mongkol Bangprapa and Wassana Nanuam – seem on Abhisit’s side, stating that “most of the panel members asked leading questions based on their personal assumptions…”. There’s no evidence presented for this claim.

Abhisit again makes these claims and denials:

He said he did not order the army to shoot at people, but casualties occurred because soldiers who manned security checkpoints were attacked by unidentified gunmen and they had to act in self-defence.

“How can you end a protest if you use water cannons to disperse protesters who return fire with a series of M79 grenades?”

He also noted that the protesters seized a number of weapons and ammunition from security officers during the unrest.

He also questioned what the goverment and army would gain from shooting dead six protesters inside Wat Pathum Wanaram and called for the panel to look at the motives of the culprits.

Those who follow events in Thailand have repeatedly heard such claims. Abhisit’s basic point is that he did nothing that anyone could hold against him into the future. The blame must be apportioned to others. He blames “men in black” and “terrorists” amongst the red shirts.

Perhaps it is the military leadership? But, then, General Prayuth Chan-ocha has recently said that he was willing to take responsibility for his actions. While we doubt the extent of this commitment, at least Prayuth has said something that Abhisit seems unable to utter. But then again, it was General Anupong Paojinda in charge of the Army at the time.

Perhaps he wants to blame security boss and former Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban? At least Suthep has admitted that leaked documents showing he ordered the use of live rounds against protesters are genuine. They seem to show that the order was given before any military or police were attacked by any “men in black.” Suthep may well become Abhisit’s scapegoat.

We suspect that Abhisit is again being a bit too smart, apparently believing that his signature may never be found on orders to shoot protesters. Yet he was the prime minister and bears responsibility for the actions of his Army.

Democrat Party Rajaprasong rally to “explain killing”

In The Nation, it is stated that its planned “rally” at Rajaprasong is to “express its views on the bloody military crackdown last year…”. Democrat Party strategist Korbsak Sabhavasu says they want to do this regardless of the impact on votes. He says the party, led by Abhisit Vejjajiva and Suthep Thaugsuban, who oversaw the murderous crackdown, wants to give its “side of the story.”

He adds: “The party needed to explain its side of the story and voters have the right to know the truth before casting their ballots. Many people directly involved in the incident, such as Jatuporn Promphan and Natthawut Saikua are Pheu Thai Party candidates…”.

Of course, the government has Jatuporn locked up in order to silence him.

Abhisit said he wanted “relatives of six dead rescue staff members to listen to the Democrats’ explanations on the bloody incident. The six were killed in Wat Pathum Wanaram temple…”. He claimed: “If they listen to the other side of the truth, they would get a better understanding of the situation…. I’m ready to exchange opinions with the relatives…”.

Is the Democrat Party serious? Is Abhisit serious? Hasn’t their story been, all along, that no soldier killed anyone? Hasn’t this been stated ad nauseum? Hasn’t the government, the Department of Special Investigation and its Army deliberately delayed all investigation? Didn’t protesters run in front of bullets?

If, just for a moment, we consider them serious, and that they do have another story to tell, couldn’t they have explained “their side” earlier? Couldn’t Abhisit have talked with relatives of the dead before, in a situation other than a political rally? Couldn’t they have expressed sympathy? Shouldn’t there have been some progress on a serious investigation of the killing? No, they aren’t serious at all. They are desperate and heartless knaves.