Thanks, interesting article, I somewhat doubt the Thais will enthusiastically embrace anything that contradicts the alternative universe of their fictional history. Petty fascists everywhere love to enrage their ill-educated countrymen in tales of wrongdoing that never happened (oddly the US comes immediately to mind).
Stir the nationalist fervor, increase the military budgets, more Mercedes ordered, more Villas purchased, good for the whole economy really. Truth has little do do with politics, as long as trouble makers like the author keep their big mouths closed.
Whilst the government has undoubtedly exaggerated the numbers and the role of the “MIB” it was the appearance of this group and its use of deadly force against the army in May that unfortunately raised the stakes of violence. I am sorry for Fabio’s death but, if the sponsors of the MIB had refrained from the use of violence in support of the red cause in May, Fabio and Muramoto would both still be alive today. The red shirt cause would also have been better served if the red shirt leaders had taken a clear stance to disavow the use of violence rather than the ambivalent stance they adopted.
Thomas Boy, maybe there is a connection between the spottiness and the lack of transparency and legal process. They need cooperation from ISPs to enforce the censorship but, since they prefer secrecy and avoid using legal process, that makes it difficult to enforce the censorship on a consistent basis. Perhaps they learned a lesson from the notorious Youtube block that drew so much unwelcome attention to something that could indeed have been deemed offensive but was trivial in nature and would otherwise have gone away by itself virtually unnoticed. On the other hand the case in point is a highly embarrassing one that cannot stand up to scrutiny and drawing attention to it could cause great trouble for the censors.
It seems they are running on sand, expending a lot of effort and resources to achieve a great deal of inefficient censorship, while not daring to be transparent by imposing a small dose of efficient censorship that can be justified openly and with legal recourse. In fighting the Internet you can only win, if you are prepared to take a draconian approach like China and Burma and officially ban virtually everything you don’t like without justification, but Thailand’s political structure doesn’t permit that.
In any case, a continuing thread of all the discussions on censorship of the electronic media (and by extension of other media, academic discussion, conversation) is that the censorship regime is arbitrary, secretive and non-transparent and not subject to a proper legal process.
There may sometimes be a case that can be made for censorship but only where it is clearly and publicly understood what has been censored and where there are transparent mechanisms to appeal against the censorship.
There can be no case in any system with pretences to democracy for the type of censorship Thailand practices today.
Charles F: It’s not about comprehension. It’s about probability. Suppose we have a coin where Heads= “Killed by the army” and Tails= “Killed by the red shirts.” Also suppose we decide to flip the coin, say, 56 times over the course of a six day period (say, May 13 to May 19). What is the probability we end up with 56 Heads?
The probability is (1/2)^56=.0000000000000000139, less than one in a trillion. What does that tell you? Most probably, we aren’t using a “fair coin,” as the stats geeks call it, but a coin where Heads has a much higher probability of turning up than Tails (if Tails has any chance to show up at all). That’s the coin we should flip in this case.
An access to such information has been temporarily ceased
due to the order of the Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES)
under the authority of emergency decree B.E 2548 (A.D. 2005).
The idea that only those “on the ground” can make judgement calls on an event or series of events or the actions of a state is just nonsense. Why have international courts if that’s the case? How many of us here personally witnessed Sharpville, the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, Bloody Sunday? Undoubtedly most of us would condemn those people who perpetrated these events even though none of us were actually there.
In fact, those on the ground can often be the worst at making an objective call as they tend to only see one tiny part of the picture and become immersed in the particular energies of the specific location they are in. Wood and trees.
While such individual insight is undoubtedly important it doesn’t convey anymore than partial details. The overall judgement needs to take in all the facts, from all perspectives and also have full access to all the evidence, including that held by the state.
Are there any written records of army orders issued at that time? Is the army conducting internal investigations regarding possible breaches of the rules of engagement? Was each discharge of weapons by the army an accountable act?
If the Thai govt is incapable of acting accountably (which it clearly isn’t) then it is perfectly right and proper as much pressure is put on it as possible to make sure it does.
From what I’ve personally heard from a source I can’t reveal is that the evidence reveals that it is very likely Fabio was deliberately targeted by a Thai army sniper. If that is the case then it is the Thai govt and army’s interest and obligation under international law to clear this up as quickly as possible, arrest the killer, put them on trial and offer justice and transparency.
But we know that such an outcome will never occur.
Fabio’s family will never get justice.
We just have to make sure that he’s not forgotten.
Finally, what is indisputable is that the Thai army were using snipers against unarmed civilians. They were often targeted with head shots. Such a mode of operation can only be described as psychopathic. And if opposing such acts labels me as “politicised” I’m very very happy to be called such.
You replied to me stating – “Medical staff massacred by security forces to use your words”.
No, those are not my words. They are yours.
You also state, in a rather stilted and bizarre way that I am a “romantic”. What exactly am I being romantic about?
Maybe you should ask Nurse Kate’s family whether they were being “romantic” when they buried their daughter after she was murdered by the army at Wat Pathum?
And how you rationalise a call for transparency, accountability and justice as support Chalerm as PM is just laughable.
As for patience – it is the Thai people who are showing that – with an incredibly corrupt and violent elite who’d stop at nothing to maintain their grip on power. A long and sordid history of coup after coup, massacre after massacre, elections subverted and appointees and generals running the show. It’s been going on for decades.
Mr.Widyono, let me summarize your points of view on the issue. You argue that the international community has considered ECCC tribunal as a corrupted organization as well as being dominated by the current Cambodian government. In short, you imply that the ECCC carries no credibility and cannot be trust on the issue of justice because the Judges are corrupted and the Cambodian government interferes in the trial process. Second, you argue that trial Duch is a waste of time and resources that should instead be spending on investment enterprise. And you also imply that it isn’t Cambodian but the West that is interested in pursuing the crimes against humanity.
In contrast to Mr.Widyono assertion, I argued that it was Cambodian who initiated the trial because the country ratified the Rome Stature. In my opinion, all the international organizations were initiated and created by the Victor Permanent Powers: Russia, U.S. China, France and Britain to ensure international stability after the World War II. For example, the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court, the United Nations International Law Commission, etc. they all have “global” jurisdiction within the United Nations Mandate, and ECCC is part of this international system. The United Nations had announced publicly that Ms. Michelle Lee of China coordinated UN assistance for Khmer Rouge Trials that led to the establishment of the ECCC in 2006.
Anyway, the issue is not about jurisdiction, the issue is about Crimes Against Humanity. Three million people perished during the Khmer Rouge regime in power on 17 April 1975 to 7 January 1979. This matters!
International community has been providing funding and judges to ECCC to express the collective conscious against inhumane cruelty. Cambodian official H.E. Sok An makes statement “NEVER AGAIN” on the occasion of the 60th Anniversary of the Liberation of Auschwitz and the other Nazi Extermination Camps.
Who did Kamolket Akahad threaten exactly? Shot and killed in Wat Pathum while she was treating someone. By soldiers snipping from the Skytrain track, it seems pretty clear. See here for a summary of the evidence:
And note to Bangkok Dan: she was wearing a white shirt with a green cross, signifying she was a medic. But a Press T-shirt would have protected Fabio, right?
It couldn’t be 50/50. Govt troops were well-armed and was always behind some solid structures too. The daredevil red shirt protesters always ran for cover once the troop opened fire. A crossfire situation could mean Fabio, the daredevil photojournalist embedded in the protesters’ side, was more likely cut down by the soldiers’ bullet. I believe the footage of people dragging his body should be thoroughly investigated and some telling evidence can come from last few frames of his life in his stolen camera.
All the propanganda prior to all these killings, the core red-shirted successfully convinced many red-shirted protesters using oppositions’ audio recordings of Abhisit telling soldiers to kill red-shirted protesters during Songkran 2009’s confrontation. The two men who got killed were defending their home against the Red Shirt mob in Nan Leang area. The 57-time tampered audio recording was played in the parliament and audio experts scientifically proven and the Thai courts ruled the recording was a ‘dud’. I witnessed the highly explosive emotion when the tampered tape were played by various red-shirted orators in the red rallies. Politicians laying down lives of mob for their hidden agenda is not new. Yellow shirts leaders did the same–Udon Thani incident. Red Shirts are many fronts with one objective to topple AV govt. Period. What happened to the mostly women, elderly, children crowd when the Red Shirt leaders called it quit?? They were brought down to Bkk and promised by leaders who would fight with their bare hands if soldiers arrived to end the protest!! My red-shirt friends who by the protest stage were dissappointed by the core red leaders. They were booing and cursing their cowardly leaders. The red shirt leaders were telling the protesters right after the mayhem on April 10 to deny seeing any Men-in-Black. It did not appear to be a cover-up. It was it.
For Fabio and the 90 who got killed in the recent political crisis, their cases are in Khun Na Nakorn and his committee’s hand. It would not be easy. Theories will abound for some cases. Let’s hope the Fabio’s case and other high political value cases get a thorough investigation.
Simon and BangkokDan: Could you please tell us to what you are referring: “A photographer goes to battlezone and ignores repeated and unambiguous warnings to leave. “As Simon said, he was warned.” What warnings? The rumors (usually spread by Yellow Shirt sympathizers) that Red Shirts were targeting journalists? The general SoE order to clear the area, which was evidently not meant to include journalists, since the army made little or no effort to stop them from entering the perimeter? (Or do you believe journalists should not have been there at all?) Please explain — personally, I’m tired of years of know-nothings trying to turn fiction in fact (in the same manner that some people still insist that PAD guards were not armed). But my mind is open, if you can cite some evidence of your claim.
“Wearing a green or whatever shirt with clear MEDIA or PRESS letters would probably saved his life.”
Most likely not. Don’t forget – almost in the same spot two other journalists were injured, and both of them did not wear black.
“Charles F”
You said:
“Meaning the shot could have come from anywhere. The Thai army didn’t have all the firearms; there is ample evidence that some protesters were armed as well.”
It was a bit more complicated. There was an brief armed battle in Lumpini Park in the morning when the army took the park. The Red Shirt militants retreated soon.
By the time Fabio was shot it was a rather lopsided situation – there was massive fire from the military into the Red Shirt camp, and at most very little fire from the side of the Red Shirts, if any fire at all. I was behind the military lines, some people said that there was some small arms fired at the military, but it was quite difficult to assess, if that was so, or not.
The main reason i decided that day to stay behind the military was that i thought it was too risky to be on the receiving end of the military bullets. This was a personal decision – primarily i wanted to survive that day, and any photos were secondary. I anyhow got into trouble a bit later, when the militants decided to fire a series of M79 when we reached Sarasin intersection, but after the first granade (most like a training round) exploded a few meters next to us journos i rushed to cover in a small alley. Unfortunately Chandler didn’t, and had to pay dearly for it.
Who killed Fabio? There are more than overwhelming chances and evidence that he indeed was killed by an army bullet, and not by a bullet fired by the militants. I don’t think though that it was a bullet purposely fired at a foreign journalist. Were the soldiers justified with firing massively into the direction of the Red Shirts? I don’t know. It’s difficult to say. It’s not really a clear cut situation.
Was the government justified in ordering a final crackdown that morning? That is where i have more doubts. There were last minute attempts for negotiations, when the night of the 18th the senator visited the Red Shirt camp, and the Red Shirt leaders have made major concessions, and more or less asked for a few more days so they could wind things down. This was not taken up by the government. I tend to believe that the government should have taken this chance – lives could have been saved, and a bit of goodwill could have been created.
Lets not forget here that all the mess was a result of a chain of very wrong calls by both sides over a long period of time. This was a development, not just a series of single and unrelated events. The Red Shirts have made many very bad decisions, but the government has done so as well. There were incidents were the military has made right decisions on the ground, but there were other incidents in which the military has shown tremendous incompetence, and there were incidents were soldiers have clearly not just broken their own rules of engagement, but have committed clear human rights violations. What complicates matters even more is that besides the many peaceful protesters there were armed militants.
This whole thing is not a black and white situation, it is very complex and it needs more time to properly investigate. What makes me angry though, and serves nobody, is when people who were not anywhere near the things are giving blanket statements on what has happened according to their own political convictions.
Quite right. Every now and then Bangkok Dan and StanG come out from their own redneck blogs to pontificate and bluster about the rightness of the actions of the present military/palace junta government.
Sickening and grotesque indeed.
Bangkok Dan, in his post (above) seeks to attach cause the the shooting of Fabio in these terms: “Chances are he was very well shot by an army sniper. Because he looked like a black shirt and was in their area.” Not that Dan has any idea at all about the ‘because’ of it at all, he is simply parroting the line that he and his redneck ilk are wont to parrot when springing to the defence of this disgraceful government. Then he goes on to speculate that “Wearing a green or whatever shirt with clear MEDIA or PRESS letters would probably saved his life.” Does he know this? of course he doesn’t, his aim is simply to negate the odious responsibility borne by the Abhisit government for this dreadful massacre, and to peddle the fiction that the army, with orders to shoot-to-kill, did just that, with more than just a hint of suspicion that journalists and photographers were targetted to ensure that ‘unacceptable’ or ‘misleading’ facts about the murderous clean-up should never come to light.
And of course, in the Budget bill now before parliament, we now see the army being rewarded for its murder of Thai citizens, and the significant domination of Queens Guard officers at the top of the corrupt edifice is further enhanced.
For an army that lost a minor skirmish against Laos in the late 1970’s, doubtless, making war on it’s own people is an altogether more attractive and much safer prospect (also less demanding of their levels of training) than actually defending the country against real agressors (of which there are none at all). Which is probably why the role of the army in Thailand is not to defend the country against would-be aggressors, but to rabidly defend the ruling elites from the threat of democracy.
That must be the shortest post you’ve ever commented here. You usually do not agree with me, so I was surprised even though I have a rough idea where you stand.
Can you elaborate a bit more so that I and other NM readers can understand you better.
What I am trying to do with this series of essays is to paint a general background from a native Burmese point of view so that NM readers can at least grasp why and how Burma is in such a situation now.
Like you, I am also really tired of the black and white view of our Burma presented by foreign experts just from reading a lot of books about the country not from their own life experiences like you and I had to go through.
Henry, can you enlighten us with some of your backup evidences? I am not disputing this suspicious as I also believe that the party involved in killing Fabio was the military.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Cambodia is not a province of Thailand
Thanks, interesting article, I somewhat doubt the Thais will enthusiastically embrace anything that contradicts the alternative universe of their fictional history. Petty fascists everywhere love to enrage their ill-educated countrymen in tales of wrongdoing that never happened (oddly the US comes immediately to mind).
Stir the nationalist fervor, increase the military budgets, more Mercedes ordered, more Villas purchased, good for the whole economy really. Truth has little do do with politics, as long as trouble makers like the author keep their big mouths closed.
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
Whilst the government has undoubtedly exaggerated the numbers and the role of the “MIB” it was the appearance of this group and its use of deadly force against the army in May that unfortunately raised the stakes of violence. I am sorry for Fabio’s death but, if the sponsors of the MIB had refrained from the use of violence in support of the red cause in May, Fabio and Muramoto would both still be alive today. The red shirt cause would also have been better served if the red shirt leaders had taken a clear stance to disavow the use of violence rather than the ambivalent stance they adopted.
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
I seem to recall that Fabio disclosed something about the army & ambulances a few days before he was killed – can anyone elaborate?
Thanks to Fabio and all the photographers/journalists who risk their live so we can see the truth.
Big questions for Thailand
Thomas Boy, maybe there is a connection between the spottiness and the lack of transparency and legal process. They need cooperation from ISPs to enforce the censorship but, since they prefer secrecy and avoid using legal process, that makes it difficult to enforce the censorship on a consistent basis. Perhaps they learned a lesson from the notorious Youtube block that drew so much unwelcome attention to something that could indeed have been deemed offensive but was trivial in nature and would otherwise have gone away by itself virtually unnoticed. On the other hand the case in point is a highly embarrassing one that cannot stand up to scrutiny and drawing attention to it could cause great trouble for the censors.
It seems they are running on sand, expending a lot of effort and resources to achieve a great deal of inefficient censorship, while not daring to be transparent by imposing a small dose of efficient censorship that can be justified openly and with legal recourse. In fighting the Internet you can only win, if you are prepared to take a draconian approach like China and Burma and officially ban virtually everything you don’t like without justification, but Thailand’s political structure doesn’t permit that.
Big questions for Thailand
WLH, I cannot access it on TRUE.
In any case, a continuing thread of all the discussions on censorship of the electronic media (and by extension of other media, academic discussion, conversation) is that the censorship regime is arbitrary, secretive and non-transparent and not subject to a proper legal process.
There may sometimes be a case that can be made for censorship but only where it is clearly and publicly understood what has been censored and where there are transparent mechanisms to appeal against the censorship.
There can be no case in any system with pretences to democracy for the type of censorship Thailand practices today.
Big questions for Thailand
WLH: The government claims to be blocking WikiLeaks, but this blocking has been spotty for over a month.
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
Charles F: It’s not about comprehension. It’s about probability. Suppose we have a coin where Heads= “Killed by the army” and Tails= “Killed by the red shirts.” Also suppose we decide to flip the coin, say, 56 times over the course of a six day period (say, May 13 to May 19). What is the probability we end up with 56 Heads?
The probability is (1/2)^56=.0000000000000000139, less than one in a trillion. What does that tell you? Most probably, we aren’t using a “fair coin,” as the stats geeks call it, but a coin where Heads has a much higher probability of turning up than Tails (if Tails has any chance to show up at all). That’s the coin we should flip in this case.
Big questions for Thailand
In Bangkok:
р╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕Вр╣Йр╕▓р╕Цр╕╢р╕Зр╕Вр╣Йр╕нр╕бр╕╣р╕ер╕Фр╕▒р╕Зр╕Бр╕ер╣Ир╕▓р╕зр╕Щр╕╡р╣Й р╕Цр╕╣р╕Бр╕гр╕░р╕Зр╕▒р╕Ър╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Кр╕▒р╣Ир╕зр╕Др╕гр╕▓р╕з
р╣Вр╕Фр╕вр╕нр╕▓р╕ир╕▒р╕вр╕нр╕│р╕Щр╕▓р╕Ир╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕Бр╕│р╕лр╕Щр╕Фр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Ър╕гр╕┤р╕лр╕▓р╕гр╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕Бр╕▓р╕г р╣Гр╕Щр╕кр╕Цр╕▓р╕Щр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Ур╣Мр╕Йр╕╕р╕Бр╣Ар╕Йр╕┤р╕Щ р╕Ю.р╕и. р╣Тр╣Хр╣Фр╣Ш
р╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕Др╕│р╕кр╕▒р╣Ир╕Зр╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕ир╕╣р╕Щр╕вр╣Мр╕нр╕│р╕Щр╕зр╕вр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Бр╕Бр╣Йр╣Др╕Вр╕кр╕Цр╕▓р╕Щр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Ур╣Мр╕Йр╕╕р╕Бр╣Ар╕Йр╕┤р╕Щ
——————————————————————————–
An access to such information has been temporarily ceased
due to the order of the Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES)
under the authority of emergency decree B.E 2548 (A.D. 2005).
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
Nick Nostitz,
The idea that only those “on the ground” can make judgement calls on an event or series of events or the actions of a state is just nonsense. Why have international courts if that’s the case? How many of us here personally witnessed Sharpville, the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, Bloody Sunday? Undoubtedly most of us would condemn those people who perpetrated these events even though none of us were actually there.
In fact, those on the ground can often be the worst at making an objective call as they tend to only see one tiny part of the picture and become immersed in the particular energies of the specific location they are in. Wood and trees.
While such individual insight is undoubtedly important it doesn’t convey anymore than partial details. The overall judgement needs to take in all the facts, from all perspectives and also have full access to all the evidence, including that held by the state.
Are there any written records of army orders issued at that time? Is the army conducting internal investigations regarding possible breaches of the rules of engagement? Was each discharge of weapons by the army an accountable act?
If the Thai govt is incapable of acting accountably (which it clearly isn’t) then it is perfectly right and proper as much pressure is put on it as possible to make sure it does.
From what I’ve personally heard from a source I can’t reveal is that the evidence reveals that it is very likely Fabio was deliberately targeted by a Thai army sniper. If that is the case then it is the Thai govt and army’s interest and obligation under international law to clear this up as quickly as possible, arrest the killer, put them on trial and offer justice and transparency.
But we know that such an outcome will never occur.
Fabio’s family will never get justice.
We just have to make sure that he’s not forgotten.
Finally, what is indisputable is that the Thai army were using snipers against unarmed civilians. They were often targeted with head shots. Such a mode of operation can only be described as psychopathic. And if opposing such acts labels me as “politicised” I’m very very happy to be called such.
Big questions for Thailand
Thaler, I can access Wikileaks just fine from Bangkok, on a TRUE line. So any block you’re experiencing is either ISP-based or spottily enforced. FYI.
Robert Amsterdam on a “Strategy of Tension” in Bangkok
Tony
So your startling revelation is that Robert Amsterdam is trying to get his line into the international press?
Wow man, you’re a genius! How in god’s name did you figure that out????
The brain eating virusese bit as well.
Jeez. Communists, melting orbs and Chatham House. All in one posting!!!
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
Whoever.
You replied to me stating – “Medical staff massacred by security forces to use your words”.
No, those are not my words. They are yours.
You also state, in a rather stilted and bizarre way that I am a “romantic”. What exactly am I being romantic about?
Maybe you should ask Nurse Kate’s family whether they were being “romantic” when they buried their daughter after she was murdered by the army at Wat Pathum?
And how you rationalise a call for transparency, accountability and justice as support Chalerm as PM is just laughable.
As for patience – it is the Thai people who are showing that – with an incredibly corrupt and violent elite who’d stop at nothing to maintain their grip on power. A long and sordid history of coup after coup, massacre after massacre, elections subverted and appointees and generals running the show. It’s been going on for decades.
An alternative view of the Duch verdict in Cambodia
Mr.Widyono, let me summarize your points of view on the issue. You argue that the international community has considered ECCC tribunal as a corrupted organization as well as being dominated by the current Cambodian government. In short, you imply that the ECCC carries no credibility and cannot be trust on the issue of justice because the Judges are corrupted and the Cambodian government interferes in the trial process. Second, you argue that trial Duch is a waste of time and resources that should instead be spending on investment enterprise. And you also imply that it isn’t Cambodian but the West that is interested in pursuing the crimes against humanity.
In contrast to Mr.Widyono assertion, I argued that it was Cambodian who initiated the trial because the country ratified the Rome Stature. In my opinion, all the international organizations were initiated and created by the Victor Permanent Powers: Russia, U.S. China, France and Britain to ensure international stability after the World War II. For example, the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court, the United Nations International Law Commission, etc. they all have “global” jurisdiction within the United Nations Mandate, and ECCC is part of this international system. The United Nations had announced publicly that Ms. Michelle Lee of China coordinated UN assistance for Khmer Rouge Trials that led to the establishment of the ECCC in 2006.
Anyway, the issue is not about jurisdiction, the issue is about Crimes Against Humanity. Three million people perished during the Khmer Rouge regime in power on 17 April 1975 to 7 January 1979. This matters!
International community has been providing funding and judges to ECCC to express the collective conscious against inhumane cruelty. Cambodian official H.E. Sok An makes statement “NEVER AGAIN” on the occasion of the 60th Anniversary of the Liberation of Auschwitz and the other Nazi Extermination Camps.
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
Whoever: “We all know who threatened whom”
Who did Kamolket Akahad threaten exactly? Shot and killed in Wat Pathum while she was treating someone. By soldiers snipping from the Skytrain track, it seems pretty clear. See here for a summary of the evidence:
http://us.asiancorrespondent.com/bangkok-pundit-blog/what-happened-at-wat-pathum-wanaram
And note to Bangkok Dan: she was wearing a white shirt with a green cross, signifying she was a medic. But a Press T-shirt would have protected Fabio, right?
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
It couldn’t be 50/50. Govt troops were well-armed and was always behind some solid structures too. The daredevil red shirt protesters always ran for cover once the troop opened fire. A crossfire situation could mean Fabio, the daredevil photojournalist embedded in the protesters’ side, was more likely cut down by the soldiers’ bullet. I believe the footage of people dragging his body should be thoroughly investigated and some telling evidence can come from last few frames of his life in his stolen camera.
All the propanganda prior to all these killings, the core red-shirted successfully convinced many red-shirted protesters using oppositions’ audio recordings of Abhisit telling soldiers to kill red-shirted protesters during Songkran 2009’s confrontation. The two men who got killed were defending their home against the Red Shirt mob in Nan Leang area. The 57-time tampered audio recording was played in the parliament and audio experts scientifically proven and the Thai courts ruled the recording was a ‘dud’. I witnessed the highly explosive emotion when the tampered tape were played by various red-shirted orators in the red rallies. Politicians laying down lives of mob for their hidden agenda is not new. Yellow shirts leaders did the same–Udon Thani incident. Red Shirts are many fronts with one objective to topple AV govt. Period. What happened to the mostly women, elderly, children crowd when the Red Shirt leaders called it quit?? They were brought down to Bkk and promised by leaders who would fight with their bare hands if soldiers arrived to end the protest!! My red-shirt friends who by the protest stage were dissappointed by the core red leaders. They were booing and cursing their cowardly leaders. The red shirt leaders were telling the protesters right after the mayhem on April 10 to deny seeing any Men-in-Black. It did not appear to be a cover-up. It was it.
For Fabio and the 90 who got killed in the recent political crisis, their cases are in Khun Na Nakorn and his committee’s hand. It would not be easy. Theories will abound for some cases. Let’s hope the Fabio’s case and other high political value cases get a thorough investigation.
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
Simon and BangkokDan: Could you please tell us to what you are referring: “A photographer goes to battlezone and ignores repeated and unambiguous warnings to leave. “As Simon said, he was warned.” What warnings? The rumors (usually spread by Yellow Shirt sympathizers) that Red Shirts were targeting journalists? The general SoE order to clear the area, which was evidently not meant to include journalists, since the army made little or no effort to stop them from entering the perimeter? (Or do you believe journalists should not have been there at all?) Please explain — personally, I’m tired of years of know-nothings trying to turn fiction in fact (in the same manner that some people still insist that PAD guards were not armed). But my mind is open, if you can cite some evidence of your claim.
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
“BangkokDan”
You said:
“Wearing a green or whatever shirt with clear MEDIA or PRESS letters would probably saved his life.”
Most likely not. Don’t forget – almost in the same spot two other journalists were injured, and both of them did not wear black.
“Charles F”
You said:
“Meaning the shot could have come from anywhere. The Thai army didn’t have all the firearms; there is ample evidence that some protesters were armed as well.”
It was a bit more complicated. There was an brief armed battle in Lumpini Park in the morning when the army took the park. The Red Shirt militants retreated soon.
By the time Fabio was shot it was a rather lopsided situation – there was massive fire from the military into the Red Shirt camp, and at most very little fire from the side of the Red Shirts, if any fire at all. I was behind the military lines, some people said that there was some small arms fired at the military, but it was quite difficult to assess, if that was so, or not.
The main reason i decided that day to stay behind the military was that i thought it was too risky to be on the receiving end of the military bullets. This was a personal decision – primarily i wanted to survive that day, and any photos were secondary. I anyhow got into trouble a bit later, when the militants decided to fire a series of M79 when we reached Sarasin intersection, but after the first granade (most like a training round) exploded a few meters next to us journos i rushed to cover in a small alley. Unfortunately Chandler didn’t, and had to pay dearly for it.
Who killed Fabio? There are more than overwhelming chances and evidence that he indeed was killed by an army bullet, and not by a bullet fired by the militants. I don’t think though that it was a bullet purposely fired at a foreign journalist. Were the soldiers justified with firing massively into the direction of the Red Shirts? I don’t know. It’s difficult to say. It’s not really a clear cut situation.
Was the government justified in ordering a final crackdown that morning? That is where i have more doubts. There were last minute attempts for negotiations, when the night of the 18th the senator visited the Red Shirt camp, and the Red Shirt leaders have made major concessions, and more or less asked for a few more days so they could wind things down. This was not taken up by the government. I tend to believe that the government should have taken this chance – lives could have been saved, and a bit of goodwill could have been created.
Lets not forget here that all the mess was a result of a chain of very wrong calls by both sides over a long period of time. This was a development, not just a series of single and unrelated events. The Red Shirts have made many very bad decisions, but the government has done so as well. There were incidents were the military has made right decisions on the ground, but there were other incidents in which the military has shown tremendous incompetence, and there were incidents were soldiers have clearly not just broken their own rules of engagement, but have committed clear human rights violations. What complicates matters even more is that besides the many peaceful protesters there were armed militants.
This whole thing is not a black and white situation, it is very complex and it needs more time to properly investigate. What makes me angry though, and serves nobody, is when people who were not anywhere near the things are giving blanket statements on what has happened according to their own political convictions.
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
^@Dead Journalist:
Quite right. Every now and then Bangkok Dan and StanG come out from their own redneck blogs to pontificate and bluster about the rightness of the actions of the present military/palace junta government.
Sickening and grotesque indeed.
Bangkok Dan, in his post (above) seeks to attach cause the the shooting of Fabio in these terms: “Chances are he was very well shot by an army sniper. Because he looked like a black shirt and was in their area.” Not that Dan has any idea at all about the ‘because’ of it at all, he is simply parroting the line that he and his redneck ilk are wont to parrot when springing to the defence of this disgraceful government. Then he goes on to speculate that “Wearing a green or whatever shirt with clear MEDIA or PRESS letters would probably saved his life.” Does he know this? of course he doesn’t, his aim is simply to negate the odious responsibility borne by the Abhisit government for this dreadful massacre, and to peddle the fiction that the army, with orders to shoot-to-kill, did just that, with more than just a hint of suspicion that journalists and photographers were targetted to ensure that ‘unacceptable’ or ‘misleading’ facts about the murderous clean-up should never come to light.
And of course, in the Budget bill now before parliament, we now see the army being rewarded for its murder of Thai citizens, and the significant domination of Queens Guard officers at the top of the corrupt edifice is further enhanced.
For an army that lost a minor skirmish against Laos in the late 1970’s, doubtless, making war on it’s own people is an altogether more attractive and much safer prospect (also less demanding of their levels of training) than actually defending the country against real agressors (of which there are none at all). Which is probably why the role of the army in Thailand is not to defend the country against would-be aggressors, but to rabidly defend the ruling elites from the threat of democracy.
Sickening and grotesque indeed.
Burma in Limbo, Part 2
Thanks Plan B,
That must be the shortest post you’ve ever commented here. You usually do not agree with me, so I was surprised even though I have a rough idea where you stand.
Can you elaborate a bit more so that I and other NM readers can understand you better.
What I am trying to do with this series of essays is to paint a general background from a native Burmese point of view so that NM readers can at least grasp why and how Burma is in such a situation now.
Like you, I am also really tired of the black and white view of our Burma presented by foreign experts just from reading a lot of books about the country not from their own life experiences like you and I had to go through.
Who killed Italian photographer Fabio Polenghi?
Henry, can you enlighten us with some of your backup evidences? I am not disputing this suspicious as I also believe that the party involved in killing Fabio was the military.