Your ‘sources’ have hard evidence, or just more hearsay?
I don’t believe the reds, and I don’t believe the military/government.
however, as an academic, you should be held to higher standards than using only eye-witness accounts as factual evidence. Then we are only left with “he-said, she-said” bullshit (pardon my language).
The only fact is that no one except people involved knew exactly what happened at Din Daeng that morning.
The rest of us are relying on our biases to fill up the half-truth we know into the ‘truth’.
David Brown does with his insistence and “confirmation” of dead bodies being loaded into pickup trucks, and Portman’s steadfast belief that ‘practice’ rounds were used even while faced with a military general stating live full-metal-jacket rounds were used.
And unfortunately, even you are doing when you insist as a fact that the ‘blue’ were instigators. It would be better for you to use the word ‘allegedly’ when discussing about the government. By making the statement as a ‘fact’ you are being intellectually dishonest, then to turn around and claim that the truth you know is the only truth smacks of blind partisanship and faith.
Not very becoming of an anthropologist. You’re the type of classroom professor where the ‘A’ students opinions simply mirror your own. You will use the flimsiest excuses to mark down the grades of people whose opinion don’t match yours.
Oh, I heard it from a former student of yours, I can’t tell you who, cuz I must protect my source whose career depends on it. But I can say he Aced your class because he knew your type and knew your game. He decided to keep silent and not share information with anyone because he didn’t want people to fail your class or come back and haunt him in his career.
Do you get how weak your argument is yet?
Personally, I don’t doubt Abhisits sincerity. The Blue shirt causing the whole mayhem is very believable, as Newin has a history of instigating violence, as he did against the PAD when they were protesting against Phra Viharn. And the military led by seemingly a very politically hungry man like Anupong doesn’t heed well.
While me thinking it is believable does not make it “true” by any status.
Antipadshit:
while you are correct to state that there are alternative viewpoints to the ‘official truth’ (which is probably a cover-up). Exactly what the cover up is, we don’t know….
it could be that there were deaths (but I don’t really believe it, and if so, I don’t think it would be more than a handful)
it could be that the Blue Shirt disguised came to setup the militia to make the situation go out of hand… which is more believable as it is a ‘3rd hand’ theory. –> The Red Shirt leadership will have to share some blame if this is true, as they should’ve condemned the independent behavior of their supporters immediately and kept them in control. By allowing anarchy, they paved the way for the 3rd hand to enter… khao chai mai?
But to believe words, just words, out of each side is 1. Intellectually Dishonest, 2. Gross incompetence, 3. preferring to remain ignorant… take your pick.
Jim Taylor. So now it is attack the messenger and not the message?
I did not attack you report on the meeting except to state that other parts of your piece based on unsubstantiated rumour and gossip undermined it and would finally leave me questioning it. I also thanked you for that report.
I do question your credibility when unsubstantiated rumour is part of a piece and not even noted as such but presented to come across as fact. When you talk of academic credibility being about truth, how does this gossip fit in?
So you are in Thailand and have sources that you dont want to name. Fine, but please do us the service of stating such when you publish the allegations these people make as it is effectively hearsay. All of us foreigners in Thailand have “sources”. Some of them may claim to know things. Maybe they do. However, surely it is not right to present unproven and provocative allegations that some claim are the propoganda of one side anyway without making it clear that is what they are, or are you doing anything different from ISOC as you seemingly attempt to influence thought here. In doing so I am a little surprised that you seem perplexed that people would ask for evidence not just take your word for it. “It seems people need a little more convincing these days”.
Quite how you conclude I am reproducing government propoganda when I criticse ISOC too and basically just question a lack of evidence? Surely evidence is a cornerstone of everything we hold dear in a democracy, or maybe you would disagree with this.
I also note while criticising the military, Abhisit and Newin and I am sure they deserve criticism for some of the things they have done, some of which I dont doubt we dont know about, even if they havent quite achieved the level of repression and supreme control of all local and international media and every camera equipped phone and digicam in the area while with more efficiency than the militaries of the US or China etc massacring and diappearing people in droves that your conspiracy entails, that you do not reserve any criticism for the violent actions of the elements of the red shirts that conducted violent acts. Surely there is already enough evidence that this happened for at least some criticism after all even Charan admitted the red violence was a mistake(paraphrasing from memory).
There are two sides or even more to every story and you are giving one uncritically from what I see. Is that truth, propoganda, campaigning for ones personal beliefs or weighted academic assessment or something else?
I could add information from my sources which include family members at Din Daeng flats, but I wont because that too would be hearsay. Needless to say though there are versions very different from yours.
For clarification I am not an anthropologist or politcal scientist but just a humble person living in Thailand and someone who has for quite some time not that any of that should adjust any weight to any comment I or anyone else makes.
antipadshist #155 turning up the charm! With all those winks I am blushing already.
And good news – more grounds for our RECONCILLIATION:
On #155 WE AGREE – lets wait for conclusive evidences first before BEFORE ACCUSING ANYONE of “COGNITIVE BIAS” as it could easily be you who is biased!
Let’s not twist words around too there’s a huge difference between “trust” and “believe” – reread my post #154 I don’t TRUST PT, UDD, I TRUST Nick. Where did this “I don’t believe come from” – your own cognitive bias???
On #156 “WHO are the attackers actually ? WHO “started first” ?”
Since when is blocking of Dindaeng intersection LEGAL??? I smell cognitive bias??? Anyone smell this too???
If PT, UDD, DTV and PMThaksin are the only trustworthy sources in the world, MONOPOLIZERS OF TRUTH it stinks of cognitive bias… You reckon?
It’s now 2009, and I’m interested in any ‘developments’ regarding the ‘progress’ of Nam Tha dam #1.
Also, as the distance between Nalae to L. Nam Tha is approximately 60 kilometres (on a twisty road – so probably only 50 k). The proposed 110km ‘flood’ tail would appear to also reach beyond Nam Tha (on a straight line basis). But, as the topography upstream of Nam Tha rises quickly and significantly, if 110km WAS to be the distance, it’d be a MASSIVE dam.
I’m not sure the Chinese know how to deal with siltation (the cause of turbidity). The ‘mighty’ 3 Gorges dam will have a life of only 50 years precisely because the Chinese don’t know how to address the impact of siltation on the dam floor.
In realtion to various comments, lets put this in layman’s terms: We suspect something has happened but we have no evidence but we believe it anyway. We also claim that no evidence has been produced to disprove the theory.
This is theological or faith based belief and not fact pure and simple. Obviously Bush and Rove had a laregr and longer lasting effect than I had previously believed to be the case. We usually wait until something is proven to be true based at least on a preponderance of evidence before accepting it.
Nobody? (That sums it up!) Actually, academic credibility is about truths and a need for a professional ethics (something that the Thai media and their supporters have lost). “Nobody” does not seem to appreciate the real lived danger out there right now to those in the Red Shirt membership who reveal their first hand experiences. So belittling my comments undremines your own credibility in the reproduction of govt fiction. My argument holds: if the political environment in Thailand now was such that it was really able to support freedom (alternative voices?), equality and impartial justice – then people who provide information to people like me would not feel that they have to hide, ask for discretion or use electronic sites which reveal these facts only to have them deleted by ICT’s army of censors as soon as they appear: Right? People like “Nobody” live in a world of fiction in a web that they spin themselves from material they chose to use.
As anthropologist I would not place the life of my informants at risk however slight for my own gain- though some political scientists may have a different viewpoint??
wow ! congradulations, dude – you have just “discovered America”, huh ?
CNN? now, that’s one MSM media outlet which certainly deserves trust! 😉 especially by Abhisit’s own government and Thai Media – who has launched full scale officially declared “Media war” not so long ago – to counter-act exactly those very “foreign media” whom they accuse of being “Thaksin’s payees”. now suddenly CNN is being quoted as … supporting the government “official truth” version, huh ? 😉
Daniel,
this video (and many others) we’ve watched LONG before you have mentioned it here, and in Thai original version.
you may see it yourself that the “students” are recording it from VERY FAR AWAY ! there was a program on Thai VT channel NBT which interviewd Thai reporters who were there – and ALL of them said the SAME thing (which confirms the same point here) : ALL of them too were FAR AWAY from the main action ! the footages they played clearly shown that: they were only able to zoom-in to certain limit (with great disadvantage of distance and lack of proper ligh – that’s why probably amry chose to start their operation before the dawn, to have this advantage on their side of covering up the facts). one of those reporters said that at one point he was trying to get closer – and was stopped by …. GUN (or rifle) pointed at him by a soldier !
so, WHAT can you see from this video except some dots and flashes, Daniel ? do you even see faces or any more details ?
WHO are the attackers actually ? WHO “started first” ?
and even – WHO are those “students” ? (sure, on one of two other of their original videos can be seen even their faces briefly). WHY they didn’t come up and support the government’s “official truth” ? why they are not named as a real witnesses ?
now, that’s the ONLY what I can see as what is presented by pro-government supporters as “credible evidences” ! 😀 while they rant on and on about “Bias” of Nick and others who disagree with “official truth” and dismiss ANY attempts to present such evidences as “I don’t believe it”.
well, then THIS video deserves as much : “I don’t believe it” ! 🙂
coz there is NO WAY to prove by this video that it was indeed UDD people who did that. and even if they did – that they didn’t retaliate AFTER the soldiers shot few of them first.
to be a CREDIBLE evidence – those “students” have to go to POLICE or authorites – not some sensationalist “Yellow journallists” (term NOT related to PAD actually 🙂 ) as CNN to make a few bucks !
I mean, come on Daniel, frankly – do you honestly think that these “students” SOLD their amature POOR QUALITY video to a big foreign media because they “love the truth” ? 😉
WHY then Thai gove. / police/ whoever concerned authroties do NOT use this video as sufficient evidence, and do not name the “students” who’s made it ? 😉
last thing, about “other side of the pitcture” – Daniel, you’re trying to sound like it is rather UDD/ Red-shirts / Nick who are dominating the Media and censoring all the alternative opinion – rather than government and Thai MSM ! “other side” you say – other side of …. WHAT ? of …. OTHER SIDE of the MAIN SIDE = THE “main side” ?
hahahaha this is simply too funny !
“the other side” of the other side of the OFFICIAL side !
Daniel, be honest – WHAT other side ? the whole point of Nick’s story, whom you accuse of “bias” (due to your own confirmation bias) is – that THERE IS NO ANY OTHER SIDE, except the official version so rigorously propagated by government and Thai MSM !
this story by Nick – it IS the OTHER side, the ONLY other side – tiny and insignificant, and yet so furioulsy attacked by you and many others here.
I am not at all surprised that you wouldn’t agree with those things. in fact – I was rather expecting that.
and actually that was my whole point : people like Portman (and I guess you too) demand “evidences”. then when / if evidences are presented – you would still reject them for some excuse as “I don’t trust them”.
well, then what the whole fuss is all about, which you and Partman are making here? do you want evidences or not? and which evidences you want? evidences by whom ? by Nick – he is a reporter, not a police or private detective.
you may or may not trust those evidences by PT/ UDD – it is irrelevent, it is your own problem ! 😉
but Parliament has appointed the group to investigate these allegations – and that implies that those who comprise this group ARE TRUSTED ENOUGH – otherwise they won’t be allowed to partake in the work of this group.
as for UDD – well, if they produce solid enough evidences, then certainly some motion will be to present those evidences to police and Parliament, as well as to public. and those to whom it will be presented will decide on the credibility of evidences.
sure, I have no doubt that there will be attempts to reject those evidences same as yu did – “I don’t believe them”, and efforts to prove those evidences wrong.
but for you to say “I don’t believe them” – this is a childish excuse. !
you’re not in position to pass the judgment – there are some authorities for that. there is a certain legal process and in the end of this process will be a judgement.
so, all I said was – you and Portman have to AT LEAST wait till then. meanwhile all your denials are useless.
another thing I said – that most likely even IF there are evidences and those evidences are excepted by authorities (which is very unlikely – taking into consideration such a GIANT effort to cover-up and then deny all those facts) – then you and Portman will still continue in one way or another admitting that you were wrong.
While the factual elements of the report are appreciated, some of the unsubstantiated claims seem to detract from the piece to the point where its presence on what is described as an academic site seems bizarre.
While attacking the propoganda tactics of ISOC is a reasonable thing to do the effort is undermined by, in the way it is written, what seems like direct unsubatantiated rumour and propoganda by the writer himself.
There are elements of the Songkran day incident that need to be clarified and sorted out in a transparent manner. If the writer has any evidence, preferably multi level proof that colloborates other evidence, then I am sure there are more than a few media outlets (international if local is not trusted) that would be willing to run the story apart from any interest here. However, considering the current state of tension in Thailand if there is no evidence and this is just rumour or even worse another sides spin then it is irresponsible to make the claim. I hope this is not the case as clarifying what happened away from the spin of any side is really where this needs to go.
I wholeheartedly disagree with what ISOC are doing here and once again thank the writer for the segment of his report that covered that aspect.
As an addendum having read through all the comments now I find the writers defence of no evidence astounding and verging on the level of conspiracy theory that even Thanong on acid couldnt reach. I understand the writer is meant to be an academic. It seems the level of academia has plunged since I left college, admittedly a long time ago, if the controversial elements of this piece and subsequent comments are intended as academic commentary rather than direct propoganda, which must on its own now at least reach the level of what ISOC are doing, and which I add yet again totally undermines the factual report part assuming that is really factual which unfortunately I now start to have doubts over with this writer who seems set on a course to pathologically discredit himself and even damage the reputation of this site as academic.
BTW, how did you get from, a witness sees 2 men in a truck, to “5 to 7 men” in 2 trucks, to “up to 10 gunmen”? This kind of undisciplined reporting begs New Mandala to review its standards. And you to watch more CSI.”
David Fullbrook writes:
High-velocity assault rifles is not dramatic. The rifles reportedly used high velocity rounds as opposed to low velocity rounds fired by pistols. High velocity rounds have a high chance of passing through soft vehicles like cars, as well as trees, walls, etc. Five minutes is what the paper said. I added ‘up to’.
I appreciate the account of farming and its violent suppression in two settings. But there is also something to be said about the violent protection of such farming, beyond Burma and Afghanistan. In Thailand in the early years of the 20th century, when Nan was incorporated into Siam, a few Yao/Mien settlements were allowed to grow opium for the Opium Monopoly. As far as I can tell, this took to larger households in five settlements (Phulangka and a few others). Everybody else was continually at risk of arrest and fines, and both police and military had a history of demanding goodwill-payments for looking the other way. Until about 1958, licensed growers were registered, monitored, and protected. From what I have heard, the “Red Meo revolt” started in February of 1968 when a Hmong settlement refused to make such payment to the third official group (military, police, or whatever) that came to the village B. Meo Maaw in a short period (they had paid two already, the village was not far from B. Phulangka). The documentary Miao Year by Bill Geddes, available as a video cd at the Tribal Museum the last I knew, does not suggest any such monitoring or harassment by the authorities. It is a very striking film, in part because it makes no mention of the violence that lingered.
antipadshist #150 – you certainly have a charming way of writing and, if anything, I’d like to achieve ‘reconciliation’ with you.
Where we agree:
– On your “rural peasant” comments in #150, I totally agree with you and you can do a search of my 1-2 years worth of past comments on this blog.
– On crimes committed by the Thai State/military of the past comments on #152, I’ve made similar comments in the past – and again the evidences are in this blog.
Where we don’t agree:
– Let’s wait until PT/UDD – which I don’t trust to be frank, OR, even BETTER a fair-minded Red like Nick, who I trust – to produce those evidences of truck loads of poor, dead Red sacrificial lambs and that the government/military were “professional” in covering up the killings BEFORE ACCUSING ANYONE of COGNITIVE BIAS. Do keep an open mind as the bias may also be your own, antipadshist… This is only fair.
#149 “photojourn blog has a story about monk telling this – that he saw it himself. would monk lie ?”
Some monks are known to give wrong lottery numbers and/or predictions of the future – it that lying? Some monks are also known to sneak out to party, drink and womanize…
Tumbler: I would say that his continued animated existence in this earthly vale of tears is a major enabling factor for a good deal of the present unpleasantness.
There are, of course, many other issues involved too.
If your question was not tongue-in-cheek, then you need to go have an off-the-record chat with people who have some understanding of the Thai situation. Most of what is really going on is not even all that indirectly alluded to here or in other forums.
Congratulations on your oft repeated crocodile farm remark. It has even been translated into German as a commentary alongside the video clip you cite that purports to show the reptiles’ morning treat being loaded into the trucks. Unfortunately that is the only thing that is remarkable about the clip. Compared to the clip of Thaksin’s 500 baht announcement with 645,000 odd views, the crocodile food clip has only drawn 15,000. Surely it would have also gone viral, if people thought it was convincing evidence of red shirts being put to use as raw material for the croc skin handbags to be sported by wealthy khunyings. In the film the military are shown loading 4 or 5 people on stretchers into their pick-up truck ambulances as the commentator comments that these are injured people from both the rioters’ and the military side. As for the monk, his evidence is also unconvincing. Giving him the benefit of the doubt that he exists at all, he said he wasn’t sure whether the people he claimed to have seen being loaded into trucks were alive or dead.
Vichai is right. Given Thaksin’s still massive available wealth and all his connections in the military and police, as well as Chalerm Yoobamrung’s expertise on these matters, it seems unbelievable that he cannot come up with any better evidence of the bodies he mentioned on television than the crocodile clip, the anonymous monk’s statement, the fake shooting of the man being pulled out of a bus who was actually hit on the head by an MP etc. Surely alongside such a large number of deaths as claimed there would have been an even larger number of bullet wound injuries? Where are all of those people? Do you want us to believe they were fed to the crocs while still alive or did they make the shorter journey to Siam Paragon to be put out of their misery by the sharks in the basement?
Antipadsiht #18
I pointed out from the beginning that the military admitted it used practice rounds which are also live rounds and just as lethal as combat ammunition at the relatively short ranges separating the army and the rioters.
A really (unsurprisingly) BIASED description of events by a guy who spend days with them (of course, with the more-decent red shirts with cooler head, I doubt if he’s ever been hanging out with those red shirts who throw motolovs without any threat from the soldiers).
However, I admire your various attempts to be fair and report the story from the other side of the picture.
As foreigners, You might find a translated-description of this famous video useful.
.
.
If you haven’t seen it already, you really really should. It’s a translation from the witness describing the important event captured on camera and photos from an eye-witness.
Read it, see it, and you’ll really be thinking with some aspects from the other side of the picture
“Because Jakrapob Penkair has been reading, researching, and giving speech about Thailand political history, the Monarchy feels threatened. Especially because Jakrapob read the Thai history of the critical period of the 1932 coup d’etat revolution that had successfully placed the Thai Monarchy under the constitution.”
It is true that many Thais are not very well versed in the history of their own country but Jakraphob’s reading of the history of the 1932 coup is far from being a unique achievement in Thailand. I and many thousands of others have also read the history of this fascinating period and the basic facts are known to virtually all Thais, including those with no interest in reading history. I think your unqualified personal adoration for Jakraphob has caused you to exaggerate the significance and potential threat to the monarchy of this intellectual featherweight in your own mind.
Jakraphob was spotted by Thaksin when he was a TV commentator covering the APEC conference in 2003. Thaksin, whose own spotty command of English was well illustrated in his recent mendacious stammerings on CNN, the BBC and Al Jazeera, was so impressed by Jakraphob’s unctious commentary on the APEC event in English that he made him government spokesman. Unfortunately Jakraphob’s facile approach of telling unbelievable bare faced lies to the foreign media and going off on tangents soon made him a total laughing stock. Nevertheless, his willingness to lie for the big boss earned him Thaksin’s confidence which is why he is a leader of the red movement to restore Thaksin to power, not because of the love, respect and trust of the Thai people as you suggest.
I express my RESPECT to Jim Taylor for daring to express the alternative opinion – alternative to the “official truth”.
BTW, Jim perhaps a bit off-topic (although you did mention that army hass a history of cover up facts) – yesterday there was some discussion on one of Thai Forums about some guys (some people who find things under the sea to resell – like “sea-scavengers” ? ) finding few sunk containers under the sea. these containers were checked and apparently they are sort of missing / dissapeared sinc events of 1992. so far only 1 was opened – and … it was full of sceletons.
naturally it is not reflected in Thai MSM.
now, regading this Jim’s story and additional comments – it is good to see that there are some people as him who are well capable of telling the truth and standing up to all those who would attack him.
I would not start here all over again fighting with Portman and his buddies (like maverick), coz obviously it is useless and pointless. coz even when sufficient evidences are presented (as in another thread – to Portman about LIVE bullets) – they still would neve admit they were wrong, but continue to eel-out from the true facts.
there is a saying about these people : “even if you piss into their eyes – they’ll say it is God’s dew” hahaha
I’ll just wait till May 11 (and may be till PT investigation is done too) – and THEN I’ll challenge all these twitty-twatty chaps to at least COMMENT on that.
lastly, Jim – don’t bother so much about petty attacks on you by these guys: “dogs bark and caravan goes on”. 😉
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Red faces: Unconvincing psych-ops
Jim,
Your ‘sources’ have hard evidence, or just more hearsay?
I don’t believe the reds, and I don’t believe the military/government.
however, as an academic, you should be held to higher standards than using only eye-witness accounts as factual evidence. Then we are only left with “he-said, she-said” bullshit (pardon my language).
The only fact is that no one except people involved knew exactly what happened at Din Daeng that morning.
The rest of us are relying on our biases to fill up the half-truth we know into the ‘truth’.
David Brown does with his insistence and “confirmation” of dead bodies being loaded into pickup trucks, and Portman’s steadfast belief that ‘practice’ rounds were used even while faced with a military general stating live full-metal-jacket rounds were used.
And unfortunately, even you are doing when you insist as a fact that the ‘blue’ were instigators. It would be better for you to use the word ‘allegedly’ when discussing about the government. By making the statement as a ‘fact’ you are being intellectually dishonest, then to turn around and claim that the truth you know is the only truth smacks of blind partisanship and faith.
Not very becoming of an anthropologist. You’re the type of classroom professor where the ‘A’ students opinions simply mirror your own. You will use the flimsiest excuses to mark down the grades of people whose opinion don’t match yours.
Oh, I heard it from a former student of yours, I can’t tell you who, cuz I must protect my source whose career depends on it. But I can say he Aced your class because he knew your type and knew your game. He decided to keep silent and not share information with anyone because he didn’t want people to fail your class or come back and haunt him in his career.
Do you get how weak your argument is yet?
Personally, I don’t doubt Abhisits sincerity. The Blue shirt causing the whole mayhem is very believable, as Newin has a history of instigating violence, as he did against the PAD when they were protesting against Phra Viharn. And the military led by seemingly a very politically hungry man like Anupong doesn’t heed well.
While me thinking it is believable does not make it “true” by any status.
Antipadshit:
while you are correct to state that there are alternative viewpoints to the ‘official truth’ (which is probably a cover-up). Exactly what the cover up is, we don’t know….
it could be that there were deaths (but I don’t really believe it, and if so, I don’t think it would be more than a handful)
it could be that the Blue Shirt disguised came to setup the militia to make the situation go out of hand… which is more believable as it is a ‘3rd hand’ theory. –> The Red Shirt leadership will have to share some blame if this is true, as they should’ve condemned the independent behavior of their supporters immediately and kept them in control. By allowing anarchy, they paved the way for the 3rd hand to enter… khao chai mai?
But to believe words, just words, out of each side is 1. Intellectually Dishonest, 2. Gross incompetence, 3. preferring to remain ignorant… take your pick.
Red faces: Unconvincing psych-ops
Jim Taylor. So now it is attack the messenger and not the message?
I did not attack you report on the meeting except to state that other parts of your piece based on unsubstantiated rumour and gossip undermined it and would finally leave me questioning it. I also thanked you for that report.
I do question your credibility when unsubstantiated rumour is part of a piece and not even noted as such but presented to come across as fact. When you talk of academic credibility being about truth, how does this gossip fit in?
So you are in Thailand and have sources that you dont want to name. Fine, but please do us the service of stating such when you publish the allegations these people make as it is effectively hearsay. All of us foreigners in Thailand have “sources”. Some of them may claim to know things. Maybe they do. However, surely it is not right to present unproven and provocative allegations that some claim are the propoganda of one side anyway without making it clear that is what they are, or are you doing anything different from ISOC as you seemingly attempt to influence thought here. In doing so I am a little surprised that you seem perplexed that people would ask for evidence not just take your word for it. “It seems people need a little more convincing these days”.
Quite how you conclude I am reproducing government propoganda when I criticse ISOC too and basically just question a lack of evidence? Surely evidence is a cornerstone of everything we hold dear in a democracy, or maybe you would disagree with this.
I also note while criticising the military, Abhisit and Newin and I am sure they deserve criticism for some of the things they have done, some of which I dont doubt we dont know about, even if they havent quite achieved the level of repression and supreme control of all local and international media and every camera equipped phone and digicam in the area while with more efficiency than the militaries of the US or China etc massacring and diappearing people in droves that your conspiracy entails, that you do not reserve any criticism for the violent actions of the elements of the red shirts that conducted violent acts. Surely there is already enough evidence that this happened for at least some criticism after all even Charan admitted the red violence was a mistake(paraphrasing from memory).
There are two sides or even more to every story and you are giving one uncritically from what I see. Is that truth, propoganda, campaigning for ones personal beliefs or weighted academic assessment or something else?
I could add information from my sources which include family members at Din Daeng flats, but I wont because that too would be hearsay. Needless to say though there are versions very different from yours.
For clarification I am not an anthropologist or politcal scientist but just a humble person living in Thailand and someone who has for quite some time not that any of that should adjust any weight to any comment I or anyone else makes.
The crushing of the Red Shirts
antipadshist #155 turning up the charm! With all those winks I am blushing already.
And good news – more grounds for our RECONCILLIATION:
On #155 WE AGREE – lets wait for conclusive evidences first before BEFORE ACCUSING ANYONE of “COGNITIVE BIAS” as it could easily be you who is biased!
Let’s not twist words around too there’s a huge difference between “trust” and “believe” – reread my post #154 I don’t TRUST PT, UDD, I TRUST Nick. Where did this “I don’t believe come from” – your own cognitive bias???
On #156 “WHO are the attackers actually ? WHO “started first” ?”
Since when is blocking of Dindaeng intersection LEGAL??? I smell cognitive bias??? Anyone smell this too???
If PT, UDD, DTV and PMThaksin are the only trustworthy sources in the world, MONOPOLIZERS OF TRUTH it stinks of cognitive bias… You reckon?
More on the Chinese in northern Laos
During my time in both Bokeo and Nam Tha provinces, everywhere I was told the ‘going’ rate is 1000kip.
But, interestingly, it appears that it was Thai, not Chinese, who were the middle men collectors of the corn.
Cheers
The Nam Tha dam
Olivier
It’s now 2009, and I’m interested in any ‘developments’ regarding the ‘progress’ of Nam Tha dam #1.
Also, as the distance between Nalae to L. Nam Tha is approximately 60 kilometres (on a twisty road – so probably only 50 k). The proposed 110km ‘flood’ tail would appear to also reach beyond Nam Tha (on a straight line basis). But, as the topography upstream of Nam Tha rises quickly and significantly, if 110km WAS to be the distance, it’d be a MASSIVE dam.
I’m not sure the Chinese know how to deal with siltation (the cause of turbidity). The ‘mighty’ 3 Gorges dam will have a life of only 50 years precisely because the Chinese don’t know how to address the impact of siltation on the dam floor.
Cheers on a great article.
The crushing of the Red Shirts
In realtion to various comments, lets put this in layman’s terms: We suspect something has happened but we have no evidence but we believe it anyway. We also claim that no evidence has been produced to disprove the theory.
This is theological or faith based belief and not fact pure and simple. Obviously Bush and Rove had a laregr and longer lasting effect than I had previously believed to be the case. We usually wait until something is proven to be true based at least on a preponderance of evidence before accepting it.
Fact is dead. Long live belief!
Red faces: Unconvincing psych-ops
Nobody? (That sums it up!) Actually, academic credibility is about truths and a need for a professional ethics (something that the Thai media and their supporters have lost). “Nobody” does not seem to appreciate the real lived danger out there right now to those in the Red Shirt membership who reveal their first hand experiences. So belittling my comments undremines your own credibility in the reproduction of govt fiction. My argument holds: if the political environment in Thailand now was such that it was really able to support freedom (alternative voices?), equality and impartial justice – then people who provide information to people like me would not feel that they have to hide, ask for discretion or use electronic sites which reveal these facts only to have them deleted by ICT’s army of censors as soon as they appear: Right? People like “Nobody” live in a world of fiction in a web that they spin themselves from material they chose to use.
As anthropologist I would not place the life of my informants at risk however slight for my own gain- though some political scientists may have a different viewpoint??
The crushing of the Red Shirts
@DanielCU #153
wow ! congradulations, dude – you have just “discovered America”, huh ?
CNN? now, that’s one MSM media outlet which certainly deserves trust! 😉 especially by Abhisit’s own government and Thai Media – who has launched full scale officially declared “Media war” not so long ago – to counter-act exactly those very “foreign media” whom they accuse of being “Thaksin’s payees”. now suddenly CNN is being quoted as … supporting the government “official truth” version, huh ? 😉
Daniel,
this video (and many others) we’ve watched LONG before you have mentioned it here, and in Thai original version.
you may see it yourself that the “students” are recording it from VERY FAR AWAY ! there was a program on Thai VT channel NBT which interviewd Thai reporters who were there – and ALL of them said the SAME thing (which confirms the same point here) : ALL of them too were FAR AWAY from the main action ! the footages they played clearly shown that: they were only able to zoom-in to certain limit (with great disadvantage of distance and lack of proper ligh – that’s why probably amry chose to start their operation before the dawn, to have this advantage on their side of covering up the facts). one of those reporters said that at one point he was trying to get closer – and was stopped by …. GUN (or rifle) pointed at him by a soldier !
so, WHAT can you see from this video except some dots and flashes, Daniel ? do you even see faces or any more details ?
WHO are the attackers actually ? WHO “started first” ?
and even – WHO are those “students” ? (sure, on one of two other of their original videos can be seen even their faces briefly). WHY they didn’t come up and support the government’s “official truth” ? why they are not named as a real witnesses ?
now, that’s the ONLY what I can see as what is presented by pro-government supporters as “credible evidences” ! 😀 while they rant on and on about “Bias” of Nick and others who disagree with “official truth” and dismiss ANY attempts to present such evidences as “I don’t believe it”.
well, then THIS video deserves as much : “I don’t believe it” ! 🙂
coz there is NO WAY to prove by this video that it was indeed UDD people who did that. and even if they did – that they didn’t retaliate AFTER the soldiers shot few of them first.
to be a CREDIBLE evidence – those “students” have to go to POLICE or authorites – not some sensationalist “Yellow journallists” (term NOT related to PAD actually 🙂 ) as CNN to make a few bucks !
I mean, come on Daniel, frankly – do you honestly think that these “students” SOLD their amature POOR QUALITY video to a big foreign media because they “love the truth” ? 😉
WHY then Thai gove. / police/ whoever concerned authroties do NOT use this video as sufficient evidence, and do not name the “students” who’s made it ? 😉
last thing, about “other side of the pitcture” – Daniel, you’re trying to sound like it is rather UDD/ Red-shirts / Nick who are dominating the Media and censoring all the alternative opinion – rather than government and Thai MSM ! “other side” you say – other side of …. WHAT ? of …. OTHER SIDE of the MAIN SIDE = THE “main side” ?
hahahaha this is simply too funny !
“the other side” of the other side of the OFFICIAL side !
Daniel, be honest – WHAT other side ? the whole point of Nick’s story, whom you accuse of “bias” (due to your own confirmation bias) is – that THERE IS NO ANY OTHER SIDE, except the official version so rigorously propagated by government and Thai MSM !
this story by Nick – it IS the OTHER side, the ONLY other side – tiny and insignificant, and yet so furioulsy attacked by you and many others here.
“OTHER SIDE” – this is simply hillarious !
“Just leave him alone”
Coincidentally, the following post is about Thanong Khanthong. Medhi is about as credible an interpreter of Thai politics as Thanong.
“Hitler was also elected” is a truly crazy reduction of post 1918 German politics (I say this as a German).
The crushing of the Red Shirts
Sidh #154
I am not at all surprised that you wouldn’t agree with those things. in fact – I was rather expecting that.
and actually that was my whole point : people like Portman (and I guess you too) demand “evidences”. then when / if evidences are presented – you would still reject them for some excuse as “I don’t trust them”.
well, then what the whole fuss is all about, which you and Partman are making here? do you want evidences or not? and which evidences you want? evidences by whom ? by Nick – he is a reporter, not a police or private detective.
you may or may not trust those evidences by PT/ UDD – it is irrelevent, it is your own problem ! 😉
but Parliament has appointed the group to investigate these allegations – and that implies that those who comprise this group ARE TRUSTED ENOUGH – otherwise they won’t be allowed to partake in the work of this group.
as for UDD – well, if they produce solid enough evidences, then certainly some motion will be to present those evidences to police and Parliament, as well as to public. and those to whom it will be presented will decide on the credibility of evidences.
sure, I have no doubt that there will be attempts to reject those evidences same as yu did – “I don’t believe them”, and efforts to prove those evidences wrong.
but for you to say “I don’t believe them” – this is a childish excuse. !
you’re not in position to pass the judgment – there are some authorities for that. there is a certain legal process and in the end of this process will be a judgement.
so, all I said was – you and Portman have to AT LEAST wait till then. meanwhile all your denials are useless.
another thing I said – that most likely even IF there are evidences and those evidences are excepted by authorities (which is very unlikely – taking into consideration such a GIANT effort to cover-up and then deny all those facts) – then you and Portman will still continue in one way or another admitting that you were wrong.
this is my guess.
so, let’s wait and see…
Red faces: Unconvincing psych-ops
While the factual elements of the report are appreciated, some of the unsubstantiated claims seem to detract from the piece to the point where its presence on what is described as an academic site seems bizarre.
While attacking the propoganda tactics of ISOC is a reasonable thing to do the effort is undermined by, in the way it is written, what seems like direct unsubatantiated rumour and propoganda by the writer himself.
There are elements of the Songkran day incident that need to be clarified and sorted out in a transparent manner. If the writer has any evidence, preferably multi level proof that colloborates other evidence, then I am sure there are more than a few media outlets (international if local is not trusted) that would be willing to run the story apart from any interest here. However, considering the current state of tension in Thailand if there is no evidence and this is just rumour or even worse another sides spin then it is irresponsible to make the claim. I hope this is not the case as clarifying what happened away from the spin of any side is really where this needs to go.
I wholeheartedly disagree with what ISOC are doing here and once again thank the writer for the segment of his report that covered that aspect.
As an addendum having read through all the comments now I find the writers defence of no evidence astounding and verging on the level of conspiracy theory that even Thanong on acid couldnt reach. I understand the writer is meant to be an academic. It seems the level of academia has plunged since I left college, admittedly a long time ago, if the controversial elements of this piece and subsequent comments are intended as academic commentary rather than direct propoganda, which must on its own now at least reach the level of what ISOC are doing, and which I add yet again totally undermines the factual report part assuming that is really factual which unfortunately I now start to have doubts over with this writer who seems set on a course to pathologically discredit himself and even damage the reputation of this site as academic.
The Sondhi Limthongkul assassination effort
In response to Polo’s comment:
BTW, how did you get from, a witness sees 2 men in a truck, to “5 to 7 men” in 2 trucks, to “up to 10 gunmen”? This kind of undisciplined reporting begs New Mandala to review its standards. And you to watch more CSI.”
David Fullbrook writes:
High-velocity assault rifles is not dramatic. The rifles reportedly used high velocity rounds as opposed to low velocity rounds fired by pistols. High velocity rounds have a high chance of passing through soft vehicles like cars, as well as trees, walls, etc. Five minutes is what the paper said. I added ‘up to’.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
The violent suppression of opium cultivation
I appreciate the account of farming and its violent suppression in two settings. But there is also something to be said about the violent protection of such farming, beyond Burma and Afghanistan. In Thailand in the early years of the 20th century, when Nan was incorporated into Siam, a few Yao/Mien settlements were allowed to grow opium for the Opium Monopoly. As far as I can tell, this took to larger households in five settlements (Phulangka and a few others). Everybody else was continually at risk of arrest and fines, and both police and military had a history of demanding goodwill-payments for looking the other way. Until about 1958, licensed growers were registered, monitored, and protected. From what I have heard, the “Red Meo revolt” started in February of 1968 when a Hmong settlement refused to make such payment to the third official group (military, police, or whatever) that came to the village B. Meo Maaw in a short period (they had paid two already, the village was not far from B. Phulangka). The documentary Miao Year by Bill Geddes, available as a video cd at the Tribal Museum the last I knew, does not suggest any such monitoring or harassment by the authorities. It is a very striking film, in part because it makes no mention of the violence that lingered.
The crushing of the Red Shirts
antipadshist #150 – you certainly have a charming way of writing and, if anything, I’d like to achieve ‘reconciliation’ with you.
Where we agree:
– On your “rural peasant” comments in #150, I totally agree with you and you can do a search of my 1-2 years worth of past comments on this blog.
– On crimes committed by the Thai State/military of the past comments on #152, I’ve made similar comments in the past – and again the evidences are in this blog.
Where we don’t agree:
– Let’s wait until PT/UDD – which I don’t trust to be frank, OR, even BETTER a fair-minded Red like Nick, who I trust – to produce those evidences of truck loads of poor, dead Red sacrificial lambs and that the government/military were “professional” in covering up the killings BEFORE ACCUSING ANYONE of COGNITIVE BIAS. Do keep an open mind as the bias may also be your own, antipadshist… This is only fair.
#149 “photojourn blog has a story about monk telling this – that he saw it himself. would monk lie ?”
Some monks are known to give wrong lottery numbers and/or predictions of the future – it that lying? Some monks are also known to sneak out to party, drink and womanize…
“Just leave him alone”
Tumbler: I would say that his continued animated existence in this earthly vale of tears is a major enabling factor for a good deal of the present unpleasantness.
There are, of course, many other issues involved too.
If your question was not tongue-in-cheek, then you need to go have an off-the-record chat with people who have some understanding of the Thai situation. Most of what is really going on is not even all that indirectly alluded to here or in other forums.
Red faces: Unconvincing psych-ops
David Brown #16
Congratulations on your oft repeated crocodile farm remark. It has even been translated into German as a commentary alongside the video clip you cite that purports to show the reptiles’ morning treat being loaded into the trucks. Unfortunately that is the only thing that is remarkable about the clip. Compared to the clip of Thaksin’s 500 baht announcement with 645,000 odd views, the crocodile food clip has only drawn 15,000. Surely it would have also gone viral, if people thought it was convincing evidence of red shirts being put to use as raw material for the croc skin handbags to be sported by wealthy khunyings. In the film the military are shown loading 4 or 5 people on stretchers into their pick-up truck ambulances as the commentator comments that these are injured people from both the rioters’ and the military side. As for the monk, his evidence is also unconvincing. Giving him the benefit of the doubt that he exists at all, he said he wasn’t sure whether the people he claimed to have seen being loaded into trucks were alive or dead.
Vichai is right. Given Thaksin’s still massive available wealth and all his connections in the military and police, as well as Chalerm Yoobamrung’s expertise on these matters, it seems unbelievable that he cannot come up with any better evidence of the bodies he mentioned on television than the crocodile clip, the anonymous monk’s statement, the fake shooting of the man being pulled out of a bus who was actually hit on the head by an MP etc. Surely alongside such a large number of deaths as claimed there would have been an even larger number of bullet wound injuries? Where are all of those people? Do you want us to believe they were fed to the crocs while still alive or did they make the shorter journey to Siam Paragon to be put out of their misery by the sharks in the basement?
Antipadsiht #18
I pointed out from the beginning that the military admitted it used practice rounds which are also live rounds and just as lethal as combat ammunition at the relatively short ranges separating the army and the rioters.
The crushing of the Red Shirts
A really (unsurprisingly) BIASED description of events by a guy who spend days with them (of course, with the more-decent red shirts with cooler head, I doubt if he’s ever been hanging out with those red shirts who throw motolovs without any threat from the soldiers).
However, I admire your various attempts to be fair and report the story from the other side of the picture.
As foreigners, You might find a translated-description of this famous video useful.
.
video witness – iReport to CNN on soldiers clash with protester in Din Dang at dawn
.
If you haven’t seen it already, you really really should. It’s a translation from the witness describing the important event captured on camera and photos from an eye-witness.
Read it, see it, and you’ll really be thinking with some aspects from the other side of the picture
“Just leave him alone”
Does “him junior” have anything to do with the political crisis?
“Raid” at the BBC
Susie Wong #3
“Because Jakrapob Penkair has been reading, researching, and giving speech about Thailand political history, the Monarchy feels threatened. Especially because Jakrapob read the Thai history of the critical period of the 1932 coup d’etat revolution that had successfully placed the Thai Monarchy under the constitution.”
It is true that many Thais are not very well versed in the history of their own country but Jakraphob’s reading of the history of the 1932 coup is far from being a unique achievement in Thailand. I and many thousands of others have also read the history of this fascinating period and the basic facts are known to virtually all Thais, including those with no interest in reading history. I think your unqualified personal adoration for Jakraphob has caused you to exaggerate the significance and potential threat to the monarchy of this intellectual featherweight in your own mind.
Jakraphob was spotted by Thaksin when he was a TV commentator covering the APEC conference in 2003. Thaksin, whose own spotty command of English was well illustrated in his recent mendacious stammerings on CNN, the BBC and Al Jazeera, was so impressed by Jakraphob’s unctious commentary on the APEC event in English that he made him government spokesman. Unfortunately Jakraphob’s facile approach of telling unbelievable bare faced lies to the foreign media and going off on tangents soon made him a total laughing stock. Nevertheless, his willingness to lie for the big boss earned him Thaksin’s confidence which is why he is a leader of the red movement to restore Thaksin to power, not because of the love, respect and trust of the Thai people as you suggest.
Red faces: Unconvincing psych-ops
I express my RESPECT to Jim Taylor for daring to express the alternative opinion – alternative to the “official truth”.
BTW, Jim perhaps a bit off-topic (although you did mention that army hass a history of cover up facts) – yesterday there was some discussion on one of Thai Forums about some guys (some people who find things under the sea to resell – like “sea-scavengers” ? ) finding few sunk containers under the sea. these containers were checked and apparently they are sort of missing / dissapeared sinc events of 1992. so far only 1 was opened – and … it was full of sceletons.
naturally it is not reflected in Thai MSM.
now, regading this Jim’s story and additional comments – it is good to see that there are some people as him who are well capable of telling the truth and standing up to all those who would attack him.
I would not start here all over again fighting with Portman and his buddies (like maverick), coz obviously it is useless and pointless. coz even when sufficient evidences are presented (as in another thread – to Portman about LIVE bullets) – they still would neve admit they were wrong, but continue to eel-out from the true facts.
there is a saying about these people : “even if you piss into their eyes – they’ll say it is God’s dew” hahaha
I’ll just wait till May 11 (and may be till PT investigation is done too) – and THEN I’ll challenge all these twitty-twatty chaps to at least COMMENT on that.
lastly, Jim – don’t bother so much about petty attacks on you by these guys: “dogs bark and caravan goes on”. 😉
keep digging up !