Thursday, August 13, 2009

More on Thailand's Secret Prison

A Window Into C.I.A.’s Embrace of Secret Jails

New York Times


Early in the fight against Al Qaeda, agency officials relied heavily on American allies to help detain people suspected of terrorism in makeshift facilities in countries like Thailand. But by the time two C.I.A. officials met with Mr. Foggo in 2003, that arrangement was under threat, according to people briefed on the situation. In Thailand, for example, local officials were said to be growing uneasy about a black site outside Bangkok code-named Cat’s Eye. (The agency would eventually change the code name for the Thai prison, fearing it would appear racially insensitive.) The C.I.A. wanted its own, more permanent detention centers.

Another story the Thai government and media can cover up. This story only proves the extent to which the Thai media takes orders from the generals and covers up for them.

I just want to remind that readers once again that Kavi over at The Nation was reporting directly on the interrogations when Hambali was captured and tortured in Thailand.

So basically all the editors over there were aware of the torture and secret prison and have been playing dumb recently in supplication to the government.

Here is a story and another story in The Nation about the reward for the capture and how Thai security personal were all going to divvy the loot. Oh, by the way, Thai government officials were present when Hambali was interrogated. General Chavalit even admitted to knowing the 10 officers who received the reward.

Did the Thai media ever get around to asking General Surayud or General Chavalit about the secret prison? Nope. Never bothered.

Did General Anupong resign for basically lying to the media? Nope.

Amazing what the generals get away with.

By the way, it seems General Anupong got away with another lie regarding his denial that nobody from the state was responsible for the recent Mosque massacre in the South.

Buddha forbid that The Nation holds the military to the standards they have for Thaksin. But we all know that hell will freeze over before that ever happens. After all, Yoon doesn't want to lose his shows on military TV and his brother, Thepchai, owes his career to the military giving him Thai PBS.


Unknown said...

One of the things that has always troubled me about Thais is their dishonesty, in small things and in large things, often when dishonesty, lyong and dissembling is not even necessary.

These days it is just astonishing to consider the almost complete lack of honesty in Thai officlaldom and, by implication, society. I believe this comes partly from a conviction among Thai pooyays that everybody else (including all foreigners) are stupid, or at leasts that Thai pooyays are smarter than everyone else; and partly from the abhorrent level of unaccountability in Thailand, where literally, nobody with money or influence is ever held accountable to anyone unless the people in the big house decide that they need to be made an example of (which was Thaksins unhappy lot).

There was an Irish joke a while back which went like this:
Q: Why did the South Africans get all the diamonds and the Irish got all the potatoes?
A: because the Irish got first choice.

In a way, I can see this applying also to Thailand having first choice between progressive society in which honesty, integrity and truth have an actual value, and the society they have actually got.

People sometimes ask me why Thailand never seemed to make it out of the 'developing nation' mould, whereas Korea, Japan and lots of others managed it pretty well over the last 60-odd years. And latterly, China of course.

It is a stupid question really since the answer is perfectly obvious to anyone who understands Thailand and Thais.


Unknown said...

I find this totally amusing. If Anupong has to resign for lying about existence of a torture cell that Americans built, what does that make the builders and what should they do? You have never had a word on that. Attacking Yoon and Thepchai over this is also ridiculous to say the least. The evil came from America and you want to pillorie journalists who don't even know where the thing is. Should Hillary Clinton resign too because she refused to confirm the prison's existence when asked by Yoon? Should the entire Obama Cabinet resign because none of its members has admitted publicly that the US have been torturing people overseas? In one post you even almost praised Hillary. Why? Because she was a better liar than Anupong?

If Your hatred didn't blind you so much you would have easily known who to focus your criticism on in this case. Too bad your prejudice means you don't bother to take the big fish to task but are enjoying crushing smaller ones. What a shame.

I dare you to publish this if you love democracy as much as you claim. If you don't, then at least I for one know you are a fake.

Fonzi said...


1. This is a blog about Thailand, not the United States. There are literally thousands of blogs that discuss US politics and foreign policy--from every side of the political spectrum. This is not one of them. BTW, you don't know if I haven't condemned this type of US behavior in a relevant blog on a relevant topic on this matter.

2. I don't subscribe to your fallacious reasoning and argumentation that I am obligated to discuss the evils of every other person or entity on every topic I blog about. In this particular case, I am talking about a Thai media cover up and the lies of the generals, which doesn't oblige me to talk about US foreign policy. They are not related topics. For example, let us imagine for a moment that I let this blog descend into a attack against US foreign policy, then that means under your logic and reasoning that I am obligated to talk about Australian foreign policy, because Australia was part and parcel of every US foreign policy and military adventure since World War 2.

3. This is my blog and I can talk about topic that I wish and under no obligation to discuss US foreign policy. You have your own blog. If you want to spend 24/7 attacking the US, go right ahead, that is your prerogative. I might even join in the discussion.

4. You have your own blog and how would you feel when you discussed a music video for example that I called you a hypocrite for not playing other music videos and clutter up your blog with a lot of nonsense that has no bearing on the topic at hand? How would you like it if when you were talking about Krishnamurti or whatever guru you follow that I came along and called you a hypocrite just because you chose not to discuss Bagwhan Shri Rashneesh or the Maharishi also. Doesn't make too much sense, does it?

5. I am a fake, I am intellectually inconsistent and I am a hypocrite sometimes. I am human. On the other hand, I don't control massive media empires and have the power to influence millions of people with cover ups and lies like Yoon and Thepchai. I don't command armies and torture 3rd party nationals and lie about it.

6. By the way, name every blog that you condemn because it dare not subscribe to your fallacious reasoning that when discussing a topic at hand it is under a Hobby obligation to cover every side that you think is relevant. Under your own logic, if you attack me, you are obligated to go and attack everybody who follows the same policy just to be fair. I will be waiting with baited breath for that to happen.