Who Shot the Dissident Thai General?

<a href="http://www.defenseimagery.mil/imagery.html#guid=8b0d041b8bef9e33f65037ed3d9bd463d17c46a4">US Army</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


I’m hardly an unconditional supporter of the Thai government, but I admit I’ve been harboring some respect for the restraint its army has shown during the massive protests that have crippled Bangkok since March. After two dozen people were killed in clashes with troops that were trying to disperse the protesters, the army backed off, even though gunfire was coming from both sides. The protesters, members of the United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship known as Red Shirts, have largely had the run of the town since, and say they aren’t going anywhere until Thailand’s prime minister dismantles parliament and calls new elections. I mean, would the US Army let thousands of protesters who were demanding the dissolution of Congress and sometimes shooting at soldiers shut down a square mile of Washington, DC, barricading themselves behind buses and flaming tires for two months?

But yesterday, Khattiya Sawatdiphol, a Thai general who had joined the protesters, was shot in the head by a sniper while talking to reporters. No one knows who did it. Thai newspapers are reporting the Red Shirts’ assertion that the government is responsible. They’re biased, obviously, but Thai authorities are indeed acting awfully suspicious. A government spokesman told the Bangkok Post that the government didn’t plan to kill Gen. Khattiya, but would have trouble determining who did. (Whoever it was will probably be successful: Khattiya is currently in critical condition; doctors say he’s unlikely to survive.) “It will be hard to arrest the ‘invisible hand,'” the spokesman said, “but authorities will try their best to find the shooter.” When does a government ever not say, “We’ve got all our resources behind solving this case and won’t rest until we have some answers” or whatever? When does an assassination attempt of a high-level figure, a military figure no less, happen in public, in the capital, on videotape, and the government response is, “Jeez, we’ll look into what happened, but that’s gonna be really hard”?

When asked directly by the AP if troops were involved in the shooting, another government spokesman gave this alarmingly shady answer: “The operation by authorities was according to international standards and law. So far, we have not found any actions by the authorities that went beyond that.” If the Thai government did not in fact try to kill this dissident, why wouldn’t its spokesman just answer that question by saying, “No”?

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate