recently the man who did not stand by silently but instead tried to bear witness recently passed away to pancreatic cancer. I'm speaking of the man who told the stories of the killing fields (the term he coined) in Cambodia Dith Pran.

What we know of the Khmer Rouge's atrocities is thanks to him. He suffered and fought to survive to tell the story of what was happening to the US, the world, and especially the UN. The UN which Ironically had recognised the Khmer Rouge as the government of cambodia and I remember being young and seeing him on 20/20 or 60 minutes and a show about it and him. Even though I was young I was truly moved by the story of him and his country and wondered why there was no action bye the group I had learned in school was made to help the helpless.. the UN. They did nothing and millions died. In one place they killed so many thousands were killed that only a handful of survivors made it out the last one dying recently.

People like him remind me when Good people do nothing and say nothing and take no action they are just as much a part of the problem as if they were the cause.

May Dith Pran finally have the piece that was stolen from him.

Check out the book The killing fields or the movie of the same name.

'The Killing Fields' was the first VHS movie I ever purchased with my own money, I still remember that as it had such an impact on me.

I did read about Dith Pran's passing, last week I think it was, and was saddened.

However, never forget that he acheived more in his life than a million others would ever do.

R.I.P.

the movie "killing fields" was a good movie, will have to watch it over again to remember the story......don't remember dith pran either, was he the real person in this story, because i think the actor portraying him passed away some years back?

I met Dith Pran, and have several friends who worked with him.

He was, of course, a very courageous and admirable person.

But, he is not the originator of the term Killing Fields (although it was the title of the book and movie), nor is he the only one responsible for what we know about what happened in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge.

There are many many people in Cambodia whose stories and struggles are similar to Dith Pran's.

The difference is that Dith Pran worked for the New York Times and Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist Sydney Schanberg.

You know, Paul, the New York Times, that newspaper you describe as liberal leftist Islamofacist-loving traitorous propaganda.

Richard Nixon described it in much the same way (substitute Communist for Islamofacist) for its reporting on Cambodia and what his administration did there.

Still getting your news from Chuck Norris' blog?

By the way Paul, the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA recognized the Khmer Rouge government and voted for the Khmer Rouge to retain Cambodia's seat at the United Nations after Vietnam kicked out the Khmer Rouge from Cambodia.

Yes, Paul, the prime mover of that vote was THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Furthermore, the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA funded and armed the Cambodian coalition resistance to the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia.

Now, US policy was that its arms should not go to the Khmer Rouge, although they were in that coalition. But the US was also well aware that its arms were going to the Khmer Rouge, courtesy of the Thai military, which handled the transfers of weapons, supplies and funds.

So keep blaming the UN. But the entity responsible for the Khmer Rouge holding Cambodia's seat at the UN was the UNITED STATES.

And, Paul, it is extremely unlikely the Khmer Rouge would ever have come to power if it were not for the actions of the UNITED STATES in illegally and covertly bombing Cambodia, and in supporting a coup d'etat that overthrew King Sihanouk of Cambodia.

You really need to learn a bit more history, Paul.

Agree with Loburt here. You gotta learn bit better what was the power equation between UN and USA in the Cambodia history. All the stuff regarding outsiders part in the events of Cambodia, the biggest blame has been put to USA not UN.

BUT I am not sure, Loburt, I remember reading that to me it seemed that USA's part was not that direct in Khmer Rouge's staying in power. From all the foreign policy meddlings USA has done, to me it's part in the Khmer Rouge was not the one of the most direct ones. But my memory on this is bit touch-and-go. Thailand for example had much more direct influence on it. Well ok, USA supported China and Thailand in their support of Pol Pot. But is that a causal responsibility then? After all, USA could not have supported such a monster as Pol Pot, but Thailand and China could. Officially Washington did not offer support to Red Khmers.

The US did not support Pol Pot when he was in power. In fact, we had an ugly incident with the Khmer Rouge over the Mayaguez, a US Navy ship.

No one had any influence over the Khmer Rouge when they were in power. The only ones with slight influence were the Chinese, but even they did not have that much.

It was when the Vietnamese invaded and kicked the Khmer Rouge out that the US supported the motion that the Khmer Rouge retain the Cambodian seat at the UN, rather than the new Cambodian government installed by Vietnam. By the way, the eventual leader of that VN-installed government was Hun Sen, who is still in power today.

The US funneled arms to the anti-Vietnamese coalition that included the Khmer Rouge. The US was very aware that the Thais were passing the weapons on to the KR. It was all "wink wink" so to speak.

The US support for the Khmer Rouge holding the seat at the UN was utterly shameful. The Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia was justified, as the KR had committed several attacks against villages in Vietnam and ignored warnings from Hanoi to cease. The Vietnamese invasion ended the genocide of Cambodians.

Now, no one wanted VN to turn Cambodia into a colony or client state. But the best way to deal with that would have been to deal with Vietnam diplomatically - something the Chuck Norris types could not accept because of wounded pride and the still unproved reports VN was keeping American prisoners - rather than support a regime that had committed genocide against its own people. It's unlikely VN could have held onto Cambodia permanently considering the deep hatred many Cambodians have for VN.

And all those years when everyone was asking "where is Pol Pot"? He was treated in a hospital on Sathorn Road for various illnesses. The Thai military (and government), which of course facilitated always knew where he was.

first Moses and now Dith Pran...why won't britney die?

"Between them they did more than anyone else in the world to expose the Khmer Rouge's crimes against humanity in Cambodia. "

You are mistaken about that.

While it is probably true that the book and the Hollywood film The Killing Fields made more average people aware of what happened in Cambodia than anything else, the real hard work of exposing the crimes of the Khmer Rouge has been carried out by others, among them Youk Chhang.

http://www.time.com/time/asia/2006/heroes/in_chhang.html

I'd have to say that historians such as David Chandler have also done much more work on documenting the crimes of the Khmer Rouge than Schanberg.

Honorable mentions also should go to Nate Thayer of the Far Eastern Economic Review, who ventured into Khmer Rouge held territory several times, suffering cerebral malaria and nearly losing his life several times, to track down Pol Pot, which he finally did.

And to Nic Dunlop, still based here in Bangkok, who tracked down Duch, the chief torturer at Tuol Sleng S-21, who is now on trial for his crimes.

Schanberg and Pran deserve an enormous amount of respect, of course.

Loburt the us actions against the Vietnamese were as in many cases of US action moves against communist. Cases of the greater evil without the knowledge of what was truly the greater evil. Plus agree that many others have put forth great effort on behave of Cambodia but Pran and his friend Schanberg were the first to draw the world attention to it because of their connections and positions with the NY Times which both had worked with prior to the rise of the Khmer Rouge. As for the bombing of Cambodia during the Vietnam war .... the areas bombed and subseuent special ops missions as well (which sometimes included local camboidans told to me first hand from former operator) against vietkong insurgents using cambodia to move men and materials outside the AO of the regular military troop operations.

As for the UN-US operations. funny how you will blame the US on the UN recognizing the Khmer Rouge but also blame the US for not making the UN remove group from the human rights council who have the worst record of rights violations on their own record, who do follow their own mandates when it comes to suppliers (often involved in kickbacks, bribes, and other crimes in their native countries) and should be removed by UN rules but are still used in direct violation of such, their top officials are indicted and called to be investigated for various crimes and it's suddenly brushed away and there's public outcry as you call for the heads of US and British officials. Just seems pretty uneven of a standard that you hold the group up to and not a higher one that it should be?

What local Cambodians were involved in the carpet bombing of their own country, Paul? We had Cambodians in the US Air Force? Cause they didn't have an AF and certainly weren't carpet bombing their own country.

Any more stories you want to make up?

The NY Times was not the only news organization reporting on Cambodia before and after the rise of the Khmer Rouge. Most major news organizations were there. CBS, which lost reporters and cameramen, certainly made more US citizens more aware of what was going on in Cambodia at the time than the NY Times. The Associated Press's entire Cambodian staff, more than 20 people, were murdered by the KR. They just didn't have a Hollywood movie made about them. Have you ever actually been to Cambodia, Paul? Have you ever worked there? But go ahead, and spout off, Mr. Expert.

Paul wrote:

"As for the UN-US operations. funny how you will blame the US on the UN recognizing the Khmer Rouge but also blame the US for not making the UN remove group from the human rights council who have the worst record of rights violations on their own record, who do follow their own mandates when it comes to suppliers (often involved in kickbacks, bribes, and other crimes in their native countries) and should be removed by UN rules but are still used in direct violation of such, their top officials are indicted and called to be investigated for various crimes and it's suddenly brushed away and there's public outcry as you call for the heads of US and British officials. Just seems pretty uneven of a standard that you hold the group up to and not a higher one that it should be?"

As Alex said, this makes no sense whatsoever. I can't respond to it, because none of us understand what it is you are talking about.

Are you on some medication? Or just retarded?

Whatever it is, it doesn't change the fact that the United States of America supported the Khmer Rouge, a genocidal regime that murdered at least 1.7 million of its own people, as the legitimate representative of Cambodia at the United Nations after they were deposed from power.

Nothing you can write can change that absolutely shameful act by the United States Government.

Nothing.