Thai Anti-Riot Squad Cut Up By Soldiers In Black

[mythBuster]

I assume that the Nation is trying to mix up stories (as they do more often). Their conclusion has nothing to do with the reds or with Chamlong but should be that the army is divided.

[TonyH]

one aside

Hillary Clinton talking about reconilliation in Thailand wearing a red jacket.

http://www.state.gov/video/?videoid=77621375001

I think she is wearing "Orchid Pink"

Edited April 13, 2010 by TonyH

[neverdie]

one aside

Hillary Clinton talking about reconilliation in Thailand wearing a red jacket.

http://www.state.gov/video/?videoid=77621375001

Its pink. Please hand in your drivers licence asap.

[tracymeaw]

its interesting reading over on the other paper we cannot quote on here

headed ''Slain camerman may have caught 'third hand' killers''

google it

the intimation seems to be that the cameraman may have been shot by the men in black

Not to mention that the 1st and repeated reports blamed him

'for insulting a soldier who shot him point blank.'

Snipers told to create deaths to spin on the world stage.

One reporter shot by army is a world wide negative.

Only now do we hear other sides to this.

'Boots on the ground' to give legs to the story one side wants told to the world.

Perception Managment of what we think,

because what we see may back up what we were TOLD.

Regardless of the truth in the matter.

I think we should correct a bit of misinformation here before it is repeated again and starts being quoted as fact ...

It was a French tourist who told a soldier "<removed> y_u" and was shot in the chest (I presume with a rubber bullet or blank or he'd probably be dead) at close range.

The japanese journalist has never been reported by any credible source (except incorrectly on this board) as saying this.

animatic I'm not criticizing you. I know you saw it here on another post and are simply repeating it.

You mean this report? The bullet that killed te Japanese Cameraman struck another person as well. Thats a very close eyewhitness report. http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-431494

[tracymeaw]

From an International news reporting agency a direct quote that their correspondents saw "army soldiers carrying and shooting high velocity rifles".

An M16, standard army issue, is a high velocity rifle at 2800 feet/second so they're correct in that every soldier were carrying high velocity rifles.

And a max range over 3500 meters.. the perfect weapon to fire live rounds over peoples heads in an urban environment.. if you are taking orders from Abhisit that is. I also noticed in the French video that the army was using both M16's and TAR-21's to fire live rounds at the redshirts.

[stroker]

That's a M16A1 used by the first guy. Its not a carbine M4 variant. A carbine has a shorter barrel made for CQB.

The M16A1 used is equipped with a standard issued muzzle/ flash suppressor. Not a blank attachment. True about blank attachment being painted bright yellow; but nothings stopping ppl from removing the paint having said that. Blank attachment with live ammo means chamber explosion.

The 400m range as mentioned is not very possible for an M16A1. The US M16A2 yes. The A1 at best 300+m. I wouldn't classify the M16 as a sniper rifle. No way near it. Although great accuracies can be had with a proficent user. Taking down a figure 11 (standing adult) at 300m is easy.

The dude with the head blown off does look like its the work of a lapua round or some other equivelent ammo. The 5.56 round fired by an M16 usually has a small entry and a big mess at the back caused by the rifling in the bore.

[stroker]

And a max range over 3500 meters.. the perfect weapon to fire live rounds over peoples heads in an urban environment.. if you are taking orders from Abhisit that is. I also noticed in the French video that the army was using both M16's and TAR-21's to fire live rounds at the redshirts.

A range of 3500m (3.5km) from an M16A1?? NO WAY! As mentioned in my post above, an M16A1 has an effective range of 300+m. An A2 can go further with 400m.

Anyways, the way the soldiers are shooting seemed more like fire suppression than taking out individual targets. At least I wont shoot like this when I'm taking out targets individually.

[OzMick]

From an International news reporting agency a direct quote that their correspondents saw "army soldiers carrying and shooting high velocity rifles".

An M16, standard army issue, is a high velocity rifle at 2800 feet/second so they're correct in that every soldier were carrying high velocity rifles.

Not true. The statement says "soldiers", you have added "every". I will assume a logic error rather than a lie.

[zaphodbeeblebrox]

Looks like a private security force, most likely paid by elements tied to the UDD, probably did not follow the orders given by their employer. It reminds me of Altamont. A hired security force, paid with beer and drugs, who already have a propensity for violence, can be expected under stressful conditions, to act out on their own. So, the real task is identifying who hired the black shirt security force, because it appears that several of the deaths and serious injuries can be attributed to their use of weapons, which the UDD had tried to prevent their security forces from using.

[OzMick]

Looks like a private security force, most likely paid by elements tied to the UDD, probably did not follow the orders given by their employer. It reminds me of Altamont. A hired security force, paid with beer and drugs, who already have a propensity for violence, can be expected under stressful conditions, to act out on their own. So, the real task is identifying who hired the black shirt security force, because it appears that several of the deaths and serious injuries can be attributed to their use of weapons, which the UDD had tried to prevent their security forces from using.

What leads you to believe that they didn't do exactly what they were paid to do?

[humfurry]

Looks like a private security force, most likely paid by elements tied to the UDD, probably did not follow the orders given by their employer. It reminds me of Altamont. A hired security force, paid with beer and drugs, who already have a propensity for violence, can be expected under stressful conditions, to act out on their own. So, the real task is identifying who hired the black shirt security force, because it appears that several of the deaths and serious injuries can be attributed to their use of weapons, which the UDD had tried to prevent their security forces from using.

I just got a Twit pic of a fellow that looks a lot like the long nosed blackshirt.... it's a left profile and the pic of him with the rifle is a right profile.

Tricky.

Edited April 13, 2010 by humfurry

[rabo]

From an International news reporting agency a direct quote that their correspondents saw "army soldiers carrying and shooting high velocity rifles".

An M16, standard army issue, is a high velocity rifle at 2800 feet/second so they're correct in that every soldier were carrying high velocity rifles.

And a max range over 3500 meters.. the perfect weapon to fire live rounds over peoples heads in an urban environment.. if you are taking orders from Abhisit that is. I also noticed in the French video that the army was using both M16's and TAR-21's to fire live rounds at the redshirts.

What evidence do you have from the video that the soldiers were firing "live rounds"?

On the otherhand, rubber bullets must be fired at the protesters to have an effect,

so I assume they were rubber bullets (but I have no evidence)

[Fatdog]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7oKenp6ZLw

This video shows black clad gunmen firing at army lines.

Thanks for posting this. This was the video I referenced earlier in the thread. At least one of the people with shields protecting the gunmen is wearing red. I can't find the webpage, but there was a site with several still shots from the video, and seemed to be in a higher resolution than the Youtube version.

For those that can't watch the video, I've attached a quick screen cap of the "man in black" firing towards the army.

As to the second video, you'll notice the green lasers being used used to mark the possible sniper in the building, similar to what the army says was used to target the army leaders. So it looks like you have people with laser pointers trying to locate targets for those with the guns.

Just watched this clip, and something struck me as funny, if the army were firing live rounds back then why did the 3 guys clustered around the shooter have riot shields? I don't think a riot shield would stop a live round.

FD

[Longtooth]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7oKenp6ZLw

This video shows black clad gunmen firing at army lines.

Thanks for posting this. This was the video I referenced earlier in the thread. At least one of the people with shields protecting the gunmen is wearing red. I can't find the webpage, but there was a site with several still shots from the video, and seemed to be in a higher resolution than the Youtube version.

For those that can't watch the video, I've attached a quick screen cap of the "man in black" firing towards the army.

As to the second video, you'll notice the green lasers being used used to mark the possible sniper in the building, similar to what the army says was used to target the army leaders. So it looks like you have people with laser pointers trying to locate targets for those with the guns.

I'm no ballistic expert but this is what UDD Thailand had to say about the video

"Muzzle flash is way too big, it is clearly an automatic weapon and yet only one shot is fired- rubber bullet attachment on the end of the barrel? "

Sounds a pretty shaky defence even to me who has no knowledge of ballistics.

You know, I did think the muzzle flash was EXTREMELY big. You can see all the partially burned grains of propellant still burning WELL past the muzzle.

Could this imply there was inadequate back pressure and time for a complete burn? In other words, no lead bullet, only a rubber projectile launched from it's

mounting at the tip of the barrel? I think a definite MAYBE!

[Tod Daniels]

Seh Daeng merely commented that there might have been some but he does not know who they are.

So please, do not lie. He is also not a core "red leader".

For someone with a posting name like you have, I must say you post some of the wackiest takes on all things thai I've ever read. Were the situation NOT so serious I'd almost laugh.

While this is somewhat long-ish it certainly gives insight into what kind of person it would take to be the “third hand” or find ‘ronin warriors’.

My vote’s that it’s none other than Army Senior Advisor Maj.Gen.Khattiya Sawasdipol; ( A person who BTW is a definitely a "legend in his own mind", as well as a frickin’ loose cannon.)

Khattiya Sawasdipol alias Seh Daeng, is a major general in the Royal Thai Army, assigned to the Internal Security Operations Command. He came into conflict with the Thai police commander, General Seri Temiyavet, during the investigation of a large gambling den in 2006. General Seri filed a libel suit against Khattiya, who was arrested and sentenced to prison for four months. Khattiya has since brought a 600 million Baht libel suit against Seri for defamation. (Kinda reminiscent of Thaksin when the press critiqued anything he didn't like; "litigate them into silence.)

Khattiya made news on October 18, 2008, by announcing "he would mobilize government supporters against any military attempt to seize political power." Khattiya said members of the pro-government Democratic Alliance against Dictatorship (DAAD) would use petrol bombs against tanks and military vehicles taking part in a coup attempt. (Although NO coup attempt was made..)

Khattiya was reassigned as an aerobics teacher by Gen. Anupong Paochinda, Thai Army commander. Khattiya responded by saying, "The army chief wants me to be a presenter leading aerobics dancers. I have prepared one dance. It's called the ‘throwing-a-hand-grenade' dance." (Guess he didn't like the leotards and spandex outfit. .. )

On 14 January 2010, Army Commander Anupong Poachinda ordered a suspension of Khattiya Sawasdipol after an inquiry committee found that Khattiya has expressly paid loyalty to the National United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship, a political pressure group supporting Thaksin Shinawatra, breaching official disciplines. The following day, Anupong's office in the Royal Thai Army Headquarters was bombed by rockets launched by M79, left the office demolished but no person injured. Seh Daeng has also denied any link to war weapons seized in raids on his home and the living quarters of his aide on Thursday. He also denied any involvement in the Jan 15 M79 grenade attack on the office of the army chief. (WOW, that's a lot of denials.)

Another great quote by the infamous Seh Daeng: "In the past, what have the three leader of the Red Shirts achieved? They have led the Red Army and lost twice. On the contrary, I – the soldier – have always won and was always loyal to the Red Shirts. Thus the UDD leaders should step aside with the exception of Natthawut Saigua and make space for Arisaman Pongruengrong, Suporn Atthawong and Kwanchai Praiphana to be the new leaders.“

And yet another news blurb of note; UDD leaders distanced themselves from Khattiya and another hawkish veteran general, Pallop Pinmanee, after they claimed, following a visit with Thaksin, that they had started a 'people's army'. (Sure seems like if you're distancing yourself from someone already in your camp that he held quite a sway with which way things swung.) Also doesn't the term people's army sound really close to an 'unknown force' or 'ronin warriors'?

And the last one from "he who likes to hear himself talk"; "Maj-Gen Khattiya Sawasdipol said Sunday that the so-called 'Ronin' warriors or underground warriors helped red-shirt protesters battle troops on Saturday. He admitted that the "unknown force" or "Ronin warriors" fired M79 grenades at troops and one M79 grenade landed at the tent of the commander of the operation. "This caused the troops to have no commander and caused them to lose the battle," Khattiya said. "The Army commander thought the red shirts were easy to be crushed but there are not," Khattiya said." (For a man out of the loop, he seems awfully in-the-know about the ronin warriors" doncha think?) Guess he was consulting his "crystal balls" again. Here let me check mine.

Google “UDD leaders using Arisaman, Jatuporn and Khattiya’s names” it certainly gives enough hits and pix

Anyway you spin the P/R on this guy; he is a frickin' loose cannon and certainly advocates a level of violence that even Jatuporn and/or Arisaman with their fire-brand rhetoric don't come close to.

Khattiya is NOT someone the reds need in their corner; EVER!!

Oh and in answer to him NOT being a 'hard core' red leader, here's a pic for you. ..

The people are; Seh Daeng, Arisman, Suporn and Panlop with Thaksin. Look at the date stamp on the pic 3/2/2010.

Nope he certainly could NOT be a red leader. ...

Edited April 13, 2010 by tod-daniels

[tracymeaw]

And a max range over 3500 meters.. the perfect weapon to fire live rounds over peoples heads in an urban environment.. if you are taking orders from Abhisit that is. I also noticed in the French video that the army was using both M16's and TAR-21's to fire live rounds at the redshirts.

A range of 3500m (3.5km) from an M16A1?? NO WAY! As mentioned in my post above, an M16A1 has an effective range of 300+m. An A2 can go further with 400m.

Anyways, the way the soldiers are shooting seemed more like fire suppression than taking out individual targets. At least I wont shoot like this when I'm taking out targets individually.

I was thinking M16A2 and I said max range not effective.. which would be 500 for individual point targets and 800 for area targets. Page 4, TM9-1005-319-10... which I'm holding in my hand.

[noel2499rk]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7oKenp6ZLw

This video shows black clad gunmen firing at army lines.

Thanks for posting this. This was the video I referenced earlier in the thread. At least one of the people with shields protecting the gunmen is wearing red. I can't find the webpage, but there was a site with several still shots from the video, and seemed to be in a higher resolution than the Youtube version.

For those that can't watch the video, I've attached a quick screen cap of the "man in black" firing towards the army.

As to the second video, you'll notice the green lasers being used used to mark the possible sniper in the building, similar to what the army says was used to target the army leaders. So it looks like you have people with laser pointers trying to locate targets for those with the guns.

Just watched this clip, and something struck me as funny, if the army were firing live rounds back then why did the 3 guys clustered around the shooter have riot shields? I don't think a riot shield would stop a live round.

FD

I don't think the soldiers on the ground were firing live rounds somebody was firing live rounds from the buildings ( I think army) if you watch this video then you will agree this guy wasn't hit by rubber bullet.

Neither were the other protesters killed who were shot.

I really find it hard to believe that so many people believe the UDD would pay people to murder their own supporters just to get some international sympathy. Because as a tactic it does not further their cause inside. Thailand

[basjke]

its interesting reading over on the other paper we cannot quote on here

headed ''Slain camerman may have caught 'third hand' killers''

google it

the intimation seems to be that the cameraman may have been shot by the men in black

Though it's *all* speculation, I assumed the Japanese cameraman must have been targeted.

More speculation (admittedly far out). I have been wondering who would have taken the picture published at the top of the page? If you look at the shadow of the gun barrel on the other guy's red shirt, it is well below the gun barrel, meaning the picture was taken at very close range, probably by an expensive camera with a separate flash attachment.

How is the guy who took the picture still alive, if the picture is what it is insinuated to be?

Where is the Japanese cameraman's camera?

Questions or trying to connect the dots, nothing more.

The first dot you can connect is that there is no shadow at all on the red shirt.It is a vow of the shirt or maybe something hidden under the shirt.

Have a closer look.

My eyes are maybe not so good anymore but I see what seems that the white flowers on his shirt fold under the supposed shadow line.In my opinion he has a long object under his shirt.

[ozzieman05]

Grisly, but plausible: Red 'ronin' targeting some of their own in order to generate sympathy from the public, and to tar the military.

You dont honestly believe that do you ? Since there is zero proof, I would have to say thats the biggest cheap-shot accusation I have heard in a long time. Lift up your game.

Yes

seem there is no proof that they did

But

there is no proof they did not

sometime things make good sense though

[lannarebirth]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7oKenp6ZLw

This video shows black clad gunmen firing at army lines.

Thanks for posting this. This was the video I referenced earlier in the thread. At least one of the people with shields protecting the gunmen is wearing red. I can't find the webpage, but there was a site with several still shots from the video, and seemed to be in a higher resolution than the Youtube version.

For those that can't watch the video, I've attached a quick screen cap of the "man in black" firing towards the army.

As to the second video, you'll notice the green lasers being used used to mark the possible sniper in the building, similar to what the army says was used to target the army leaders. So it looks like you have people with laser pointers trying to locate targets for those with the guns.

Just watched this clip, and something struck me as funny, if the army were firing live rounds back then why did the 3 guys clustered around the shooter have riot shields? I don't think a riot shield would stop a live round.

FD

I don't think the soldiers on the ground were firing live rounds somebody was firing live rounds from the buildings ( I think army) if you watch this video then you will agree this guy wasn't hit by rubber bullet.

Neither were the other protesters killed who were shot.

I really find it hard to believe that so many people believe the UDD would pay people to murder their own supporters just to get some international sympathy. Because as a tactic it does not further their cause inside. Thailand

Sure it does. Especially if you get the word out that it was the Army who did it. Then you get enough noise coming from all directions whereby nothing is true or false anymore. Lines get drawn and the next battle begins with everyone firmly secure in their own propaganda. Welcome to the postmodernist world.

[kraxlhuber]

its interesting reading over on the other paper we cannot quote on here

headed ''Slain camerman may have caught 'third hand' killers''

google it

the intimation seems to be that the cameraman may have been shot by the men in black

Though it's *all* speculation, I assumed the Japanese cameraman must have been targeted.

More speculation (admittedly far out). I have been wondering who would have taken the picture published at the top of the page? If you look at the shadow of the gun barrel on the other guy's red shirt, it is well below the gun barrel, meaning the picture was taken at very close range, probably by an expensive camera with a separate flash attachment.

How is the guy who took the picture still alive, if the picture is what it is insinuated to be?

Where is the Japanese cameraman's camera?

Questions or trying to connect the dots, nothing more.

assuming ,the Japanese cameraman had a video camera and transmitting live to where.

The japs are such cowards,they sell their grandmother and grandfather,just not to rock the boat,and loose profitable contracts and help that Thailand is sucked of every yen they can lay a hand on.

Maybe the gunman was a jakucha,face certainly is not Thai.

[noel2499rk]

"Sure it does. Especially if you get the word out that it was the Army who did it. Then you get enough noise coming from all directions whereby nothing is true or false anymore. Lines get drawn and the next battle begins with everyone firmly secure in their own propaganda. Welcome to the postmodernist world.

But the Thai media would never report that the Royal Thai army shot its own citizens and no investigation would ever come to that conclusion.

[fullcave]

OK whatever you say..

[lannarebirth]

But the Thai media would never report that the Royal Thai army shot its own citizens and no investigation would ever come to that conclusion.

Maybe it's coming late to Thailand, I don't know. People who want to believe something will either find or create the media source that supports their view. It doesn't have to be "Thai media". The foreign press who gets a lot wrong about Thailand is often cited when it suits a given agenda. If no existing media supports your preheld view, then you create it. UDD live streaming "TV" and whatever the PAD station is called, ring a bell?

Edited April 13, 2010 by lannarebirth

[stroker]

And a max range over 3500 meters.. the perfect weapon to fire live rounds over peoples heads in an urban environment.. if you are taking orders from Abhisit that is. I also noticed in the French video that the army was using both M16's and TAR-21's to fire live rounds at the redshirts.

A range of 3500m (3.5km) from an M16A1?? NO WAY! As mentioned in my post above, an M16A1 has an effective range of 300+m. An A2 can go further with 400m.

Anyways, the way the soldiers are shooting seemed more like fire suppression than taking out individual targets. At least I wont shoot like this when I'm taking out targets individually.

I was thinking M16A2 and I said max range not effective.. which would be 500 for individual point targets and 800 for area targets. Page 4, TM9-1005-319-10... which I'm holding in my hand.

Nice text book specs. Try taking down an individual human target at 500m with iron sights at a skirmish enviroment with an A2. Whoever can do that gets my respect. What I mentioned was off-my-head specs, which is what the soldiers are drilled with. Effective range is all that matters; range whereby you can use yr rifle, not hoping for stray rounds to reach someone somewhere somehow.

Chill and cheers!

[TheOldWolf]

"The "terrorists" the prime minister said instigated the bloodshed on Saturday night are malcontent soldiers intent on bringing down the government, UDD leader Natthawut Saikua said on Tuesday.

He said the government should find and arrest them.

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said on Monday the government had evidence that "armed terrorists" aiming to bring down his government were among the red-shirt protesters on Saturday.

He said they instigated the bloodshed that resulted in 21 deaths and more than 800 people injured.

Deputy Prime MInister Suthep Thaugsuban also accused unidentified armed men of causing the chaos.

"The terrorists the government claimed [were there] are soldiers who do not accept the current administration, causing conflict within the army," Mr Natthawut said.

"They used the opportunity on Saturday to create unrest."

He did not identify them, or offer to help with their arrest."

This is from another English newspaper in BKK

You think Al Quida call themselves terrorists? I think they call them selves freedom fighters!

[truthfulfox]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7oKenp6ZLw

This video shows black clad gunmen firing at army lines.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jY7OafG9Src

This shows someone among the reds firing at a third floor window, why would he be doing that, I suspect he was returning fire.

Which leads me to believe that the army had snipers positioned in buildings around the area, something which I think this video supports.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xcwxd7_redbkk_news

Maybe Satuday was the first skirmish in a civil war

Yes. I noticed that. An alternate interpretation is that they sniper in the building were the Ronin completing their necessary job of creating martyrs on the redshirt side and taking out military personnel.

Of course your guess is also possible.

However, I can see no benefit to either the government or military in taking out redshirts and other civilians. Whereas there are huge benefits to the redshirts, which we are now witnessing.

notice how almost everyone here thinks its all over for the Dems now the EC commision has ruled?

notice that they are all out celebrating and the immediate political pressure has been released?

this is a clever strategy that will buy some Abhisit some time to gather evidence

in that time, Abhisist will prove who the real protaganists were on Saturday

he will prove it was the red militia operating a false flag operation

think about this simple fact; if it was Government that employed army snipers, why did they not take out the red leaders?

they were there to be shot at and targetted by the snipers just as easily, after all you might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb.

it did not happen, that was not the intention, it was intended that only randomly selected, innocent reds would die

they make for better international media condemnation than if any of the already loathed red leaders were to be killed

the overall plan was to sacrifice a few of their own ordinary joe public reds to create an international uproar and get the publics sympathy on the red side

kill a few soldiers too but certainly not as many, and absolutely not with the same snipers bullets

this was neccesary to create an inbalance in the death toll to try to show that the Army were the protaganists

when it all unravels, which it will, (this is Thailand, where no one can keep a secret) and Abhisit has the time to prove it and he has that time now, the nation will be shocked by what actually happened and will be grateful to Abhisit for exposing it

the reds will be a spent force, even their most ardent supporters will have no stomach for their leaders killing their own supporters to make a political point

Sa Deng will be killed evading capture, as will his mercenaries

the government will present evidence that can't be disputed by the dead men and the operation will get tied to the red leadership and to Thaksin.

You maybe right no one hear does know the whole truth and I hope we do get to find out the truth as you say.

But unfortunately history teaches us that if the army were responsible as they were for 77 dead on 14/10/1973, 44 dead 06/10/1976 and 52 dead 1992 black may.

Then they will not be held responsible.

I agree that if it was all a fiendish plot by the reds to create an international outcry then the truth will come out.

All side knew that it was the last round so they played all for all , it's pretty hard to guess who was hunting who!!!

[way2muchcoffee]

I really find it hard to believe that so many people believe the UDD would pay people to murder their own supporters just to get some international sympathy. Because as a tactic it does not further their cause inside. Thailand

Actually the only group that stands to benefit from killed or injured protesters is the UDD.

[truthfulfox]

one aside

Hillary Clinton talking about reconilliation in Thailand wearing a red jacket.

http://www.state.gov/video/?videoid=77621375001

[noel2499rk]

I really find it hard to believe that so many people believe the UDD would pay people to murder their own supporters just to get some international sympathy. Because as a tactic it does not further their cause inside. Thailand

Actually the only group that stands to benefit from killed or injured protesters is the UDD.

Then why is it that every time there is a protest movement in Bangkok which is opposed to army involvement in politics they are murdered by the Thai army.

As in 1973, 1976, 1992 and now 2010.

So if the army have nothing to gain from it why do they keep doing it?

Edited April 13, 2010 by noel2499rk