Red-Shirts Leader Seh Daeng Shot In The Head - Fighting For His Life In ICU - Video

[SomTumTiger]

What dumbfounds me is how most of the Red TV expats seem to be from Chiang Mai. Been drinking a little to much of the Shiniwatra Kool-Aid I think.

[whybother]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/...;-30129281.html

from Seh Daengs own mouth before he was shot, it makes interesting reading

Q : What is your view on infighting among the red-shirt leadership?

A : The "dove" leaders took money from the government and the "hawk" leaders want to expose them, but they don't dare to. But the "hawk" leaders have me, so I expose the "dove leaders".

Q : Who are the dove leaders?

K : Nattawut Saikua, Jatuporn Promphan, Dr weng Tojirakarn, and Wisa Khanthap.

Q : The infighting will weaken the protest?

K : No. The doves are bad leaders. The red shirts have come to fight and die. How can they make a deal [with the government] for themselves? The PM's road map, the surrender of Suthep Thaugsuban at the DSI, and at the CSD. I exposed them all. The red shirts have come here for House dissolution, not for the road map.

this might be an indicator of who was out to get him besides the army and millions of other disgruntled Bangkokians

There are certainly many people that could have wanted him dead, both within the army and within the reds. He was a road block to a peaceful resolution. Many of the red leaders have been accepting of Abhisit's road map, but the main stumbling block has been Sae Daeng.

[timekeeper]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/...;-30129281.html

from Seh Daengs own mouth before he was shot, it makes interesting reading

Q : What is your view on infighting among the red-shirt leadership?

A : The "dove" leaders took money from the government and the "hawk" leaders want to expose them, but they don't dare to. But the "hawk" leaders have me, so I expose the "dove leaders".

Q : Who are the dove leaders?

K : Nattawut Saikua, Jatuporn Promphan, Dr weng Tojirakarn, and Wisa Khanthap.

Q : The infighting will weaken the protest?

K : No. The doves are bad leaders. The red shirts have come to fight and die. How can they make a deal [with the government] for themselves? The PM's road map, the surrender of Suthep Thaugsuban at the DSI, and at the CSD. I exposed them all. The red shirts have come here for House dissolution, not for the road map.

this might be an indicator of who was out to get him besides the army and millions of other disgruntled Bangkokians

and theres more disagreements in the ranks

A skirmish broke out between red-shirt leaders and security officers at around 11 P.M. last night when protesters walked from their rally site around Lumpinee Park to a checkpoint on Rama IV Road close to Sathorn Road. Gunshots rang out. When things quiet down, a 25-year-old male protester was found lying on the ground dead. At least four other people were injured.

Reports have surfaced that several key leaders of the red-shirt movement have resigned after Major General Katthiya Sawasdiphol was shot. They include Weera Musikapong, Wisa Kanthap, Adisorn Piangket, and Paijit Aksornnarong.

Meanwhile, several key members, such as Weng Tojirakarn, Jaran Dittapichai, and Korkaew Pikulthong are considering leaving the movement.

TAN NETWORK

-- Tan Network 2010-05-14

[canuckamuck]

I think we should open up a thread with all of the comments from the ballistics experts here and put it in the jokes section.

Some pretty amazing conclusions here based on nearly no evidence.

[rabo]

Thaksin always gets what he wants.

Sae Deng knew too much and Thaksin wanted him out.

Let's see what Thaksin wants next.

so this is your verdict? Thaksin killed him? I've heard it all now...

No one knows, of course, but in this case there are several logical scenarios.

1. Government/police enforcing the law, stopping an obvious and self proclaimed threat.

2. Military, Anupong, remember SD is suspected in the M79 attack on Anupong's office and assassination of the commanding officers on the night of April 10th.

3. Moderate reds who are shaking in their boots and want to prevent the militarization of the movement as threated by SD>

4. Thaksin cleaning up a mess that failed to produce the desired results, removing obvious witness.

I don't buy any of these without some evidence. As for number 4, it would not be Thaksin's first assassination attempt, remember Sondhi was shot in the head.

Edited May 14, 2010 by rabo

[chadintheusa]

Governments, even when confronted by demonstrations - even violents ones - MUST always uphold the law - its the sign of a mature society - shooting people in the head by sniper fire - a serving General - is outrageous - and even yellows should be condemning it outright.

Point of fact: No longer serving at the time, he had been suspended from dance instruction and aerobics for being a loose cannon.

..And you keep repeating the allegation that the government was responsible, TIT, the army is separate from government, though it is possible of course that a fake government carried out the shooting to discredit the real one.

So true, the government must end the demonstration and uphold the law and prosecute each person at Rajprasong for their crimes. People die when the law is enforced sometimes, a risk criminals take.

[AleG]

It is easy to say Seh Daeng deserved this and that as so many people have done on this forum. He was obviously a bit of a loud mouth which is always a loose cannon in this society. But as my mother would say " its the quiet ones you have to watch".

Don't make the mistake of believing those who can control their speech and actions more so than he could, are somehow more pure and honest than him, as that's probably not the case.

The fact that this has progressed so far is an indication that there are probably many people who have not even shown their colours as yet. Only time will tell at the moment.

Now, I don't condone the killing but let's be honest here, he wasn't just a loud mouth; he was almost certainly implicated in terrorist attack across the country. From firing a grenade in to the army chief office to the "Ronin Warriors".

[Motoon]

Again so many theories...fact remains that there will be a lot of relieved people. You might just want to think that the incident is the logical consequence of previous actions. I rather tend to look at the different military factions to whom Seh Daeng has become an unacceptable problem...

[OzMick]

I have consistently posted against all violence by any side - but what has it come to when a guy gives a TV interview and is shot in the head on TV? and we watch on CNN? this is a demonstration of a 'clean' government? a sign of 'law'? yellows on here carp on about 'rule of law' - where is it NOW? it's a disgrace and anyone with a nounce of intelligence and compassion should condemn it outright.

I believe that it was a NEWSPAPER interview, but what does it matter. A target is a target, and best taken out when stationary. Talking to a reporter, taking a leak or picking his nose.....................all good opportunities.

You connect intelligence with compassion. Why? Have you considered that some intelligent people may have discarded the Judeo-Christian BS you were brainwashed with as a child. Most of the people on this planet DO NOT believe that all human life is sacred; there are a lot of complete @r$eholes out there, and the world is a better place when they are removed from the gene pool. And all your sanctimonious preaching about compassion won't change that one bit.

Given the chance to kill Stalin or Hitler in 1935, would it have been morally wrong to take them out?

[ChiangMaiFun]

Thaksin always gets what he wants.

Sae Deng knew too much and Thaksin wanted him out.

Let's see what Thaksin wants next.

so this is your verdict? Thaksin killed him? I've heard it all now...

No one knows, of course, but in this case there are several logical scenarios.

1. Government/police enforcing the law, stopping an obvious and self proclaimed threat.

2. Military, Anupong, remember SD is suspected in the M79 attack on Anupong's office and assassination of the commanding officers on the night of April 10th.

3. Moderate reds who are shaking in their boots and want to prevent the militarization of the movement as threated by SD>

4. Thaksin cleaning up a mess that failed to produce the desired results, removing obvious witness.

I don't buy any of these without some evidence. As for number 4, it would not be Thaksin's first assassination attempt, remember Sondhi was shot in the head.

'logical scenario'? 'enforcing the law'?

assasinating someone is 'enforcing the law'? Jeezeeee even in kindergarden law books it doesn't say shooting someone in the head is 'enforcing the law'

[dobadoy]

You might just want to think that the incident is the logical consequence of previous actions.

I think that's the way most Thais will look at it, on all sides.

[rabo]

I have consistently posted snip

snip

Put your pig avatar back, it suited you better.

I kind of like the new avatar with an M79 being fired across a blacked out city skyline. Kind of symbolizes what was supposed to happen April 10th????

[dobadoy]

Thaksin always gets what he wants.

Sae Deng knew too much and Thaksin wanted him out.

Let's see what Thaksin wants next.

so this is your verdict? Thaksin killed him? I've heard it all now...

No one knows, of course, but in this case there are several logical scenarios.

1. Government/police enforcing the law, stopping an obvious and self proclaimed threat.

2. Military, Anupong, remember SD is suspected in the M79 attack on Anupong's office and assassination of the commanding officers on the night of April 10th.

3. Moderate reds who are shaking in their boots and want to prevent the militarization of the movement as threated by SD>

4. Thaksin cleaning up a mess that failed to produce the desired results, removing obvious witness.

I don't buy any of these without some evidence. As for number 4, it would not be Thaksin's first assassination attempt, remember Sondhi was shot in the head.

'logical scenario'? 'enforcing the law'?

assasinating someone is 'enforcing the law'? Jeezeeee even in kindergarden law books it doesn't say shooting someone in the head is 'enforcing the law'

"Kindergarden law books" what are they?

Most kindergarten books don't mention law at all, but they do contain simple law-like homilies which are apt to Seh Daeng, such as "be careful what you wish for".

[chadintheusa]

I have consistently posted against all violence by any side - but what has it come to when a guy gives a TV interview and is shot in the head on TV? and we watch on CNN? this is a demonstration of a 'clean' government? a sign of 'law'? yellows on here carp on about 'rule of law' - where is it NOW? it's a disgrace and anyone with a nounce of intelligence and compassion should condemn it outright.

I believe that it was a NEWSPAPER interview, but what does it matter. A target is a target, and best taken out when stationary. Talking to a reporter, taking a leak or picking his nose.....................all good opportunities.

You connect intelligence with compassion. Why? Have you considered that some intelligent people may have discarded the Judeo-Christian BS you were brainwashed with as a child. Most of the people on this planet DO NOT believe that all human life is sacred; there are a lot of complete @r$eholes out there, and the world is a better place when they are removed from the gene pool. And all your sanctimonious preaching about compassion won't change that one bit.

Given the chance to kill Stalin or Hitler in 1935, would it have been morally wrong to take them out?

Put your pig avatar back, it suited you better.

If Osama Bin Laden sat down and gave an interview with Larry King at CNN would the CIA wait for him to finish, or would they take him out?

[ChiangMaiFun]

I have consistently posted against all violence by any side - but what has it come to when a guy gives a TV interview and is shot in the head on TV? and we watch on CNN? this is a demonstration of a 'clean' government? a sign of 'law'? yellows on here carp on about 'rule of law' - where is it NOW? it's a disgrace and anyone with a nounce of intelligence and compassion should condemn it outright.

I believe that it was a NEWSPAPER interview, but what does it matter. A target is a target, and best taken out when stationary. Talking to a reporter, taking a leak or picking his nose.....................all good opportunities.

You connect intelligence with compassion. Why? Have you considered that some intelligent people may have discarded the Judeo-Christian BS you were brainwashed with as a child. Most of the people on this planet DO NOT believe that all human life is sacred; there are a lot of complete @r$eholes out there, and the world is a better place when they are removed from the gene pool. And all your sanctimonious preaching about compassion won't change that one bit.

Given the chance to kill Stalin or Hitler in 1935, would it have been morally wrong to take them out?

Put your pig avatar back, it suited you better.

you're comparing Stalin and Hitler with this guy? wow I am humbled by your intelligence - and you think that a comic and humurous avatar of a pig suits me? this is your style? to insult fellow posters? as for your comments about Judeo-Christian BS I find that highly OFFENSIVE and, in fact, I am a practising Buddhist of 30 years and I suspect the person who pulled the trigger is too (in name only like most Thais).

[whybother]

'logical scenario'? 'enforcing the law'?

assasinating someone is 'enforcing the law'? Jeezeeee even in kindergarden law books it doesn't say shooting someone in the head is 'enforcing the law'

Police snipers take out criminals all over the world to protect civilians.

[Herm]

Seh Daeng is a rogue nut alright. The red shirts would be better off without him, but I'm not sure if assassinating him while he's giving an interview to international media on live television is a good thing to do. Probably a rather stupid move.

I'm not so sure if it actually was an army sniper that took him out. If it was, well done.

Army snipers are trained to aim at the chest. It's a larger target and a high velocity .308 round if hit in the chest is almost always deadly due to shock and other factors. Also, the head is more likely to be moved quickly causing the shot to miss. Those rounds are steel core and will penetrate a normal "bullet proof" vest without a problem. Only a vest with added ceramic plates would stop it.

In my opinion, looking at the way Thaksin and his red terrorists have acted so far, I would not be too surprised if the shot was aimed at the journalist but missed. The renegade General probably came up with the plan and literally "shot himself in the head". Another journalist shot, with him as a direct witness saying - "of course it was the government - would I put myself in danger ?" would have been a nightmare PR disaster for the government. This in itself is another argument against the government having been behind this "execution". The danger of hitting the journalist would have been way too great as Sae Deng found out in person, only in reverse.

Once the machines are turned off and an autopsy is done with forensic examinations of the angle of the wound etc.. we will know more, but my bet is on a scheme by the reds gone wrong

[way2muchcoffee]

Question is will Mr Abhisit have the balls to admit he ordered killing?

I doubt it bloody yellow skirt! yellow belly.

Probably try and fob it off on someone else.

So I assume with your vitriol and accusations that you have evidence of any sort whatsoever that Abhisit ordered the killing of Seh Daeng.

How very stupid! Who else do you think is responsible for this Somchai from the 7/11 down the road? Grow up man.

Not necessary to flame. Don't worry, I won't report you. There are any number of different groups that could be responsible for Seh Daeng's shooting. I choose not to place blame until more facts are revealed instead of jumping to conclusions. That is what most 'grown ups' do.

[Tatsujin]

Once again everyone here is taking rumor and spinning it into facts.

If Seh Daeng was guilty of all that he has been accused of, and if there is evidence to support this, then arrest him, put him up on charges and prosecute him UNDER THE LAW.

I am not a supporter of either Reds, Yellows or any other color here in Thailand, I just want to get on with living my life with the minimum of hassles. The protests are an inconvenience but I do have a certain amount of sympathy for their 'cause' and it seems that there has been no other way for these people to legitimately air their grievances and actually have something happen.

No one knows WHO shot him, tho it seems more than likely that it was an Army sniper, and if this is the case, this is nothing short of assassination, AND it occurred when he was doing nothing other than give an interview, a clear departure from the Govt's stance:

"authorities must execute measures according to international standards and rules of engagement"

How is this justified under any rules of engagement?

(waits for the howls of condemnation from the other farangs here)

[rabo]

Thaksin always gets what he wants.

Sae Deng knew too much and Thaksin wanted him out.

Let's see what Thaksin wants next.

so this is your verdict? Thaksin killed him? I've heard it all now...

No one knows, of course, but in this case there are several logical scenarios.

1. Government/police enforcing the law, stopping an obvious and self proclaimed threat.

2. Military, Anupong, remember SD is suspected in the M79 attack on Anupong's office and assassination of the commanding officers on the night of April 10th.

3. Moderate reds who are shaking in their boots and want to prevent the militarization of the movement as threated by SD>

4. Thaksin cleaning up a mess that failed to produce the desired results, removing obvious witness.

I don't buy any of these without some evidence. As for number 4, it would not be Thaksin's first assassination attempt, remember Sondhi was shot in the head.

'logical scenario'? 'enforcing the law'?

assasinating someone is 'enforcing the law'? Jeezeeee even in kindergarden law books it doesn't say shooting someone in the head is 'enforcing the law'

Curious that you only challenge the logic of number 1. Guess it was Thaksin after all.

Anyway, Since when is it illegal for police/authorities to remove an obvious, eminent, and deadly threat to public safety? In this case with multiple warrants and a state of emergency in place, and a self admission by the person posing the threat. Doubt if a court trial would even last very long.

[cmsally]

Mostly those that are allowed to let verbal abuse flow have some kind of backing and insurance policy.

I think it is a big mistake to assume that because the mouthpiece has been eliminated, the voice is no longer there.

[ChiangMaiFun]

'logical scenario'? 'enforcing the law'?

assasinating someone is 'enforcing the law'? Jeezeeee even in kindergarden law books it doesn't say shooting someone in the head is 'enforcing the law'

Police snipers take out criminals all over the world to protect civilians.

yes that's true... after obtaining a court order and after receiving orders of engagement from a very senior officer - or if that is not possible and it's an emergency (hardly the case in this scenario as he was being interviewed) and every bullet is accounted for and an investigation of any such sniping is subject of intense scrutiny and reporting - this won't happen here.

[clausewitz]

There are certainly many people that could have wanted him dead, both within the army and within the reds. He was a road block to a peaceful resolution. Many of the red leaders have been accepting of Abhisit's road map, but the main stumbling block has been Sae Daeng.

You really think it is unlikely the government and army did it. They have the area closed off, there are soldiers everywhere surrounding it, especially since yesterday. And they have promised to use live rounds.

From the Guardian:

During the closing-in operation today, it's possible that terrorists in the area would move in and encounter the officers. Therefore, the authorities must execute measures according to international standards and rules of engagement. Live ammunition will be used," Sansern said.

The warning raised the specter of a repeat of the clashes between protesters and security forces on April 10 in another part of Bangkok that killed 25 people and injured 800. Later violence related to the protests have caused four deaths and injured 600. Sansern said sharpshooters with live ammunition will take up vantage positions; water and electricity supplies to the area may be cut off, he said.

By the way which countries call using live rounds on protestors 'rules of engagement'?

[harsh4]

Seh Daeng is a rogue nut alright. The red shirts would be better off without him, but I'm not sure if assassinating him while he's giving an interview to international media on live television is a good thing to do. Probably a rather stupid move.

Keep in mind he was a renegade soldier...'rogue nut' as you say...should not discount someone settling a score from within the army and little to do with ideological stance or political support of anybody or any group..."some high up just didn't like him and his arrogance and ego clashing style, so just get rid of him while all this noise is around as fingers will only be pointed to whose got what political or short term motive now"... who knows just thinking aloud...

[chantorn]

clack, clack....clack, clack....clack, clack....clack, clack....clack, clack....clack, clack....

The red shirt propaganda machine keeps rattling and rattling... clack, clack....clack, clack....clack, clack....clack, clack....trurns upside down and tries to make out of a right a wrong...

WHY has never been a red shirt affected by the grenades launched in Silom?

Was the attack on the Prime Ministers car and on Kasit, and the "black Songkran" last year SELF DEFENSE ?

Was all this violence,the Nation was confronted with due to red shirt "Rallies" all staged by the "PM" himself?

Even someone claimed, REPORTED on internatioanl TV NEWS, to have a "peoples Revolution"?

Who is the sore loser in this game, who keeps on "ringing in" on large TV Screens,

who keeps encouraging the red shirts to keep "fighting"?

Who?

Who is the big loser behind all this?

Who?

Get real man!

WHY has never been a red shirt affected by the grenades launched in Silom?

Maybe you miss the news last night; sniper shoots + 5xM79 fire at the RED.

http://thainews.prd.go.th/en/news.php?id=255305130060

Edited May 14, 2010 by chantorn

[dobadoy]

Seh Daeng is a rogue nut alright. The red shirts would be better off without him, but I'm not sure if assassinating him while he's giving an interview to international media on live television is a good thing to do. Probably a rather stupid move.

I'm not so sure if it actually was an army sniper that took him out. If it was, well done.

Army snipers are trained to aim at the chest. It's a larger target and a high velocity .308 round if hit in the chest is almost always deadly due to shock and other factors. Also, the head is more likely to be moved quickly causing the shot to miss. Those rounds are steel core and will penetrate a normal "bullet proof" vest without a problem. Only a vest with added ceramic plates would stop it.

In my opinion, looking at the way Thaksin and his red terrorists have acted so far, I would not be too surprised if the shot was aimed at the journalist but missed. The renegade General probably came up with the plan and literally "shot himself in the head". Another journalist shot, with him as a direct witness saying - "of course it was the government - would I put myself in danger ?" would have been a nightmare PR disaster for the government. This in itself is another argument against the government having been behind this "execution". The danger of hitting the journalist would have been way too great as Sae Deng found out in person, only in reverse.

Once the machines are turned off and an autopsy is done with forensic examinations of the angle of the wound etc.. we will know more, but my bet is on a scheme by the reds gone wrong

That's a great conspiracy theory and worthy of Seh Daeng's logic - one does have to ask why was an interview taking place so close to a key flashpoint right after the "authorities" (I use the word conventionally, rather than descriptively) launched their operation.

Still, I doubt Seh Daeng would have been up for it simply because it would have showed he WASN'T in control if someone could get shot while talking to him - what would that say to his many fans? The leaky superstitious myth of "Seh Daeng wil protect you" just wouldn't hold any more water.

Frightened red's got to be number 1 suspects, gov't no.2, but frankly I wouldn't credit CRES with either the balls or the ability.

Edited May 14, 2010 by dobadoy

[Steely Dan]

you're comparing Stalin and Hitler with this guy?

Well Pol-Pot would be a closer geographical fit. It is revealing that Seh Daeng in his last interview described other red leaders as bad leaders paid off by the government. This is just the sort of paranoid scapegoating which results with someone eliminating their enemies and then their former friends to cement their position. I believe independence for Issan was another of his little pearls, I shudder to imagine what would have happened if somehow he lead a factional takeover of the army, it could have been the killing fields all over again.

Though I suppose in the cold light of day it is wrong to want anyone dead I must say I'm greatly relived he is out of the way and even if he was on a direct satellite link talking to Obama at the time I'd still think the same.

[whybother]

WHY has never been a red shirt affected by the grenades launched in Silom?

Maybe you miss the news last night; sniper shoots + 5xM79 fire at the RED.

http://thainews.prd.go.th/en/news.php?id=255305130060

5 M79's fired into the rally area ... and only *** 2 *** people injured?

And no other reports ANYWHERE else.

[ChiangMaiFun]

We have now had 'who shot Seh Daeng'

1 Thaskin

2 it was aimed at a journalist and organised by Seh Daeng himself

is there nothing that some of the yellow posters won't stoop to?

Sometimes a 'cigar is a cigar' and the government side are the obvious first candidates - cummon gimme a break

[timekeeper]

'logical scenario'? 'enforcing the law'?

assasinating someone is 'enforcing the law'? Jeezeeee even in kindergarden law books it doesn't say shooting someone in the head is 'enforcing the law'

Police snipers take out criminals all over the world to protect civilians.

yes that's true... after obtaining a court order and after receiving orders of engagement from a very senior officer - or if that is not possible and it's an emergency (hardly the case in this scenario as he was being interviewed) and every bullet is accounted for and an investigation of any such sniping is subject of intense scrutiny and reporting - this won't happen here.

no court order is neccesary, Swat type teams worldwide have standing judicial permission to act independantly

i find it amusing to think that you think that for example in a hostage crisis, some government appointed lawyer would have to go wake up a judge to get a court order to shoot whilst the hostage taker stood idly by waiting for them to get it.......or not