Thai Troops Violate Law In Bangkok Action: Amnesty

[jcbangkok]

Well, according to your logic, you cannot use the gun. You just have to let the other guy do whatever he wants, especially if he says he's lighting you on fire or burning down your house in the name of democracy.

Well, I've seen footage of the army shooting paramedics so your "logic" hits you in the face. And JC said he would rather take his chances with a bullet than a Molotov cocktail. He set no rules or parameters. But even if the guy with the Molotov cocktail threw first, I know what I would feel more comfortable with. And I think the army do too - else they'd be sneaking off the Esso and Shell every five minutes.

And the rule is the guy with the gun cannot shoot before the other guy throws the Molotov cocktail.

Hmmm... see above...

And then there’s the question of range. Trying to hit a target 500 metres away with a M-150 bottle and your arm as the power source. These Yellows don’t think it through. I still pity them...

Your logic is all wrong or you are not being honest but that has already been addressed in my other response showing your scenario is based on NOTHING I said.

But what I do want to know is the link to the footage you say you saw of army shooting paramedics.

[bangkoklight]

Wow, this guy is the reason you hear all those lawyer jokes like if you had a gun and 2 bullets in a room with Bin Laden, Hitler and a lawyer who would you kill? The lawyer - twice.

I don't think any lawyer would be in a room with Bin Laden and Hitler, but I understand you.

And do the Yellows here still think Thaksin is the richest man in Thailand? Haven't they forgotten someone?

[simonmiller]

They are not shooting at unarmed civilians, They are shooting at people who are either : 1. shooting at them - either handguns, rifles, rpg's or less lethal weapons - rockets, fire bombs, sling shots 2. lighting fires (its called arson) 3. looting 4. running checkpoints

So are you saying that its OK to consider arson and looting as a capital offense?

[bangkoklight]

Totally evaded the points we both made, whether by choice or it went over your head, I don't know.

Totally evaded? Really? Went over my head? Please elaborate on those points again. To help you, if there was a Molotov cocktail on the table and a gun, and you were fighting someone, and you had first choice, which would you choose? Tick tock...

[offissa]

And as for your last sentence, please respond to the points in posts 302, 305, 307- that on the other side of that broomstick, 100 yards away, with smoke and noise, someone can tell its a broomstick being pointed at them. And what is the point of the guy jumping up and pretending he's shooting? He's either a. retarded or b. intentionally trying to draw fire

Is this your roundabout way of conceding the point? Or what? Regardless of how he may have been perceived by the soldiers with the guns, he wasn't shooting a rifle or a machine gun, as claimed in numerous posts. And never rescinded.

[Netfan]

Wow, this guy is the reason you hear all those lawyer jokes like if you had a gun and 2 bullets in a room with Bin Laden, Hitler and a lawyer who would you kill? The lawyer - twice.

I don't think any lawyer would be in a room with Bin Laden and Hitler, but I understand you.

And do the Yellows here still think Thaksin is the richest man in Thailand? Haven't they forgotten someone?

Sadly, I think you don't understand. It was a JOKE. You know, haha.

So who is forgotten then? And don't forget to post that link jc asked for

[bangkoklight]

Your logic is all wrong or you are not being honest but that has already been addressed in my other response showing your scenario is based on NOTHING I said.

But what I do want to know is the link to the footage you say you saw of army shooting paramedics.

Maybe you should watch another channel other than ASTV JC. I shouldn't have to answer this question for you. Search on the Internet. Your bedtime isn't it?

[jcbangkok]

One way to recognize a troll is how they will move from one topic to the next when called out on their BS. Another way is that they will avoid responding to any direct questions or comments usually by pretending they don't understand to get more attention or by going on an offensive and simply restating their original nonsense they have already been called out on.

And they refuse to provide any links or sources to their claims and when asked will usually go on another offensive attack.

If you believe you have encounters a troll it is best to simply ignore them and they will go away.

Edited May 18, 2010 by jcbangkok

[offissa]

One way to recognize a troll is how they will move from one topic to the next when called out on their BS. Another way is that they will avoid responding to any direct questions or comments usually by pretending they don't understand to get more attention or by going on an offensive and simply restating their original nonsense they have already been called out on.

And they refuse to provide any links or sources to their claims and when asked will usually go on another offensive attack.

If you believe you have encounters a troll it is best to simply ignore them and they will go away.

Yip.

[simonmiller]

Won't even get into the first part with the kid being taught to fire rockets.

Agreed - this is the tragedy here: this kid is a child soldier, surely - and he doesn't look happy about what he is doing. The 17 year old who died was perhaps in a similar position. But surely something beyond Thaksin's 'propaganda' and money must be driving these people to stay and seek change by waving dustpans at the military?

[bangkoklight]

So are you saying that its OK to consider arson and looting as a capital offence?

Arson doesn't necessarily kill anyone, but a bullet in the head from a sniper's rifle does. And if the area is a “no go area” (according the military), why would there be people in a building anyway? Surely, an army can’t declare a “live fire zone” in an area where civilians live. Are you telling us otherwise?

[Insight]

An interesting interview with Thaksin's lawyer on Al Jazeera today.

Yeah he is good....a good opportunist....he can smell the money....he is a legend.....in his own mind....the lady interviewing him hung him out to dry.....waste of money there I think Tacki....link is to his bio http://www.borba.rs/eng/content/view/5542/123/

Yes good posting, the excellent interviewer tags him with every question

..and he exposes himself with every evasion. 

Wow, this guy is the reason you hear all those lawyer jokes like if you had a gun and 2 bullets in a room with Bin Laden, Hitler and a lawyer who would you kill? The lawyer - twice.

Heard variations of that one, but still, excellent

[rabo]

Well, according to your logic, you cannot use the gun. You just have to let the other guy do whatever he wants, especially if he says he's lighting you on fire or burning down your house in the name of democracy.

Well, I've seen footage of the army shooting paramedics so your "logic" hits you in the face. And JC said he would rather take his chances with a bullet than a Molotov cocktail. He set no rules or parameters. But even if the guy with the Molotov cocktail threw first, I know what I would feel more comfortable with. And I think the army do too - else they'd be sneaking off the Esso and Shell every five minutes.

And the rule is the guy with the gun cannot shoot before the other guy throws the Molotov cocktail.

Hmmm... see above...

And then there's the question of range. Trying to hit a target 500 metres away with a M-150 bottle and your arm as the power source. These Yellows don't think it through. I still pity them...

Bangkok, can you pleeeease post a link to a video showing the Army shooting paramedics in the head.

I,m sure many want to see that. Thanks

[Netfan]

And as for your last sentence, please respond to the points in posts 302, 305, 307- that on the other side of that broomstick, 100 yards away, with smoke and noise, someone can tell its a broomstick being pointed at them. And what is the point of the guy jumping up and pretending he's shooting? He's either a. retarded or b. intentionally trying to draw fire

Is this your roundabout way of conceding the point? Or what? Regardless of how he may have been perceived by the soldiers with the guns, he wasn't shooting a rifle or a machine gun, as claimed in numerous posts. And never rescinded.

Ok, lets try and keep this real simple, as its obvious, well, lets just keep it simple...a soldier is 100 meters down from a wall of tires. It is hot, loud, smoky. Suddenly a string of firecrackers is set off from the tire barrier. Some moron stands up and points an object that from the soldiers vantage point looks like a barrel of a gun. He has a split second to decide - fire back or not. The moron's motion with the object is that of someone firing an automatic weapon. If the soldier had decided to fire the moron would not have a head, so obviously the soldiers aren't out to kill on sight. And what was the purpose of the cretin standing up with the broomhandle? It was to draw fire. No other reason, unless he has an IQ of 60 and did it for fun.

The reds are trying to provoke responses from the soldiers. Thats why they are getting shot. can you understand that?

[jcbangkok]

And as for your last sentence, please respond to the points in posts 302, 305, 307- that on the other side of that broomstick, 100 yards away, with smoke and noise, someone can tell its a broomstick being pointed at them. And what is the point of the guy jumping up and pretending he's shooting? He's either a. retarded or b. intentionally trying to draw fire

Is this your roundabout way of conceding the point? Or what? Regardless of how he may have been perceived by the soldiers with the guns, he wasn't shooting a rifle or a machine gun, as claimed in numerous posts. And never rescinded.

In MY original post I assumed it was a gun because it just never occured to me the guy had such a death wish plus it looked like a gun and was being handled like a gun and being used like a gun. Anyway, after that it was simply debated IF it was a gun. Then later footage showed the same guy had a broom earlier and it seems we all now are still left unsure (we were not there) but now certainly we are ready to concede it was "possibly" a broom and the guy is either a complete nut job, suicidal or trying to further the cause of the reds with his life.

So, my original post "possibly" assumed something incorrectly but I also didn't see ANYBODY else make a claim it was a gun and it was simply a debate of what we thought it was. (actually I didn't read every post so some people may have also initially assumed it was a gun from my assumption and looking at the video)

Point being ... don't be such an exaggerating over reactor or drama queen over such a trivial and honest mistake (possible) that was addressed as soon as pointed out.

Edit: getting late, lots of typos

Edited May 18, 2010 by jcbangkok

[bangkoklight]

One way to recognize a troll is how they will move from one topic to the next when called out on their BS. Another way is that they will avoid responding to any direct questions or comments usually by pretending they don't understand to get more attention or by going on an offensive and simply restating their original nonsense they have already been called out on.

And they refuse to provide any links or sources to their claims and when asked will usually go on another offensive attack.

If you believe you have encounters a troll it is best to simply ignore them and they will go away.

Yip.

Yeah, I'm a troll because you can't come up with a decent reply to my post. “And they refuse to provide any links or sources to their claims…” LOL! Yeah... Hu hu hu... Are you guys for real?

[bangkoklight]

Bangkok, can you pleeeease post a link to a video showing the Army shooting paramedics in the head.

I,m sure many want to see that. Thanks

Shooting parameics in the head? I can't remember posting that.

[Netfan]

One way to recognize a troll is how they will move from one topic to the next when called out on their BS. Another way is that they will avoid responding to any direct questions or comments usually by pretending they don't understand to get more attention or by going on an offensive and simply restating their original nonsense they have already been called out on.

And they refuse to provide any links or sources to their claims and when asked will usually go on another offensive attack.

If you believe you have encounters a troll it is best to simply ignore them and they will go away.

Yip.

Yeah, I'm a troll because you can't come up with a decent reply to my post. “And they refuse to provide any links or sources to their claims…” LOL! Yeah... Hu hu hu... Are you guys for real?

well, we know who's not for real, otherwise we would have had that link by now

[wolf5370]

Maybe it is just me. Still look like a gun to me. This is just my opinion. You need not agree with me, I understand that.

gentlemen, please consider the situation. in the middle of riots, in a live fire zone,

an apparently cognitively impaired protester aims a broom handle at soldiers a few

hundred meters away. as his comrades set off strings of firecrackers, he pretends

to be firing a machine gun.

from the soldiers point of view, they see a barrel pointing at them, hear a series

of bangs, see flashes. they have a split-second to react.

now consider this....anyone thinking this man is harmless:

i challenge any one of you to stand in a dark alley in any democratic country in

the world, then as a cop of the beat walks by, pull out cigar and point it at

the cop as a friend behind you sets off firecrackers. good luck to your

surviving relatives suing the tobacco companies cause smoking kills.

In the UK maybe a couple of years or so ago, armed poilice shot dead a man witha table leg. As you may be aware most Biritsh cops are unarmed (truncheons and pepper spray only), and armed police are response units - i.e. called out when needed (like SWAT is in the USA). The guy was a bit loopy and had told people in the pub earlier that he had a shotgun in his bag. Police ordered him to drop the bag with supposed firearm, and he proceeded to aim the table leg (in the bag) at the officers - who shot him dead. There was a lot of hoohar, but the police were exhonerated.

In a live fire situation, when you know there are guns in use against you, when some one aims what looks like a gun at you and firecrackers and rockets and possibly gunfire is sounding all around, who would not shoot first? Who would take the chance that it is a broom handle, or table leg? Lets be serious here, if you take a water pistol to a gunfight, its your own dumb fault if someone takes it as a threat and caps you first.

[bangkoklight]

well, we know who's not for real, otherwise we would have had that link by now

I think you need to know what link you want first.

[jcbangkok]

I wonder if the plan now is to wait out the mob who the authorities have surrounded and have cut off most of their ability to get supplied and more people in.

They military has done a stellar job of getting many of the crazed folks off the streets who came out to fight authorities as the surrounded the illegal mob who is holding billions of dollars of private and public property hostage.

My guess is the remainder of the illegal violent mob will do more to instigate lawful authorities and possibly force the hand of authorities in terms of defending themselves again but you just never know from moment to moment where this will go.

However, I do know the military and authorities have done everything they can to get people out of that site, especially the children and elderly, but even 1,000 people is a lot to deal with in that kind of terrain. Well at least when you are dealing with people who have already made threats to burn down BKK, have weapons and assured authorities they will go into the buildings (malls) if authorities try to lawfully arrest or move them out.

[BNZ]

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.

Winston Churchill

"History will be kind to me for I intend to write it"

Both vibrantly displayed by Winston in his History of World War II An excellent read by an excellent writer who portrayed an unchristian covetousness to fiction ! 

But don't forget this truism "History is Written by the Victors."

But if it's truth you're really seeking, start here and google this...

Archibald Ramsay THE NAMELESS WAR   

 

Edited May 18, 2010 by BNZ

[offissa]

And as for your last sentence, please respond to the points in posts 302, 305, 307- that on the other side of that broomstick, 100 yards away, with smoke and noise, someone can tell its a broomstick being pointed at them. And what is the point of the guy jumping up and pretending he's shooting? He's either a. retarded or b. intentionally trying to draw fire

Is this your roundabout way of conceding the point? Or what? Regardless of how he may have been perceived by the soldiers with the guns, he wasn't shooting a rifle or a machine gun, as claimed in numerous posts. And never rescinded.

Ok, lets try and keep this real simple, as its obvious, well, lets just keep it simple...a soldier is 100 meters down from a wall of tires. It is hot, loud, smoky. Suddenly a string of firecrackers is set off from the tire barrier. Some moron stands up and points an object that from the soldiers vantage point looks like a barrel of a gun. He has a split second to decide - fire back or not. The moron's motion with the object is that of someone firing an automatic weapon. If the soldier had decided to fire the moron would not have a head, so obviously the soldiers aren't out to kill on sight. And what was the purpose of the cretin standing up with the broomhandle? It was to draw fire. No other reason, unless he has an IQ of 60 and did it for fun.

The reds are trying to provoke responses from the soldiers. Thats why they are getting shot. can you understand that?

It looks like bravado to me, rather than an attempt to draw fire, but why do you insist on changing the subject? To repeat, I make no comment on what the soldiers in front of the guy might have perceived, I only point out that the chap with the broom handle was in fact not shooting at anybody. Though several posts have claimed that he was. And none of the posters have yet conceded that he wasn't.

Go on—be the first.

[Netfan]

well, we know who's not for real, otherwise we would have had that link by now

I think you need to know what link you want first.

I'm gonna steal a response that someone used a couple of weeks ago because it seems to fit "Everybody knows you don't go full retard".

You said "Well, I've seen footage of the army shooting paramedics". It must be damning evidence. Please provide that link so we can be educated and maybe even change our minds on the whole deal! Or <deleted>

Edited May 18, 2010 by Netfan

[jcbangkok]

Maybe it is just me. Still look like a gun to me. This is just my opinion. You need not agree with me, I understand that.

gentlemen, please consider the situation. in the middle of riots, in a live fire zone,

an apparently cognitively impaired protester aims a broom handle at soldiers a few

hundred meters away. as his comrades set off strings of firecrackers, he pretends

to be firing a machine gun.

from the soldiers point of view, they see a barrel pointing at them, hear a series

of bangs, see flashes. they have a split-second to react.

now consider this....anyone thinking this man is harmless:

i challenge any one of you to stand in a dark alley in any democratic country in

the world, then as a cop of the beat walks by, pull out cigar and point it at

the cop as a friend behind you sets off firecrackers. good luck to your

surviving relatives suing the tobacco companies cause smoking kills.

In the UK maybe a couple of years or so ago, armed poilice shot dead a man witha table leg. As you may be aware most Biritsh cops are unarmed (truncheons and pepper spray only), and armed police are response units - i.e. called out when needed (like SWAT is in the USA). The guy was a bit loopy and had told people in the pub earlier that he had a shotgun in his bag. Police ordered him to drop the bag with supposed firearm, and he proceeded to aim the table leg (in the bag) at the officers - who shot him dead. There was a lot of hoohar, but the police were exhonerated.

In a live fire situation, when you know there are guns in use against you, when some one aims what looks like a gun at you and firecrackers and rockets and possibly gunfire is sounding all around, who would not shoot first? Who would take the chance that it is a broom handle, or table leg? Lets be serious here, if you take a water pistol to a gunfight, its your own dumb fault if someone takes it as a threat and caps you first.

When you get pulled over in the US (especially at night) you should always keep your hands on the steering wheel until the cop approaches and gives direction. Many people get shot reaching for their DL or registration or doing something stupid like reaching under the seat for something. I am not aware of any cop facing charges for offing somebody under these situations. Not going to get into right or wrong about this but just wanted to comment because you pulled this story up as if it was not a common thing in the UK and sadly just wanted to point out in the US it takes much less. Then again the US tends to have a lot more violent people with guns.

[bangkoklight]

I wonder if the plan now is to wait out the mob who the authorities have surrounded and have cut off most of their ability to get supplied and more people in.

As far as I can see, the Reds have more than enough to live off and they get fresh supplies everyday. You want a link? LOL!

They military has done a stellar job of getting many of the crazed folks off the streets who came out to fight authorities as the surrounded the illegal mob who is holding billions of dollars of private and public property hostage.

I think the BBC and CNN stopped the shooting of the civilians and then the Reds calmed down.

My guess is the remainder of the illegal violent mob will do more to instigate lawful authorities and possibly force the hand of authorities in terms of defending themselves again but you just never know from moment to moment where this will go.

Quite an empty remark with no real substance really, sorry JC.

However, I do know the military and authorities have done everything they can to get people out of that site, especially the children and elderly, but even 1,000 people is a lot to deal with in that kind of terrain. Well at least when you are dealing with people who have already made threats to burn down BKK, have weapons and assured authorities they will go into the buildings (malls) if authorities try to lawfully arrest or move them out.

They have weapons like sticks vs. machine guns, right?

Who's the troll? Go do your homework JC and good night… ;-)

[Netfan]

It looks like bravado to me, rather than an attempt to draw fire, but why do you insist on changing the subject? To repeat, I make no comment on what the soldiers in front of the guy might have perceived, I only point out that the chap with the broom handle was in fact not shooting at anybody. Though several posts have claimed that he was. And none of the posters have yet conceded that he wasn't.

Go on—be the first.

I don't know if he wasn't or not- but okay- he wasn't- wow, you win an invalid point. The real point is he looked like he was. Interesting you or the other red apologists have never said the guy was stupid, or not too smart to have done this. In fact, now you say it was "bravado". So, you won't be insulted if we say that your intelligence level is on par with his, or vice versa if you want. Good? good.

Edited May 18, 2010 by Netfan

[bangkoklight]

You said "Well, I've seen footage of the army shooting paramedics". It must be damning evidence. Please provide that link so we can be educated and maybe even change our minds on the whole deal! Or <deleted>

Good night Netfan... Has Fox News started yet? :-)

[Netfan]

You said "Well, I've seen footage of the army shooting paramedics". It must be damning evidence. Please provide that link so we can be educated and maybe even change our minds on the whole deal! Or <deleted>

Good night Netfan... Has Fox News started yet? :-)

Yep, another red full of s#!t. No surprise here.

[jcbangkok]

And as for your last sentence, please respond to the points in posts 302, 305, 307- that on the other side of that broomstick, 100 yards away, with smoke and noise, someone can tell its a broomstick being pointed at them. And what is the point of the guy jumping up and pretending he's shooting? He's either a. retarded or b. intentionally trying to draw fire

Is this your roundabout way of conceding the point? Or what? Regardless of how he may have been perceived by the soldiers with the guns, he wasn't shooting a rifle or a machine gun, as claimed in numerous posts. And never rescinded.

Ok, lets try and keep this real simple, as its obvious, well, lets just keep it simple...a soldier is 100 meters down from a wall of tires. It is hot, loud, smoky. Suddenly a string of firecrackers is set off from the tire barrier. Some moron stands up and points an object that from the soldiers vantage point looks like a barrel of a gun. He has a split second to decide - fire back or not. The moron's motion with the object is that of someone firing an automatic weapon. If the soldier had decided to fire the moron would not have a head, so obviously the soldiers aren't out to kill on sight. And what was the purpose of the cretin standing up with the broomhandle? It was to draw fire. No other reason, unless he has an IQ of 60 and did it for fun.

The reds are trying to provoke responses from the soldiers. Thats why they are getting shot. can you understand that?

It looks like bravado to me, rather than an attempt to draw fire, but why do you insist on changing the subject? To repeat, I make no comment on what the soldiers in front of the guy might have perceived, I only point out that the chap with the broom handle was in fact not shooting at anybody. Though several posts have claimed that he was. And none of the posters have yet conceded that he wasn't.

Go on—be the first.

Grow up already.

So, if what you are saying is true then a couple posters got it wrong under a very understandable circumstances.

Nobody was trying to dupe anybody. Mistakes happen ... grow up.

You act as though by proving "a couple" posters may have been fooled by a guy pretending to have a gun that the entire red army will be vindicated.

I just cannot fathom your point here beyond acting like a child over and over again about this.