Bhum Jai Thai Tight-Lipped About PM Abhisit's Furor

[rubl]

and even if you don't bring one expect to get blown away by the army anyway

Yes. Particularly when your job is to reload the weapons for your cousin who is standing next to you firing on police, journalists, civilians, and military personnel.

Oh, so the journalists were murdered by redshirts were they? I wonder why they autopsy into these deaths has not been released then, I would have thought if the autopsies exonerated the government they would have been released straight away.

It must be hard to type with your head up your arse, well done.

Could you try to keep this discussion to the point and refrain from personal insults, please ?

[Insight]

he is also one of the most impressive politicians Thailand has ever seen.............Yes,you tell that to the families from all the people who were killed last april.

What has he done in the south??????Every days killing?You must be a top joker.

For the deaths in April and May the entire blame rests with the UDD and PTP leadership.

Suggestion: Don't bring rifles, pistols, grenades, broken bottles, spears, knives, machetes, rpgs, and homemade bombs and projectiles to a 'peaceful protest'.

and even if you don't bring one expect to get blown away by the army anyway

Too late, the pictures showing armed protesters have been broadcast around the world. Few experts have described the approach of the military as heavy handed considering the circumstances.

Am sure the reds will have another shot at smearing blood on the army in the name of Thaksin next year though.

[chantorn]

Next PM will either be Mark or Newin (short for Never Win).

[Buchholz]

It must be hard to type with your head up your arse, well done.

Could you try to keep this discussion to the point and refrain from personal insults, please ?

+1

[random]

I love it when certain posters make fools of themselves with their yellow rhetoric.

Well done guys, keep it.

As ex uk police I am more than aware what an autopsy consists of having been to quite a few over the years myself, an autopsy will show the weapon and calibre, and elevation of fire, of course this will help in proving who was responsible, along with an in depth investigation.

It is clear to all those who are not yellow (politics and bravery it would appear) that the autopsy results have not been released as they will show that people were killed at the hands of the military, investigation will also show that many of these were unarmed, such as the journalists. We have all seen footage on youtube of unarmed people laying on the ground as the army are taking potshots at them, and you expect us to believe that these soldiers missed ALL their targets with their random shooting.

Anyway like I said, keep it up, normally I like to make people look stupid when they are, but you guys are doing a good enough job by yourselves

[random]

Some seem to be blinded by their own misconceptions.

Over and over again. Pulling the wool over your own eyes boys?

If you have evidence either way please produce it

[random]

It must be hard to type with your head up your arse, well done.

Could you try to keep this discussion to the point and refrain from personal insults, please ?

+1

Do you class that as an insult, sorry, I thought we had all left kindergarten and are adults, I am sure the poster is able enough to rebut it if he chooses without a little posse forming.

[Pi Sek]

Oh, so the journalists were murdered by redshirts were they?

Yes, most likely.

[Buchholz]

In an anonymous internet forum anyone can pretend to be anyone they like.

You're right about that.

As ex uk police I am

[Buchholz]

It must be hard to type with your head up your arse, well done.

Could you try to keep this discussion to the point and refrain from personal insults, please ?

+1

Do you class that as an insult, sorry, I thought we had all left kindergarten and are adults, I am sure the poster is able enough to rebut it if he chooses without a little posse forming.

Don't take it as a conspiracy when more than one person objects to personal insults. That sort of behavior is often castigated by many in a variety of situations, including forum discussions.

[random]

In an anonymous internet forum anyone can pretend to be anyone they like.

You're right about that.

As ex uk police I am

Oh this old chestnut

I know quite a few ex police here, and a few on here have doubted my past, however every time I ask them to pm me so I can allay their fears and prove it I never seem to get a pm, strange that.

Lets us see whether this latest doubting thomas has the balls to find out the truth or whether he would like to continue casting aspersions.

I await your pm with baited breath, then I will furnish you will all my details and you can check them, ok? deal?

[random]

Do you class that as an insult, sorry, I thought we had all left kindergarten and are adults, I am sure the poster is able enough to rebut it if he chooses without a little posse forming.

Don't take it as a conspiracy when more than one person objects to personal insults. That sort of behavior is often castigated by many in a variety of situations, including forum discussions.

And yet the post where you doubt my past as a police officer is ok? is that not calling me a liar? is that not personal abuse?

anyway I will wait for your pm

[rubl]

It must be hard to type with your head up your arse, well done.

Could you try to keep this discussion to the point and refrain from personal insults, please ?

+1

Do you class that as an insult, sorry, I thought we had all left kindergarten and are adults, I am sure the poster is able enough to rebut it if he chooses without a little posse forming.

Re-reading my post I'm afraid I shouldn't have said 'insult'. A request to tone down the sneers would have been better. Having left kindergarten doesn't mean colorful language is a must.

Edited October 21, 2010 by rubl

[jdinasia]

I love it when certain posters make fools of themselves with their yellow rhetoric.

Well done guys, keep it.

As ex uk police I am more than aware what an autopsy consists of having been to quite a few over the years myself, an autopsy will show the weapon and calibre, and elevation of fire, of course this will help in proving who was responsible, along with an in depth investigation.

It is clear to all those who are not yellow (politics and bravery it would appear) that the autopsy results have not been released as they will show that people were killed at the hands of the military, investigation will also show that many of these were unarmed, such as the journalists. We have all seen footage on youtube of unarmed people laying on the ground as the army are taking potshots at them, and you expect us to believe that these soldiers missed ALL their targets with their random shooting.

Anyway like I said, keep it up, normally I like to make people look stupid when they are, but you guys are doing a good enough job by yourselves

Despite your "claims" to be an expert .....

An autopsy MAY not show the calibre, Will not show the weapon. Will not show the elevation. (an examination of an intact bullet will show the weapon and calibre, an examination of a wound track will only allow for approximations)

If the bullet would was a through and through and the bullet was not recovered you will only get an estimation of both the calibre and by extension a list of weapons that use that calibre ammunition. An autopsy will NOT show the elevation at all. It will show the trajectory on impact. Elevation is implied but not stated unless you know the position of the person when they were hit. Example --- It is known that Seh Daeng was in fact standing so the elevation would be assumed (not actually proven) by the trajectory of the bullet on impact. Should the bullet not be recovered almost everything is an assumption.

BTW --- your repeated insults to other posters are getting quite old.

edit for typo

Edited October 21, 2010 by jdinasia

[Buchholz]

Oh this old chestnut

I know quite a few ex police here, and a few on here have doubted my past, however every time I ask them to pm me so I can allay their fears and prove it I never seem to get a pm, strange that.

Lets us see whether this latest doubting thomas has the balls to find out the truth or whether he would like to continue casting aspersions.

I await your pm with baited breath, then I will furnish you will all my details and you can check them, ok? deal?

Moving from insults to overly aggressive attempts at intimidation is not an improvement.

Anyway, I wash my hands of your nonsense.

Edited October 21, 2010 by Buchholz

[random]

I love it when certain posters make fools of themselves with their yellow rhetoric.

Well done guys, keep it.

As ex uk police I am more than aware what an autopsy consists of having been to quite a few over the years myself, an autopsy will show the weapon and calibre, and elevation of fire, of course this will help in proving who was responsible, along with an in depth investigation.

It is clear to all those who are not yellow (politics and bravery it would appear) that the autopsy results have not been released as they will show that people were killed at the hands of the military, investigation will also show that many of these were unarmed, such as the journalists. We have all seen footage on youtube of unarmed people laying on the ground as the army are taking potshots at them, and you expect us to believe that these soldiers missed ALL their targets with their random shooting.

Anyway like I said, keep it up, normally I like to make people look stupid when they are, but you guys are doing a good enough job by yourselves

Despite your "claims" to be an expert .....

An autopsy MAY not show the calibre, Will not show the weapon. Will not show the elevation. (an examination of an intact bullet will show the weapon and calibre, an examination of a wound track will only allow for approximations)

If the bullet would was a through and through and the bullet was not recovered you will only get an estimation of both the calibre and by extension a list of weapons that use that calibre ammunition. An autopsy will NOT show the elevation at all. It will show the trajectory on impact. Elevation is implied but not stated unless you know the position of the person when they were hit. Example --- It is known that Seh Daeng was in fact standing so the elevation would be assumed (not actually proven) by the trajectory of the bullet on impact. Should the bullet not be recovered almost everything is an assumption.

BTW --- your repeated insults to other posters are getting quite old.

edit for typo

Where do I claim to be an expert?

I stopped reading at this point as no doubt the rest of your post is full of similar inaccuracies.

[chantorn]

In an anonymous internet forum anyone can pretend to be anyone they like.

You're right about that.

As ex uk police I am

There is no such thing as anonymous in the internet.All your IP are logged, and may be used against you.

Even if you use a public internet cafe, they have camera recording all the users at all time.

[random]

Oh this old chestnut

I know quite a few ex police here, and a few on here have doubted my past, however every time I ask them to pm me so I can allay their fears and prove it I never seem to get a pm, strange that.

Lets us see whether this latest doubting thomas has the balls to find out the truth or whether he would like to continue casting aspersions.

I await your pm with baited breath, then I will furnish you will all my details and you can check them, ok? deal?

Moving from insults to overly aggressive attempts at intimidation is not an improvement.

Anyway, I wash my hands of your nonsense.

What intimidation, you made a claim, I told you I can prove otherwise, if you pm me I will give you the details to check. It seems when you are put on the spot and about to be made to look wrong you run away.

[random]

In an anonymous internet forum anyone can pretend to be anyone they like.

You're right about that.

As ex uk police I am

There is no such thing as anonymous in the internet.All your IP are logged, and may be used against you.

Even if you use a public internet cafe, they have camera recording all the users at all time.

Great, I have nothing to hide

[way2muchcoffee]

I stopped reading at this point as no doubt the rest of your post is full of similar inaccuracies.

Perhaps this attitude and behavior explains why you seem to be so uninformed. You simply stop reading anything the doesn't suit your agenda. Sounds like a good plan for being educated and informed.

Edited October 21, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[phiphidon]

I wonder where he gets his 'news' and 'facts' from.

As far as i know there are not much of official statements about investigation results what had caused all the death.

The only journalist where there is proof thus far is the one in the video who was taken out by redshirts along with a few military personnel next to him writhing on the ground covered in blood.

Or perhaps the photographer for The Nation (or doesn't he qualify as a journalist?) who gave evidence at the "The People's Centre for Information on the April – May 2010 Crackdowns (PCI)" hearing at the Thammasat Auditorium on 28th September. Google it for more testimonies.

Chaiwat Pumpuang, a photographer for the Nation, was shot in the leg on Ratchaprarop Rd on 15 May. He went up on stage with help of a crutch and a photographer friend who was also with him when he was shot. Chaiwatsaid that he and his friend were wearing bullet-proof vests with the word 'PRESS', and press armbands. He rode a motorcycle into Soi Rangnam at about 10.30 am, and passed through to Ratchaprarop Rd. He saw onedead body which protesters were trying to drag away without success, due to gunfire from the troops. The shooting stopped when they arrived, and the protesters were able to take two bodies away, including 15 year old Samaphan Srithep . The shooting resumed around 2-3 pm. Chaiwat kept taking photos, assuming that he would not be shot, but he was shot in the leg. He sat down, and made a phone call to his friend who was nearby. About 25-30 minutes later, soldiers came to take him to a military medical vehicle. He saw three coffins inside the vehicle, but did not know whether there were any corpses in them, because it was dark inside. He also told the panel that he did not see the protesters fighting the troops with weapons, only with bamboo rockets and firecrackers.

His medical certificate says only that he was shot by a high-velocity bullet which could not be identified as it splintered into pieces in his leg. He was hospitalized for 10 days, with no police interrogation. He would sue the government to set a precedent.

[random]

I stopped reading at this point as no doubt the rest of your post is full of similar inaccuracies.

Perhaps this attitude and behavior explains why you seem to be so uninformed. You simply stop reading anything the doesn't suit your agenda. Sounds like a good plan for being educated and informed.

Why bother? It will be drivel and opinion, I am able to form my own opinions, you should try it some time.

[rubl]

I wonder where he gets his 'news' and 'facts' from.

As far as i know there are not much of official statements about investigation results what had caused all the death.

The only journalist where there is proof thus far is the one in the video who was taken out by redshirts along with a few military personnel next to him writhing on the ground covered in blood.

Or perhaps the photographer for The Nation (or doesn't he qualify as a journalist?) who gave evidence at the "The People's Centre for Information on the April � May 2010 Crackdowns (PCI)" hearing at the Thammasat Auditorium on 28th September. Google it for more testimonies.

Chaiwat Pumpuang, a photographer for the Nation, was shot in the leg on Ratchaprarop Rd on 15 May. He went up on stage with help of a crutch and a photographer friend who was also with him when he was shot. Chaiwatsaid that he and his friend were wearing bullet-proof vests with the word 'PRESS', and press armbands. He rode a motorcycle into Soi Rangnam at about 10.30 am, and passed through to Ratchaprarop Rd. He saw onedead body which protesters were trying to drag away without success, due to gunfire from the troops. The shooting stopped when they arrived, and the protesters were able to take two bodies away, including 15 year old Samaphan Srithep . The shooting resumed around 2-3 pm. Chaiwat kept taking photos, assuming that he would not be shot, but he was shot in the leg. He sat down, and made a phone call to his friend who was nearby. About 25-30 minutes later, soldiers came to take him to a military medical vehicle. He saw three coffins inside the vehicle, but did not know whether there were any corpses in them, because it was dark inside. He also told the panel that he did not see the protesters fighting the troops with weapons, only with bamboo rockets and firecrackers.

His medical certificate says only that he was shot by a high-velocity bullet which could not be identified as it splintered into pieces in his leg. He was hospitalized for 10 days, with no police interrogation. He would sue the government to set a precedent.

Was this journalist in the declared 'live fire zone' ?

As for 'didn't see weapons', those who were led around the main stage on Ratchaprasong also saw nothing. Didn't mean there was nothing. The UDD is very good at propaganda and staging shows. Some learned it in Vietnam in the 70's.

[jdinasia]

Random, you claimed expert knowledge based upon being an "ex police officer" that has attended "quite a few" autopsies over the years. That I fully refuted your claims to what an autopsy will and will not reveal explains why you didn't go any further.

Further you claim that autopsies not being distributed to you means that it must support your argument. That is called a "straw man".

[random]

Was this journalist in the declared 'live fire zone' ?

As for 'didn't see weapons', those who were led around the main stage on Ratchaprasong also saw nothing. Didn't mean there was nothing. The UDD is very good at propaganda and staging shows. Some learned it in Vietnam in the 70's.

I suppose he only pretended to get shot as well

[random]

Random, you claimed expert knowledge based upon being an "ex police officer" that has attended "quite a few" autopsies over the years. That I fully refuted your claims to what an autopsy will and will not reveal explains why you didn't go any further.

Further you claim that autopsies not being distributed to you means that it must support your argument. That is called a "straw man".

I made no claim of expert knowledge, I said I had attended many autopsies, or postmortems as we call them in the UK, and as you are still trying to say I 'claimed to be an expert' or 'claimed expert knowledge' I will not entertain you.

if however you want a sensible conversation you can stop with your nonsense and I will revisit your previous post that I refused to read and we can discuss it sensibly. Deal?

[jdinasia]

Random, you claimed expert knowledge based upon being an "ex police officer" that has attended "quite a few" autopsies over the years. That I fully refuted your claims to what an autopsy will and will not reveal explains why you didn't go any further.

Further you claim that autopsies not being distributed to you means that it must support your argument. That is called a "straw man".

I made no claim of expert knowledge, I said I had attended many autopsies, or postmortems as we call them in the UK, and as you are still trying to say I 'claimed to be an expert' or 'claimed expert knowledge' I will not entertain you.

if however you want a sensible conversation you can stop with your nonsense and I will revisit your previous post that I refused to read and we can discuss it sensibly. Deal?

Not a chance,

You were claiming in depth knowledge based upon your past experiences (and by that suggesting that other people had no such knowledge.) Your other claims are as specious.

[rubl]

Was this journalist in the declared 'live fire zone' ?

As for 'didn't see weapons', those who were led around the main stage on Ratchaprasong also saw nothing. Didn't mean there was nothing. The UDD is very good at propaganda and staging shows. Some learned it in Vietnam in the 70's.

I suppose he only pretended to get shot as well

Clear answer: no, he was shot.

Can we now get some answers more related to my question ?

[random]

Random, you claimed expert knowledge based upon being an "ex police officer" that has attended "quite a few" autopsies over the years. That I fully refuted your claims to what an autopsy will and will not reveal explains why you didn't go any further.

Further you claim that autopsies not being distributed to you means that it must support your argument. That is called a "straw man".

I made no claim of expert knowledge, I said I had attended many autopsies, or postmortems as we call them in the UK, and as you are still trying to say I 'claimed to be an expert' or 'claimed expert knowledge' I will not entertain you.

if however you want a sensible conversation you can stop with your nonsense and I will revisit your previous post that I refused to read and we can discuss it sensibly. Deal?

Not a chance,

You were claiming in depth knowledge based upon your past experiences (and by that suggesting that other people had no such knowledge.) Your other claims are as specious.

so now it has gone from claiming to be an expert to claiming in depth knowledge, and I never claimed that as such others would not have the same knowledge, I said I am aware of what happens at postmortems, at no point did I say anyone else was not aware or intimate anyone else was not aware. So to reiterate at no point did I claim to me an expert, at no point did I say my knowledge was better than others,I simply said I am aware what happens at them. sadly I have not read the rest of your post but I guess it is as full of inaccuracies as these comments of yours.

Feel free to keep making a fool of yourself, what next? a false claim that i said I was there and was the gun man, ridiculous.

[random]

Was this journalist in the declared 'live fire zone' ?

As for 'didn't see weapons', those who were led around the main stage on Ratchaprasong also saw nothing. Didn't mean there was nothing. The UDD is very good at propaganda and staging shows. Some learned it in Vietnam in the 70's.

I suppose he only pretended to get shot as well

Clear answer: no, he was shot.

Can we now get some answers more related to my question ?

I don't think it is in dispute that some red shirts had weapons, as well as the secretive men in black. The issue is as to whether all those killed by the army were in fact armed or even constituting a direct threat, and the fact that this journalist was unarmed and shot by the army, and his point is there was no direct threat around him that constituted the army firing live rounds in his direction, and even if there was a threat around him then the live firing was at best random.