Thai Democrats Blocking Reconciliation: Natthawut

[473geo]

Purely your opinion - but tell me anyway - who shot the grenades? Proof, please, not speculation. You know that the MiB have never been identified. Why not??

This is the level the propaganda-posters has stooped to.

Ps. Several MIBs have been ID'd after their arrests. Some was linked to See Daeng. Ds.

calling protesters terrorists is propaganda.

But the gov't started that propaganda before the demonstrations started.

Terrorism is a term loved by gov'ts and authorities around the world today when they want to demonize a group. It allows the gov't to

- stoke fear of the group among the population at large

- justify extreme actions against the group

- suspend or eliminate due process and civil liberties

- apply harsher punishments on people

The people here stating that all the red shirts are thugs, a mob, and terrorists are the people spouting propaganda. Propaganda, I notice, once again repeated without any supporting facts.

When there is organized bombings of civilian targets, grenades being launched at civilian targets, RPG being shot at civilian targets, then the group behind the actions are terrorists.

Having an illegal sit-in doesn't make them terrorists. Having armed groups that act on their behalf, against civilian targets, with no condemnation - does.

But then are the government who had the RTA act on their behalf against civilian targets are terrorists?....are you people who do not condemn the act terrorists......quite a statement you make there

Edited April 1, 2012 by 473geo

[metisdead]

A post using blue font has been reset to black to end the provocative responses. Other posts of a moderation nature have been removed as well as replies.

[TAWP]

When there is organized bombings of civilian targets, grenades being launched at civilian targets, RPG being shot at civilian targets, then the group behind the actions are terrorists.

Having an illegal sit-in doesn't make them terrorists. Having armed groups that act on their behalf, against civilian targets, with no condemnation - does.

But then are the government who had the RTA act on their behalf against civilian targets are terrorists?....are you people who do not condemn the act terrorists......quite a statement you make there

People part of a crime in action cannot require to not be fired upon if they hide behind their brethren that fire in the other direction.

The RTA didn't attack any civilian targets unrelated to the protests. They responded to the riots that was, no-matter what we might think about proportionality.

[473geo]

When there is organized bombings of civilian targets, grenades being launched at civilian targets, RPG being shot at civilian targets, then the group behind the actions are terrorists.

Having an illegal sit-in doesn't make them terrorists. Having armed groups that act on their behalf, against civilian targets, with no condemnation - does.

But then are the government who had the RTA act on their behalf against civilian targets are terrorists?....are you people who do not condemn the act terrorists......quite a statement you make there

People part of a crime in action cannot require to not be fired upon if they hide behind their brethren that fire in the other direction.

The RTA didn't attack any civilian targets unrelated to the protests. They responded to the riots that was, no-matter what we might think about proportionality.

<deleted> you can't just shoot somebody because 'they were there'

Rather explains your view on the proceedings anyway......thanks

[phiphidon]

When there is organized bombings of civilian targets, grenades being launched at civilian targets, RPG being shot at civilian targets, then the group behind the actions are terrorists.

Having an illegal sit-in doesn't make them terrorists. Having armed groups that act on their behalf, against civilian targets, with no condemnation - does.

But then are the government who had the RTA act on their behalf against civilian targets are terrorists?....are you people who do not condemn the act terrorists......quite a statement you make there

People part of a crime in action cannot require to not be fired upon if they hide behind their brethren that fire in the other direction.

The RTA didn't attack any civilian targets unrelated to the protests. They responded to the riots that was, no-matter what we might think about proportionality.

"The RTA didn't attack any civilian targets unrelated to the protests"

That statement absolves the RTA from any death or injury they inflicted during April/May 2010, including the deaths at the Wat, the foreign and local journalists, ambulance men and women and indeed unarmed red shirt supporters.

[rubl]

A video of armed redshirts? 5 or 6 guys a couple armed, one blatantly with a rifle milling around the shopping walkways somewhere just outside a taped off area not aware of the video camera? Meanwhile someone steps over the tape who seems to recognise a video camera when he sees one as he's wearing a black balaclava with eye slits. Not a red shirt granny with a clapper within sight. Obviously armed Red Shirts.

Then theres Abhisit - even he says these armed men are in the minority and then the rest of the video first questions the shootings in the wat and then repeats the government line that there were shots from the wat and anyway the soldiers weren't on the overhead tracks that day. Proven to be a lie.

Sorry, not convincing at all.

"Abhisit - even he says these armed men are in the minority"

Well, that explains all, now doesn't it

Earlier in the campaign he was also of the opinion that there were "500 men in black" mingling with the red shirts. If you read the link I provided "lessons learned" you will see that this myth is still perpetuated in the article. Of course this "intel" would make it more easy to swallow if the army had to go in "tooled up" and firing live rounds around the place and using 20,000 troops to do so. Don't dispute the figure, it's in the article.

3. The dispersal of the demonstrations was carried out after four days of waiting. During the second stage, attempts were made to gather intelligence about the UDD’s deployment and weapons in the Lumpini area, the deployment of forces behind checkpoints and UDD guards around Ratchaprasong, the location of M-79 grenade launchers, the deployment of 500 militants in different areas, etc. Once all units were ready, the Operation commenced at dawn on 19 May 2010 and it was supposed to finish by 18.00 the same day............

6. The operational plan was advanced carefully in each area as it was estimated that the potential of the UDD guards would be much higher than during the 10 April operation. The troops thus needed better protection. As a result, during the operation utilizing around 20,000 personnel, only one died and a few were injured. This loss was acceptable.

http://www.prachatai...glish/node/2642

Well, I guess k. Abhisit was right after all. I mean 500 MiB amongst up to 1 millions protesters (depending on what figures to accept) can hardly be called more than a minority.

Mind you even a few handfulls of them would justify a more military approach in most countries. I must admit I'm a bit confused as to what you are trying to prove with your posts and quotes. Do you think the Thai government should have imported a few London Bobbies who could ask in fluent English "please excuse me, sir/madam. Are you a peaceful protester or one of the more military kind?"

Edited April 1, 2012 by rubl

[rubl]

After reading a few more posts here I'm really surprised the topic is "Thai Democrats block reconciliation: Nattawut".

Somehow it seems blaming k. Abhisit for ALL violence and deaths during the March - May 2010 riots is the way to go to achieve reconciliation. Maybe only when accepting UDD / Pheu Thai UDD MP logic and view on what is the truth as you should see it ?

[rubl]

But then are the government who had the RTA act on their behalf against civilian targets are terrorists?....are you people who do not condemn the act terrorists......quite a statement you make there

People part of a crime in action cannot require to not be fired upon if they hide behind their brethren that fire in the other direction.

The RTA didn't attack any civilian targets unrelated to the protests. They responded to the riots that was, no-matter what we might think about proportionality.

"The RTA didn't attack any civilian targets unrelated to the protests"

That statement absolves the RTA from any death or injury they inflicted during April/May 2010, including the deaths at the Wat, the foreign and local journalists, ambulance men and women and indeed unarmed red shirt supporters.

It doesn't as you very well know. Circumstances though indicate why these deaths could happen. Special police forces trained to handle even somewhat violent protesters have a different approach than military forces. Army officers will not sent their troops into a combat without doing their utmost to make sure they have what is needed. 'Collateral' damage doesn't sound good, but from a military point of view is 'to be avoided only' without adding 'at all costs'.

BTW our Canadian reporter vanderGrift was running around with the Army on the 19th of May when 'protesters' lobbed a grenade on him and some soldiers around him. Even NN said something like vdG seeming to have a deathwish running around with the military like that.

Edited April 1, 2012 by rubl

[tlansford]

As alluded to earlier the government forces were incredibly patient with red shirt protesters, the vast majority of whom were only interested in doing just that, protesting. Unfortunately there were elements within the group, especially the black shirts, who had a different agenda. After a long stand off the situation became untenable with the country being held to ransom and ultimately and after repeated warnings, action had to be taken.

yours is just a rhetorical argument for a gov't killing its own citizens, ie : murder.

I don't find that acceptable...

[Siam Simon]

As alluded to earlier the government forces were incredibly patient with red shirt protesters, the vast majority of whom were only interested in doing just that, protesting. Unfortunately there were elements within the group, especially the black shirts, who had a different agenda. After a long stand off the situation became untenable with the country being held to ransom and ultimately and after repeated warnings, action had to be taken.

yours is just a rhetorical argument for a gov't killing its own citizens, ie : murder.

I don't find that acceptable...

It's that 'money/property before life' argument that keeps cropping up in these discussions. I've wondered if the more extreme posters on TVF would keep their hard-faced attitudes toward protester deaths if it were their own offspring who'd gone off and joined a protest that said posters didn't agree with. Like I've stated before, the posters advocating protest dispersal using lethal violence should be made to clean up the actual blood and guts, and then go and counsel the bereaved families of the victims of all sides. There is always a better way than violence, and the State has to take the lead/set the example on this.

[Siam Simon]

One is constantly amazed by Calgarryll (among others) and their grossly misinformed profound statements made concerning their intimate friendship and knowledge of the Red Shirt hierarchy as well as the rank and file members made here and before in Cargaryll's case in another forum.

The truth of the matter is many of us experienced first hand the delights of the Red Shirt take on democracy, arson, looting the heroic storming of a hospital, street fighting and other assorted terrorist activities.

As such we are probably far better informed than the 2 baht pseudo intellectuals who presume to know what is best for Thailand and its people. Perchance these individuals would be better employed in campaigning for democracy in North Korea, Cambodia etc.

Perhaps if the supporters of these Red Shirt terrorist activities were to actually look at those activities and were involved in any way they might just see the true facts of the matter.

However I very much doubt that those who shout the loudest in support of the terrorist activities were actually troubled by the loutish behavior of the Red Shirts as they were no doubt cozily ensconced in there little ivory towers far from the harsh realities of the terrorism perpetrated by paid for mercenaries in order to create a demonic society rather than a democratic society for the benefit of one person, his family and their brown nosing acolytes.

What a load of codswallop, and the following part of the quoted post exemplifies the overall ignorant arrogance of said quoted post:

"The truth of the matter is many of us experienced first hand the delights of the Red Shirt take on democracy, arson, looting the heroic storming of a hospital, street fighting and other assorted terrorist activities.

As such we are probably far better informed than the 2 baht pseudo intellectuals who presume to know what is best for Thailand and its people"

There is only one member of this forum (nicknostitz) who has extensive first-hand witness and research evidence of what went on during the 2010 troubles, and his evidence and hard facts mostly contradict the opinions of forum ranters such as the one quoted. nicknostitz has repeatedly asked the forum for any new witness/hard evidence in order to expand his own knowledge. So far, his forum critics have come up with jack sh!t on that crucial aspect, and instead concentrate on tying him down with infantile character assassination attempts on him. If you guys really wanted to get to the bottom of what went on in the streets in the 2010 troubles, you would be tapping nicknostz up for his knowledge instead of trying to drive him away from the forum.

[OzMick]

As alluded to earlier the government forces were incredibly patient with red shirt protesters, the vast majority of whom were only interested in doing just that, protesting. Unfortunately there were elements within the group, especially the black shirts, who had a different agenda. After a long stand off the situation became untenable with the country being held to ransom and ultimately and after repeated warnings, action had to be taken.

yours is just a rhetorical argument for a gov't killing its own citizens, ie : murder.

I don't find that acceptable...

It's that 'money/property before life' argument that keeps cropping up in these discussions. I've wondered if the more extreme posters on TVF would keep their hard-faced attitudes toward protester deaths if it were their own offspring who'd gone off and joined a protest that said posters didn't agree with. Like I've stated before, the posters advocating protest dispersal using lethal violence should be made to clean up the actual blood and guts, and then go and counsel the bereaved families of the victims of all sides. There is always a better way than violence, and the State has to take the lead/set the example on this.

And how would you feel if your son was a conscript being shot at by terrorists? and then made to clean up the blood, guts, excreta and various other rubbish they left behind.

Stand back a little and look at the big picture. There were people on both armed sides, and only one group had the option to leave, go home and protest again in a less violent manner if they wished.

[Siam Simon]

Purely your opinion - but tell me anyway - who shot the grenades? Proof, please, not speculation. You know that the MiB have never been identified. Why not??

This is the level the propaganda-posters has stooped to.

Ps. Several MIBs have been ID'd after their arrests. Some was linked to See Daeng. Ds.

If you want to see an absolute classic example of a forum propagandist in action, view the post by Yoshi that follows yours. The propaganda video that he presents as 'evidence' of the Black Shirt threat is utterly comical: First we have some poorly-taken video of clashes where nothing of any substance can be discerned, then we have some slightly better ones of clashes which show Red Shirts using extremely basic weapons in an appalling clash with security personnel, then we have a completely different scene where there is no violence whatsoever but there is a guy in a black 'stalker' outfit walking around in said non-violent situation brazenly waving a shooter by his side whilst conveniently accompanied by another guy wearing a red shirt.

Anyway, getting back to "propagandist" tlansford's point about the Wat murders: All the independant evidence points to soldiers on a shooting spree. There is not one iota of even vaguely reliable evidence that said soldiers were doing anything other than bullying people sheltering there in the most brutal and lethal way. Suthep's blatant, ugly lies gave the game away on this. I suspect there will be a come-uppance for him, hopefully before he dies of old age.

The armed red carrying weaponry. Must be a fake red then.

As for shooting spree:

So far, Yoshi, we have a guy in a 'rapist' costume posing for the cameras and another guy running out from shelter and firing something up into the air which doesn't have any recoil effect on him. Keep 'em coming, I'm sure you'll fine one that stands up to logical analysis eventually.

[OzMick]

As alluded to earlier the government forces were incredibly patient with red shirt protesters, the vast majority of whom were only interested in doing just that, protesting. Unfortunately there were elements within the group, especially the black shirts, who had a different agenda. After a long stand off the situation became untenable with the country being held to ransom and ultimately and after repeated warnings, action had to be taken.

yours is just a rhetorical argument for a gov't killing its own citizens, ie : murder.

I don't find that acceptable...

And despite your anti-violence claims, you continue to support those who killed (at least) soldiers and bystanders i.e. murder.

I don't find that acceptable.

In fact most of the world doesn't find armed protesters acceptable.

[Siam Simon]

As alluded to earlier the government forces were incredibly patient with red shirt protesters, the vast majority of whom were only interested in doing just that, protesting. Unfortunately there were elements within the group, especially the black shirts, who had a different agenda. After a long stand off the situation became untenable with the country being held to ransom and ultimately and after repeated warnings, action had to be taken.

yours is just a rhetorical argument for a gov't killing its own citizens, ie : murder.

I don't find that acceptable...

It's that 'money/property before life' argument that keeps cropping up in these discussions. I've wondered if the more extreme posters on TVF would keep their hard-faced attitudes toward protester deaths if it were their own offspring who'd gone off and joined a protest that said posters didn't agree with. Like I've stated before, the posters advocating protest dispersal using lethal violence should be made to clean up the actual blood and guts, and then go and counsel the bereaved families of the victims of all sides. There is always a better way than violence, and the State has to take the lead/set the example on this.

And how would you feel if your son was a conscript being shot at by terrorists? and then made to clean up the blood, guts, excreta and various other rubbish they left behind.

Stand back a little and look at the big picture. There were people on both armed sides, and only one group had the option to leave, go home and protest again in a less violent manner if they wished.

As far as I'm aware , Mick, conscripts weren't involved in the dispersal operations. But that doesn't diminish in any way the deaths and injuries sustained by army personnel during said dispersal operation: They were, for the most part, just doing their duty, and were victims as much as the protesters. It all circles back to why some posters take lethal dispersal of a protest over reasonable containment of a protest, and it nearly always seems to come down to property/money versus life.

[OzMick]

So far, Yoshi, we have a guy in a 'rapist' costume posing for the cameras and another guy running out from shelter and firing something up into the air which doesn't have any recoil effect on him. Keep 'em coming, I'm sure you'll fine one that stands up to logical analysis eventually.

He is firing an M-79 grenade launcher with a 40mm explosive projectile. It is fired at an angle to "lob" the grenade to its target, and is quite lethal. A similar weapon was used to kill both the colonel and the woman on the BTS platform.

[OzMick]

And how would you feel if your son was a conscript being shot at by terrorists? and then made to clean up the blood, guts, excreta and various other rubbish they left behind.

Stand back a little and look at the big picture. There were people on both armed sides, and only one group had the option to leave, go home and protest again in a less violent manner if they wished.

As far as I'm aware , Mick, conscripts weren't involved in the dispersal operations. But that doesn't diminish in any way the deaths and injuries sustained by army personnel during said dispersal operation: They were, for the most part, just doing their duty, and were victims as much as the protesters. It all circles back to why some posters take lethal dispersal of a protest over reasonable containment of a protest, and it nearly always seems to come down to property/money versus life.

When people are being killed BY the protest, it is the duty of the relevant authorities to contain or remove that threat. As it was in the heart of the CBD and a moveable feast, containment was not possible. The first attempt to disperse was a crowd control/dispersal effort met with lethal force. Did you expect a similar response, because someone else was counting on it?

[Siam Simon]

So far, Yoshi, we have a guy in a 'rapist' costume posing for the cameras and another guy running out from shelter and firing something up into the air which doesn't have any recoil effect on him. Keep 'em coming, I'm sure you'll fine one that stands up to logical analysis eventually.

He is firing an M-79 grenade launcher with a 40mm explosive projectile. It is fired at an angle to "lob" the grenade to its target, and is quite lethal. A similar weapon was used to kill both the colonel and the woman on the BTS platform.

It's simply impossible to ascertain your interpretation from that video. I looks like someone launching a firework from a handled tube to me. Why do you think it's an RPG? And there is no definitive evidence about how the grenades that killed Col Romklao and his colleagues were delivered, though there is a strong school of thought that they were 'rolled' from close range.

[Siam Simon]

And how would you feel if your son was a conscript being shot at by terrorists? and then made to clean up the blood, guts, excreta and various other rubbish they left behind.

Stand back a little and look at the big picture. There were people on both armed sides, and only one group had the option to leave, go home and protest again in a less violent manner if they wished.

As far as I'm aware , Mick, conscripts weren't involved in the dispersal operations. But that doesn't diminish in any way the deaths and injuries sustained by army personnel during said dispersal operation: They were, for the most part, just doing their duty, and were victims as much as the protesters. It all circles back to why some posters take lethal dispersal of a protest over reasonable containment of a protest, and it nearly always seems to come down to property/money versus life.

When people are being killed BY the protest, it is the duty of the relevant authorities to contain or remove that threat. As it was in the heart of the CBD and a moveable feast, containment was not possible. The first attempt to disperse was a crowd control/dispersal effort met with lethal force. Did you expect a similar response, because someone else was counting on it?

I don't expect a turkey shoot, as happened at the wat on the final day, and I don't expect the murder of a protester as witnessed and photographed by Nick Nostitz outside that petrol station, and I don't expect the army to bottle commuters into a live firing zone so that they are given the option of lying across the footwells of their cars or diving for cover in nearby buildings as witnessed by an AJ journalist.

[nicknostitz]

And despite your anti-violence claims, you continue to support those who killed (at least) soldiers and bystanders i.e. murder.

I don't find that acceptable.

In fact most of the world doesn't find armed protesters acceptable.

Quite wrong.

You may also find that this depends on many factors. In Syria most of the world finds them acceptable, and in Lybia most of the world has not just found armed protesters acceptable, it has supported them.

[OzMick]

So far, Yoshi, we have a guy in a 'rapist' costume posing for the cameras and another guy running out from shelter and firing something up into the air which doesn't have any recoil effect on him. Keep 'em coming, I'm sure you'll fine one that stands up to logical analysis eventually.

He is firing an M-79 grenade launcher with a 40mm explosive projectile. It is fired at an angle to "lob" the grenade to its target, and is quite lethal. A similar weapon was used to kill both the colonel and the woman on the BTS platform.

It's simply impossible to ascertain your interpretation from that video. I looks like someone launching a firework from a handled tube to me. Why do you think it's an RPG? And there is no definitive evidence about how the grenades that killed Col Romklao and his colleagues were delivered, though there is a strong school of thought that they were 'rolled' from close range.

Having used a M-79 on quite a few occasions, I know one when I see one. And yes, they look like a fat tube with a handle. It is NOT an RPG, a completely different weapon in concept and appearance.

The only suggestion that the grenade which killed Col Romklao was rolled came from the red camp, an obfuscation easily discredited by the autopsy as they use different forms of shrapnel. M-79 grenades cannot be triggered by rolling.

As for your deleted insult, I am quite happy to stop my bike in small villages, stay in small hotels/guest houses and on occasion private homes. I speak enough Thai to feel comfortable talking to anyone over a few beers. If my interpretation to you seem slanted, it may have something to do with the your viewpoint.

[Buchholz]

And despite your anti-violence claims, you continue to support those who killed (at least) soldiers and bystanders i.e. murder.

I don't find that acceptable.

In fact most of the world doesn't find armed protesters acceptable.

Quite wrong.

You may also find that this depends on many factors. In Syria most of the world finds them acceptable, and in Lybia most of the world has not just found armed protesters acceptable, it has supported them.

And the factor by which most of the world did not find the armed Red Shirts acceptable and saw the situations with Syria and Libya as completely different?

.

Edited April 2, 2012 by Buchholz

[OzMick]

And despite your anti-violence claims, you continue to support those who killed (at least) soldiers and bystanders i.e. murder.

I don't find that acceptable.

In fact most of the world doesn't find armed protesters acceptable.

Quite wrong.

You may also find that this depends on many factors. In Syria most of the world finds them acceptable, and in Lybia most of the world has not just found armed protesters acceptable, it has supported them.

Right - and the implied comparison of Abhisit with long-term dictators Gaddafi and Assad is quite valid.

[tlansford]

As alluded to earlier the government forces were incredibly patient with red shirt protesters, the vast majority of whom were only interested in doing just that, protesting. Unfortunately there were elements within the group, especially the black shirts, who had a different agenda. After a long stand off the situation became untenable with the country being held to ransom and ultimately and after repeated warnings, action had to be taken.

yours is just a rhetorical argument for a gov't killing its own citizens, ie : murder.

I don't find that acceptable...

And despite your anti-violence claims, you continue to support those who killed (at least) soldiers and bystanders i.e. murder.

I don't find that acceptable.

In fact most of the world doesn't find armed protesters acceptable.

You are quite good at putting words into others mouths.

I do not support the killing of soldiers either. I have never stated otherwise.

Thank you.

[Siam Simon]

Having used a M-79 on quite a few occasions, I know one when I see one. And yes, they look like a fat tube with a handle. It is NOT an RPG, a completely different weapon in concept and appearance.

Mick, here is some video of soldiers firing shotgun-type pipe M79 grenade launchers:

Note that they have prepared their body positions (which are static), are holding the launcher firmly in both hands with the butt firmly in their shoulder, and yet they receive a pretty hefty recoil 'kick'. Note also that the launch sound is a 'pop' sound rather than an explosive one. And also note that due to the lack of high explosive projection, there is little smoke emission.

Now compare those to the video of the Red Shirt protester, who is firing on the move from a much less stable body position yet doesn't appear to suffer any significant recoil 'kick'. And (here is the crucial difference) there is a loud explosive launch sound with a lot of smoke.

My money's on a large firecracker.

The only suggestion that the grenade which killed Col Romklao was rolled came from the red camp, an obfuscation easily discredited by the autopsy as they use different forms of shrapnel. M-79 grenades cannot be triggered by rolling.

The evidence on the murder of Col Romklao and his colleagues on April 10 2010 is quite incomplete. All the relevant authorities have acknowledged this and continue to do so. The fact that you can make definitive judgments on that tragedy when even the relevant authorities can't speaks volumes about you.

As for your deleted insult, I am quite happy to stop my bike in small villages, stay in small hotels/guest houses and on occasion private homes. I speak enough Thai to feel comfortable talking to anyone over a few beers. If my interpretation to you seem slanted, it may have something to do with the your viewpoint.

But you had your own insult against me deleted by the mods from your post to which I replied, didn't you , Mick? So that's your attempt at playing the victim out of the window, isn't it? Anyway you're the one who's returned to the subject of your personal observations. And one particularly bogus one was your assertion that leaving pre-teen children 'home alone' in the villages is the norm (it isn't). But it fits nicely into your slanted pov of belittling the masses' overall morality and values in favour of bigging up the status quo.

Edited April 2, 2012 by Siam Simon

[OzMick]

Having used a M-79 on quite a few occasions, I know one when I see one. And yes, they look like a fat tube with a handle. It is NOT an RPG, a completely different weapon in concept and appearance.

Mick, here is some video of soldiers firing shotgun-type pipe M79 grenade launchers:

Note that they have prepared their body positions (which are static), are holding the launcher firmly in both hands with the butt firmly in their shoulder, and yet they receive a pretty hefty recoil 'kick'. Note also that the launch sound is a 'pop' sound rather than an explosive one. And also note that due to the lack of high explosive projection, there is little smoke emission.

Now compare those to the video of the Red Shirt protester, who is firing on the move from a much less stable body position yet doesn't appear to suffer any significant recoil 'kick'. And (here is the crucial difference) there is a loud explosive launch sound with a lot of smoke.

My money's on a large firecracker.

The only suggestion that the grenade which killed Col Romklao was rolled came from the red camp, an obfuscation easily discredited by the autopsy as they use different forms of shrapnel. M-79 grenades cannot be triggered by rolling.

The evidence on the murder of Col Romklao and his colleagues on April 10 2010 is quite incomplete. All the relevant authorities have acknowledged this and continue to do so. The fact that you can make definitive judgments on that tragedy when even the relevant authorities can't speaks volumes about you.

As for your deleted insult, I am quite happy to stop my bike in small villages, stay in small hotels/guest houses and on occasion private homes. I speak enough Thai to feel comfortable talking to anyone over a few beers. If my interpretation to you seem slanted, it may have something to do with the your viewpoint.

But you had your own insult against me deleted by the mods from your post to which I replied, didn't you , Mick? So that's your attempt at playing the victim out of the window, isn't it? Anyway you're the one who's returned to the subject of your personal observations. And one particularly bogus one was your assertion that leaving pre-teen children 'home alone' in the villages is the norm (it isn't). But it fits nicely into your slanted pov of belittling the masses' overall morality and values in favour of bigging up the status quo.

I'm sorry if my actual experience doesn't compare to your pictures and video. It is obvious that from your observations he is using an M-79 to launch fire-crackers, and not old VN war era rounds with a deteriorated charge. There is no way that the observed noise is affected by the concrete surfaces around him, or the crappy microphone.

But if you look again at the video, he has taken a stance with his back leg braced to accept recoil. As I recall, the recoil from what was commonly known as a "thump gun" was less than a shotgun. FYI firing a weapon on the range and in combat is sometimes a little different.

Would you like me to dig out some pictures of a youthful me firing one?

BTW Even if he was firing crackers and if he was doing that in my direction, I would have no qualms shooting him.

I was wondering what you were on about. My observations of village life are my own, and have no political or denigrating intent.

Edited April 2, 2012 by OzMick

[birdpooguava]

Right - and the implied comparison of Abhisit with long-term dictators Gaddafi and Assad is quite valid.

Yes it is. After 20 (successful or otherwise) military coups since the onset of Thai 'democracy' in 1932, it has been blatantly obvious that democracy has not been the process controlling & manipulating the people. Abhisit was manipulated into power, not through democratic means, but by the actions & influences outside of parliament. After the usurpation of power followed by hasty backroom deals to patch together an 'acceptable' government, Abhisit proceeded to repay the favour by immediately, drastically increasing the military budget to the obvious detriment to the electorates' rural majority . So I agree Mick, his administration is comparable to other rogue governments around the world and fully deserved to be removed by any means possible.

Edited April 3, 2012 by birdpooguava

[Siam Simon]

The problem with moving comparisons forward into the modern era, Mick, is that the modern devices are far more complex than the 'pipe' one seen being used by the Red Shirt protester. There's a slightly more modern version being used in this video, but, unfortunately for you, it still 'pops' rather than explodes and still lacks all the smoke that a firecracker always creates:

You can dig out anything you want, Mick, but it needs to prove that an M79 launcher of the type that is shown in the video posted by Yoshi can deliver a lethal, military-grade payload in the way that the Red Shirt using the device was using it.

[OzMick]

The problem with moving comparisons forward into the modern era, Mick, is that the modern devices are far more complex than the 'pipe' one seen being used by the Red Shirt protester. There's a slightly more modern version being used in this video, but, unfortunately for you, it still 'pops' rather than explodes and still lacks all the smoke that a firecracker always creates:

You can dig out anything you want, Mick, but it needs to prove that an M79 launcher of the type that is shown in the video posted by Yoshi can deliver a lethal, military-grade payload in the way that the Red Shirt using the device was using it.

I bow to the expertise of an armchair warrior. Anything is possible if you don't know what you're talking about.

[birdpooguava]

He is firing an M-79 grenade launcher with a 40mm explosive projectile. It is fired at an angle to "lob" the grenade to its target, and is quite lethal. A similar weapon was used to kill both the colonel and the woman on the BTS platform.

You seem quite the expert. Can you then explain why a weapons expert on Thai TV confirmed that that was not an M-79 he fired on that clip?