Army Had No Rubber Bullets In 2010, Weng Says

[webfact]

Army had no rubber bullets in 2010, Weng says

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Pheu Thai Party MP Weng Tojirakarn yesterday dismissed Army Chief Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha's statement that the military used rubber bullets during the red-shirt riots in 2010.

Weng said he had checked and found the military did not have rubber bullets during the time of the riots.

Weng, a leader of the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD), or red shirts, gave the Department of Special Investigation a list of 39 sharp-shooters appointed by the Centre for Resolution of the Emergency Situation.

He asked the agency to reveal details about the appointment of the sharpshooters, their operation, and sites they were stationed at.

Weng said he also asked the DSI to probe the death of Sergeant First Class Pongchalit Pittayanontakan on May 17, 2010 near Silom, to try to find out if he was killed by a militia force or security officials.

The MP said he also wanted the report on Pongchalit's autopsy and those on Col Romklao Thuwatham and Private Narongrit Sala. He also submitted a picture of a sharpshooter that he wanted the DSI to summon for investigation.

-- The Nation 2012-09-11

[ianf]

But these people are all liars ......

[KireB]

Quote:" Weng said he also asked the DSI to probe the death of Sergeant First Class Pongchalit Pittayanontakan on May 17, 2010 near Silom, to try to find out if he was killed by a militia force or security officials."

Devils advocate mr Weng? You must surely mean your own militia or security forces!

[GentlemanJim]

This seems like another tactic to delay the whole procedure by another year or two by ordering the DSI as to what they should do. Who the hell is he anyway to give orders to the police, that is the job of the police and the public prosecutors. I hope Weng produced the proof that the army did not have any rubber bullets.

[h90]

I doubt there are rubber bullets for AKA-47

[OzMick]

Has Weng forgotten that the party line is that there were no red shirt militias and riots in 2010? Better he checks with wifey.

[asiawatcher]

Here we go again. What is about the Peu Thai? Do they think the world does not have eyes or ears. Red rioters seized the city - army finally had to clear it so what access did 'Weng' have to check the army? Since when were red supporters allowed access to army to make such assessments? Give it a rest. Get a life...

[hanuman2543]

If that is true then Prayuth, Suthep, Abbisith and some others will face additional the same charges as the man ordered to be the scapegoat in the case of the Red Bull heir (THai Penal ode, Section 137).

[Ricardo]

This appears to contradict evidence already given, by soldiers who were on-the-ground, but at least one of the Red-Leaders is talking to the DSI, and will be able to be questioned about his own and others' contribution to the events of the day.

[Pib]

Sure they had rubber bullets...the steel tip type.

[nurofiend]

if there is no evidence of rubber bullets being used, then it is a terrifying thing indeed.

but surely there is solid evidence of this tho.

i mean you got to give them a bit of credit rather than to have gone all in with live ammo.

Edited September 11, 2012 by nurofiend

[jerrysteve]

Were they made from Condoms

[lensta]

This seems like another tactic to delay the whole procedure by another year or two by ordering the DSI as to what they should do. Who the hell is he anyway to give orders to the police, that is the job of the police and the public prosecutors. I hope Weng produced the proof that the army did not have any rubber bullets.

"Who the hell is he anyway to give orders to the police"

Nowhere in the OP does it say he ordered anyone to do anything. Twice he asked for something and twice he said he wanted something.

[creck]

This can not be true.

There were many soldiers around my house in the middle of that shootout, and most soldiers had rifles with very large barrel, I would say about 1.5 cm or so. The bullets had a red "ball" at the front, which was most likely rubber.

I am not saying all soldiers had those. Some had different weapons, but 6 or 7 out of 10 had those large rifles with big barrels.

The shots coming from the other side though, made holes through 2 "thai sized" concrete walls, so I could pretty confidently say those were not rubber bullets nor did they come from slingshots.

This event is surrounded by smoke, lies and fairy tales. I would love to believe what you report and why should you lie? Do you have evidence to shut up half the posters?

[Fozfromoz]

This can not be true.

There were many soldiers around my house in the middle of that shootout, and most soldiers had rifles with very large barrel, I would say about 1.5 cm or so. The bullets had a red "ball" at the front, which was most likely rubber.

I am not saying all soldiers had those. Some had different weapons, but 6 or 7 out of 10 had those large rifles with big barrels.

The shots coming from the other side though, made holes through 2 "thai sized" concrete walls, so I could pretty confidently say those were not rubber bullets nor did they come from slingshots.

Not possible they were M79's? Just asking.

[whybother]

This can not be true.

There were many soldiers around my house in the middle of that shootout, and most soldiers had rifles with very large barrel, I would say about 1.5 cm or so. The bullets had a red "ball" at the front, which was most likely rubber.

I am not saying all soldiers had those. Some had different weapons, but 6 or 7 out of 10 had those large rifles with big barrels.

The shots coming from the other side though, made holes through 2 "thai sized" concrete walls, so I could pretty confidently say those were not rubber bullets nor did they come from slingshots.

Not possible they were M79's? Just asking.

Give it 15 minutes and someone will have video evidence that it was ... that they will show next week ... or sometime in the future ... or whenever, as long as they get a few red shirts to believe it is true.

[GentlemanJim]

This seems like another tactic to delay the whole procedure by another year or two by ordering the DSI as to what they should do. Who the hell is he anyway to give orders to the police, that is the job of the police and the public prosecutors. I hope Weng produced the proof that the army did not have any rubber bullets.

"Who the hell is he anyway to give orders to the police"

Nowhere in the OP does it say he ordered anyone to do anything. Twice he asked for something and twice he said he wanted something.

What point are you trying to make? He has 'asked' for four items of information/action and stated he 'wants' four more items of information/action. In terms of legal implications in Thailand then if he has asked or wants it then if it suits Government purposes (i.e a delay) then the police will be told to oblige. I state again, it is the job of the public prosecutor to demand evidence for criminal trials or investigations and not MP's who are sticking their noses in to protect their own interests or to score political points.

[Skywalker69]

Has Weng forgotten that the party line is that there were no red shirt militias and riots in 2010? Better he checks with wifey.

he will soon do a "Weng"

[creck]

This seems like another tactic to delay the whole procedure by another year or two by ordering the DSI as to what they should do. Who the hell is he anyway to give orders to the police, that is the job of the police and the public prosecutors. I hope Weng produced the proof that the army did not have any rubber bullets.

Good, relevant information is far more useful than quick information.

Unless all the possible queries are answered then the controversy will never end.

It is fairly easy to prove that the army had and issued and used rubber bullets. So I hope that proof is issued. The absence of that proof would shout very loudly. However, that live rounds were issued and used has never been questioned by any one as far as I know – that is far more important.

The orders and the issuer of those orders under which the live rounds were fired are the most important item. Why were no ‘Normal’ crowd dispersal apparatus used? The police failed but did not seem to really try very hard. Do armoured water cannon not exist in Thailand? Armoured bulldozers? Tear gas? – Oh! I forgot, the normal way for the Army is to come out shooting. They have done it so many times in Bangkok. Look at history; can the Army change its spots?

[whybother]

This seems like another tactic to delay the whole procedure by another year or two by ordering the DSI as to what they should do. Who the hell is he anyway to give orders to the police, that is the job of the police and the public prosecutors. I hope Weng produced the proof that the army did not have any rubber bullets.

Good, relevant information is far more useful than quick information.

Unless all the possible queries are answered then the controversy will never end.

It is fairly easy to prove that the army had and issued and used rubber bullets. So I hope that proof is issued. The absence of that proof would shout very loudly. However, that live rounds were issued and used has never been questioned by any one as far as I know – that is far more important.

The orders and the issuer of those orders under which the live rounds were fired are the most important item. Why were no ‘Normal’ crowd dispersal apparatus used? The police failed but did not seem to really try very hard. Do armoured water cannon not exist in Thailand? Armoured bulldozers? Tear gas? – Oh! I forgot, the normal way for the Army is to come out shooting. They have done it so many times in Bangkok. Look at history; can the Army change its spots?

They used 'Normal' crowd dispersal equipment at Thaicom and government house, when the protesters used molotov cocktails.

They were also had it on April 10. It's not much use against grenades though.

[SICHONSTEVE]

I doubt there are rubber bullets for AKA-47

"The use of rubber bullets will lessen the risk of fatalities while controlling crowds, the sources said.

The AK-47, a selective-fire, gas-operated 7.62x39mm assault rifle, was first developed in the Soviet Union by Mikhail Kalashnikov. AK-47 stands for Kalashnikov automatic rifle, 1947 model.

The rubber bullets from the AK-47 rifles may not prove fatal if not fired from a close range and if they don't hit a vital organ, the sources said".

footnote: the AKA-47 is AKA the AK-47.

Edited September 11, 2012 by SICHONSTEVE

[creck]

This seems like another tactic to delay the whole procedure by another year or two by ordering the DSI as to what they should do. Who the hell is he anyway to give orders to the police, that is the job of the police and the public prosecutors. I hope Weng produced the proof that the army did not have any rubber bullets.

Good, relevant information is far more useful than quick information.

Unless all the possible queries are answered then the controversy will never end.

It is fairly easy to prove that the army had and issued and used rubber bullets. So I hope that proof is issued. The absence of that proof would shout very loudly. However, that live rounds were issued and used has never been questioned by any one as far as I know – that is far more important.

The orders and the issuer of those orders under which the live rounds were fired are the most important item. Why were no ‘Normal’ crowd dispersal apparatus used? The police failed but did not seem to really try very hard. Do armoured water cannon not exist in Thailand? Armoured bulldozers? Tear gas? – Oh! I forgot, the normal way for the Army is to come out shooting. They have done it so many times in Bangkok. Look at history; can the Army change its spots?

They used 'Normal' crowd dispersal equipment at Thaicom and government house, when the protesters used molotov cocktails.

They were also had it on April 10. It's not much use against grenades though.

If you increase your own ferocity to match your opponent you will never bring an end until one side or the other is eliminated. Isn’t that what we see now? One side has to be more adult, more thoughtful, more clever, do the ‘security force’ want to win at any cost or do they want to bring a diplomatic end in a diplomatic country?

(Armoured water cannon will shield against grenades and blow away grenade throwers without injury to the security force.)

[SICHONSTEVE]

This seems like another tactic to delay the whole procedure by another year or two by ordering the DSI as to what they should do. Who the hell is he anyway to give orders to the police, that is the job of the police and the public prosecutors. I hope Weng produced the proof that the army did not have any rubber bullets.

Good, relevant information is far more useful than quick information.

Unless all the possible queries are answered then the controversy will never end.

It is fairly easy to prove that the army had and issued and used rubber bullets. So I hope that proof is issued. The absence of that proof would shout very loudly. However, that live rounds were issued and used has never been questioned by any one as far as I know – that is far more important.

The orders and the issuer of those orders under which the live rounds were fired are the most important item. Why were no ‘Normal’ crowd dispersal apparatus used? The police failed but did not seem to really try very hard. Do armoured water cannon not exist in Thailand? Armoured bulldozers? Tear gas? – Oh! I forgot, the normal way for the Army is to come out shooting. They have done it so many times in Bangkok. Look at history; can the Army change its spots?

They used 'Normal' crowd dispersal equipment at Thaicom and government house, when the protesters used molotov cocktails.

They were also had it on April 10. It's not much use against grenades though.

If you increase your own ferocity to match your opponent you will never bring an end until one side or the other is eliminated. Isn’t that what we see now? One side has to be more adult, more thoughtful, more clever, do the ‘security force’ want to win at any cost or do they want to bring a diplomatic end in a diplomatic country?

(Armoured water cannon will shield against grenades and blow away grenade throwers without injury to the security force.)

"Armoured water cannon will shield against grenades and blow away grenade throwers without injury to the security force."

It all depends on the relative position of the grenade and water at the crucial moment of time.

Edited September 11, 2012 by SICHONSTEVE

[whybother]

If you increase your own ferocity to match your opponent you will never bring an end until one side or the other is eliminated. Isn’t that what we see now? One side has to be more adult, more thoughtful, more clever, do the ‘security force’ want to win at any cost or do they want to bring a diplomatic end in a diplomatic country?

(Armoured water cannon will shield against grenades and blow away grenade throwers without injury to the security force.)

If you don't increase your own ferocity to match your opponent, all that happens is that you're opponent wins and you're eliminated.

Diplomatic solutions were offered to the red shirts and rejected.

[rubl]

Weng said he also asked the DSI to probe the death of Sergeant First Class Pongchalit Pittayanontakan on May 17, 2010 near Silom, to try to find out if he was killed by a militia force or security officials.

I'm really surprised here. This is a soldier, not a red-shirt. More over he's not on the list of 83 from one of our esteemed members here

[phiphidon]

Here we go again. What is about the Peu Thai? Do they think the world does not have eyes or ears. Red rioters seized the city - army finally had to clear it so what access did 'Weng' have to check the army? Since when were red supporters allowed access to army to make such assessments? Give it a rest. Get a life...

You can kind of see his point. Weng says they did not have rubber bullets - now when he said that, do you think it might be in response to the army saying their snipers, sorry marksmen, were only using rubber bullets.

Now take that a little bit further. These snipers/marksmen we are told were put in place to protect soldiers, well, officers on the ground who were under threat of deadly force.

Now what do you think would be the point of equipping the snipers/marksmen with only rubber bullets? They are there supposedly to protect their fellow officers with supposedly non deadly ammo (depends how near to one you are and where it hits you) but not much use if someone was armed with a war weapon, so are they lying?

Now you're Weng, you've seen the results of deadly fire from snipers (the number of head shots with high velocity bullets points to a fair bit of sniper activity) and you've got a bit of a gut feeling that the army are telling lies about using rubber bullets. He has a list of snipers and a list of dead bodies and where they were shot.I'd imagine he'd want to compare those two lists for evidence for the inquests.

There are inquests going on I'm sure you are aware. The army have already tried to intefere and delay the results.

Just my two satang worth...........

[phiphidon]

This seems like another tactic to delay the whole procedure by another year or two by ordering the DSI as to what they should do. Who the hell is he anyway to give orders to the police, that is the job of the police and the public prosecutors. I hope Weng produced the proof that the army did not have any rubber bullets.

Good, relevant information is far more useful than quick information.

Unless all the possible queries are answered then the controversy will never end.

It is fairly easy to prove that the army had and issued and used rubber bullets. So I hope that proof is issued. The absence of that proof would shout very loudly. However, that live rounds were issued and used has never been questioned by any one as far as I know – that is far more important.

The orders and the issuer of those orders under which the live rounds were fired are the most important item. Why were no ‘Normal’ crowd dispersal apparatus used? The police failed but did not seem to really try very hard. Do armoured water cannon not exist in Thailand? Armoured bulldozers? Tear gas? – Oh! I forgot, the normal way for the Army is to come out shooting. They have done it so many times in Bangkok. Look at history; can the Army change its spots?

They used 'Normal' crowd dispersal equipment at Thaicom and government house, when the protesters used molotov cocktails.

They were also had it on April 10. It's not much use against grenades though.

They also had M16's, shotguns and live ammunition as well. They work very well against unarmed protesters and Cameramen.

[SICHONSTEVE]

This seems like another tactic to delay the whole procedure by another year or two by ordering the DSI as to what they should do. Who the hell is he anyway to give orders to the police, that is the job of the police and the public prosecutors. I hope Weng produced the proof that the army did not have any rubber bullets.

Good, relevant information is far more useful than quick information.

Unless all the possible queries are answered then the controversy will never end.

It is fairly easy to prove that the army had and issued and used rubber bullets. So I hope that proof is issued. The absence of that proof would shout very loudly. However, that live rounds were issued and used has never been questioned by any one as far as I know – that is far more important.

The orders and the issuer of those orders under which the live rounds were fired are the most important item. Why were no ‘Normal’ crowd dispersal apparatus used? The police failed but did not seem to really try very hard. Do armoured water cannon not exist in Thailand? Armoured bulldozers? Tear gas? – Oh! I forgot, the normal way for the Army is to come out shooting. They have done it so many times in Bangkok. Look at history; can the Army change its spots?

They used 'Normal' crowd dispersal equipment at Thaicom and government house, when the protesters used molotov cocktails.

They were also had it on April 10. It's not much use against grenades though.

They also had M16's, shotguns and live ammunition as well. They work very well against unarmed protesters and Cameramen.

And........I suppose that those mysterious 'men in black' were using spud guns and water pistols that go bang that work well against people wearing uniform and those getting in the way of them!!!!.

Edited September 11, 2012 by SICHONSTEVE

[phiphidon]

Weng said he also asked the DSI to probe the death of Sergeant First Class Pongchalit Pittayanontakan on May 17, 2010 near Silom, to try to find out if he was killed by a militia force or security officials.

I'm really surprised here. This is a soldier, not a red-shirt. More over he's not on the list of 83 from one of our esteemed members here

Do you have a problem with that list rubl, I explained a couple of times so I thought would have understood by now? If you'd like to PM me I'm quite prepared to explain it to you again, no matter how long it takes. I just feel we shouldn't waste any more of the forums time just so you can have a little flame.

[givenall]

But these people are all liars ......

yeap and especially Weng Tojirakarn