Bullets May Have Come From Both Sides

[backtonormal]

Lets not these mention the hundreds of video clips and eye witness accounts of the reds shirts carrying, using and proudly displaying these assault weapons.

Bullets may have come from both sides

Why do they keep saying this? Is there really any doubt? Really!

Your quote is the title and what was really said is

However, in the fifth case, the court said it could not determine which side the bullets came from inferring bullets may have come from a different direction. Which does not imply it was redshirts. It could easily have been army snipers.

[backtonormal]

Som num na, they got what they deserved. No city in the world would have been as tolerant as long as this one was, before finally having to relieve Bangkok of these people. First negotiation, offers of settlement (which were ignored), then requests to disperse, then demands to vacate, and finally military - what did they expect? Try laying siege to any western country and see what the police will do. No sympathy from me that's for sure.

They would be using RUBBER bullets and TEAR Gas, NOT live ammunition. For goodness sake, which western country would turn their army loose on civillian protesters with live ammunition. That is criminal respective of how long the protests had been running. Surely somebody has to answer for this bastardly order.

The indiscriminate use of live ammunition................

Those responsible and in command will, I hope, eventually be brought to court.

From the top down.

Lets take it a little further. The authorised killing of innocent people. Granted some may not be but most were no threat to army personnel or precious buildngs

[backtonormal]

Som num na, they got what they deserved. No city in the world would have been as tolerant as long as this one was, before finally having to relieve Bangkok of these people. First negotiation, offers of settlement (which were ignored), then requests to disperse, then demands to vacate, and finally military - what did they expect? Try laying siege to any western country and see what the police will do. No sympathy from me that's for sure.

They would be using RUBBER bullets and TEAR Gas, NOT live ammunition. For goodness sake, which western country would turn their army loose on civillian protesters with live ammunition. That is criminal respective of how long the protests had been running. Surely somebody has to answer for this bastardly order.

It's a shame that the red-villages also have internet-connection. Otherwise I wouldn't see comments like yours.

Bastardly order - hahahahaha. I am sure, you don't know what you are talking about.

There were also civilian (unarmed) protestors, but they are stupid when they don't leave the scene (they had many weeks time to do so) when they realise that they are on the same side with heavily armed terrorists.

Don't you know, what was going on before the army did what they finally had to do (and the western armies would have done this weeks before).

Please link to pictures of the weapons they recovered after the final assault. If they found weapons the Dems would have been all so quick to display them. I only want links to photos after the final day not PR images displayed to justify the final slaughter

[dcutman]

Lets not these mention the hundreds of video clips and eye witness accounts of the reds shirts carrying, using and proudly displaying these assault weapons.

Bullets may have come from both sides

Why do they keep saying this? Is there really any doubt? Really!

Your quote is the title and what was really said is

However, in the fifth case, the court said it could not determine which side the bullets came from inferring bullets may have come from a different direction. Which does not imply it was redshirts. It could easily have been army snipers.

Yeh, so what.

Are you implying that the redshirts had no weapons and where not shooting at the military at any time during the protests.

[473geo]

Som num na, they got what they deserved. No city in the world would have been as tolerant as long as this one was, before finally having to relieve Bangkok of these people. First negotiation, offers of settlement (which were ignored), then requests to disperse, then demands to vacate, and finally military - what did they expect? Try laying siege to any western country and see what the police will do. No sympathy from me that's for sure.

They would be using RUBBER bullets and TEAR Gas, NOT live ammunition. For goodness sake, which western country would turn their army loose on civillian protesters with live ammunition. That is criminal respective of how long the protests had been running. Surely somebody has to answer for this bastardly order.

The indiscriminate use of live ammunition................

Those responsible and in command will, I hope, eventually be brought to court.

From the top down.

I hope you are including all red/black shirts who used live weapons too:) Don't tell me there is no evidence of that.... Can't have double standards can we...

That might be a little difficult.......didn't our friend Mick suggest the men in black were Russian mercenaries who only communicated in sign language Edited January 27, 2013 by 473geo

[Terry Newman]

Note to self:

Dont talk politics in TL

religion is a MUCH safer subject!

this is actually a good point. It is like having a conversation with a tree.

[Bluespunk]

Som num na, they got what they deserved. No city in the world would have been as tolerant as long as this one was, before finally having to relieve Bangkok of these people. First negotiation, offers of settlement (which were ignored), then requests to disperse, then demands to vacate, and finally military - what did they expect? Try laying siege to any western country and see what the police will do. No sympathy from me that's for sure.

They would be using RUBBER bullets and TEAR Gas, NOT live ammunition. For goodness sake, which western country would turn their army loose on civillian protesters with live ammunition. That is criminal respective of how long the protests had been running. Surely somebody has to answer for this bastardly order.

The indiscriminate use of live ammunition................

Those responsible and in command will, I hope, eventually be brought to court.

From the top down.

Lets take it a little further. The authorised killing of innocent people. Granted some may not be but most were no threat to army personnel or precious buildings

Maybe but unfortunately there are many occasions when armed terrorist scum hide amongst civilians. And also when they are hidden by civilians.

Edited January 27, 2013 by Bluespunk

[dcutman]

Som num na, they got what they deserved. No city in the world would have been as tolerant as long as this one was, before finally having to relieve Bangkok of these people. First negotiation, offers of settlement (which were ignored), then requests to disperse, then demands to vacate, and finally military - what did they expect? Try laying siege to any western country and see what the police will do. No sympathy from me that's for sure.

They would be using RUBBER bullets and TEAR Gas, NOT live ammunition. For goodness sake, which western country would turn their army loose on civillian protesters with live ammunition. That is criminal respective of how long the protests had been running. Surely somebody has to answer for this bastardly order.

The indiscriminate use of live ammunition................

Those responsible and in command will, I hope, eventually be brought to court.

From the top down.

Lets take it a little further. The authorised killing of innocent people. Granted some may not be but most were no threat to army personnel or precious buildngs

You do realize how stupid that makes you sound, right?

[rubl]

Boonmee: Hit by a round of .223 bullets used in assault rifles - the type of bullets that also injured soldiers. Hence, there is cause to suspect that the troops were not the only ones armed with assault rifles.

Thus, the inquest concluded that though a round of .223 bullets hit Boonmee, it could not be determined which side was responsible for his death.

Shots fired from more than one side. Boonmee hit and succumbing a month later. Soldiers injured as well. That's all it says. The rest I read here is the usual speculation I've been reading here for close to three years now. Peaceful protesters, a few not so peaceful protesters. Soldiers shooting, unknowns shooting. UDD leaders telling all "it's over, please go home".

If some of the unknowns are (ex-)army will they qualify as protester and be part of the amnesty bill ?

[hellodolly]

Som num na, they got what they deserved. No city in the world would have been as tolerant as long as this one was, before finally having to relieve Bangkok of these people. First negotiation, offers of settlement (which were ignored), then requests to disperse, then demands to vacate, and finally military - what did they expect? Try laying siege to any western country and see what the police will do. No sympathy from me that's for sure.

They would be using RUBBER bullets and TEAR Gas, NOT live ammunition. For goodness sake, which western country would turn their army loose on civillian protesters with live ammunition. That is criminal respective of how long the protests had been running. Surely somebody has to answer for this bastardly order.

The indiscriminate use of live ammunition................

Those responsible and in command will, I hope, eventually be brought to court.

From the top down.

I don't think Thaksin is going to be touched so much for the top.

[ianf]

<<the armed dispersal of protesters>>

what a nice sympathetic manner to describe an all out 6 day military assault on a protest site.

Yes, excellent point. One does have to wonder why it would take a 6 day, military assault to clear out unarmed, peaceful protesters. I can only assume the slow progress was caused by advanced troops firing back towards their own comrades.

"Unarmed"????? - I don't think so!

[473geo]

Sure there were occasions where shots were fired from both sides, the majority of prolonged exchanges took place outside the protest camp, the questions being raised here surround the exchanges where fire was not returned on a scale which merited actions taken by the mlitary. The strange thing here is the clamour to blame Thaksin for all the mayhem.....when in reality the government committed the major gaff, the government understimated, lost control, tried to disperse at Phan Fah used live ammunition, failed, exacerbated the situation, lost control again, and subsequently used live ammunition on their fellow Thai in an attempt to rectify their incompetent handling of the whole situation.

[dcutman]

<<the armed dispersal of protesters>>

what a nice sympathetic manner to describe an all out 6 day military assault on a protest site.

Yes, excellent point. One does have to wonder why it would take a 6 day, military assault to clear out unarmed, peaceful protesters. I can only assume the slow progress was caused by advanced troops firing back towards their own comrades.

"Unarmed"????? - I don't think so!

So sorry. I did not intend to make my sarcasm so subtle.

[hellodolly]

If a verbal warning was given then that is it, case over. The reporters said they heard a verbal warning so end of story.

Soldiers are required to give a verbal warning before firing, most people in here would know and agree with this.

Most people in here would have enough smarts to stay out of a war zone. Notice I said most not all.

[hellodolly]

Som num na, they got what they deserved. No city in the world would have been as tolerant as long as this one was, before finally having to relieve Bangkok of these people. First negotiation, offers of settlement (which were ignored), then requests to disperse, then demands to vacate, and finally military - what did they expect? Try laying siege to any western country and see what the police will do. No sympathy from me that's for sure.

They would be using RUBBER bullets and TEAR Gas, NOT live ammunition. For goodness sake, which western country would turn their army loose on civillian protesters with live ammunition. That is criminal respective of how long the protests had been running. Surely somebody has to answer for this bastardly order.

The indiscriminate use of live ammunition................

Those responsible and in command will, I hope, eventually be brought to court.

From the top down.

Lets take it a little further. The authorised killing of innocent people. Granted some may not be but most were no threat to army personnel or precious buildngs

I for one am confused what is an innocent person. They were all knowingly in a war zone some were firing bullets some were handing them the bullets some were cooking and washing for them some were building barricades for them it was one big team effort how does some one go about picking the innocents out of that.

I can see it now here is your diner and when you get done eating it go out and shoot at the soldiers and public transport stations and when you get done come on back I will wash your clothes for you.

It is OK because I am innocent I am not doing any thing wrong. Thaksin said it was OK for me to camp out here with you no matter what the government says. I am innocent just ask Thaksin, philw and backtonormal. They will tell you.

[hellodolly]

Sure there were occasions where shots were fired from both sides, the majority of prolonged exchanges took place outside the protest camp, the questions being raised here surround the exchanges where fire was not returned on a scale which merited actions taken by the mlitary. The strange thing here is the clamour to blame Thaksin for all the mayhem.....when in reality the government committed the major gaff, the government understimated, lost control, tried to disperse at Phan Fah used live ammunition, failed, exacerbated the situation, lost control again, and subsequently used live ammunition on their fellow Thai in an attempt to rectify their incompetent handling of the whole situation.

Agreed it was incompetent handling of the situation. How ever who planed and paid for it. The red shirts had there peaceful armed rally and then moved on to non peaceful actions the illegal seizure of government property. The firing of guns and killing of soldiers the invasion of a hospital the firing of rockets at a public transport station the attempt to burn Bangkok down. And through all this the big boys got paid and when it became obvious to them (it had been 0bvious to any one with a 1st. grade education) that they were not going to win they stopped paying the flunkies and told them to carry on.

Hard to imagine An Oxford Grad letting things get that far out of hand but he did and the red shirts took advantage of it.

[dcutman]

Sure there were occasions where shots were fired from both sides, the majority of prolonged exchanges took place outside the protest camp, the questions being raised here surround the exchanges where fire was not returned on a scale which merited actions taken by the mlitary. The strange thing here is the clamour to blame Thaksin for all the mayhem.....when in reality the government committed the major gaff, the government understimated, lost control, tried to disperse at Phan Fah used live ammunition, failed, exacerbated the situation, lost control again, and subsequently used live ammunition on their fellow Thai in an attempt to rectify their incompetent handling of the whole situation.

OMG!!! Mark this moment in TVF history. A through and through red apologist admits, armed protesters firing at military

."fire was not returned on a scale which merited actions taken by the mlitary".

You are joking right?

If a protest is peaceful, as you and your redshirt loving group have defended like a dogs love for a bone, there would been no exchange of gunfire, in fact the military would not have even been there or needed.

Now Geo digest that for a moment before responding. There is no need for you and your group to look so foolish any longer, trying to defend terrorists.

Edited January 27, 2013 by dcutman

[473geo]

Sure there were occasions where shots were fired from both sides, the majority of prolonged exchanges took place outside the protest camp, the questions being raised here surround the exchanges where fire was not returned on a scale which merited actions taken by the mlitary. The strange thing here is the clamour to blame Thaksin for all the mayhem.....when in reality the government committed the major gaff, the government understimated, lost control, tried to disperse at Phan Fah used live ammunition, failed, exacerbated the situation, lost control again, and subsequently used live ammunition on their fellow Thai in an attempt to rectify their incompetent handling of the whole situation.

OMG!!! Mark this moment in TVF history. A through and through red apologist admits, armed protesters firing at military

."fire was not returned on a scale which merited actions taken by the mlitary".

You are joking right?

If a protest is peaceful, as you and your redshirt loving group have defended like a dogs love for a bone, there would been no exchange of gunfire, in fact the military would not have even been there or needed.

Now Geo digest that for a moment before responding. There is no need for you and your group to look so foolish any longer, trying to defend terrorist.

Now after all this time, you, want to argue the scale of gunfire exchanged

Think fire fight, you recall the actions outside the protest camp? returning fire and I have no sympathy for those who entered into such confrontation, then cast your mind across to the Temple incident, now was fire returned? or was the action of the military excessive as has been suggested, As usual here we see an attempted blanket covering by you of all aspects, that's your flaw dcutman, you follow the same route as the government did, lack of attention to detail......and it is all in the detail.... Edited January 27, 2013 by 473geo

[ramrod711]

Those responsible and in command will, I hope, eventually be brought to court.

From the top down.

Thaksin Skypes

.

Nice pic of a man using a telephone.

Not exactly a rare occurrence.

Does you photo collection extend to a pic of a person holding a pen or pencil ???

If so, do please share.

I'd like to see a photo of a man telling people that they won't have to wait for their 500 baht if they come to Bangkok.

[hellodolly]

Sure there were occasions where shots were fired from both sides, the majority of prolonged exchanges took place outside the protest camp, the questions being raised here surround the exchanges where fire was not returned on a scale which merited actions taken by the mlitary. The strange thing here is the clamour to blame Thaksin for all the mayhem.....when in reality the government committed the major gaff, the government understimated, lost control, tried to disperse at Phan Fah used live ammunition, failed, exacerbated the situation, lost control again, and subsequently used live ammunition on their fellow Thai in an attempt to rectify their incompetent handling of the whole situation.

OMG!!! Mark this moment in TVF history. A through and through red apologist admits, armed protesters firing at military

."fire was not returned on a scale which merited actions taken by the mlitary".

You are joking right?

If a protest is peaceful, as you and your redshirt loving group have defended like a dogs love for a bone, there would been no exchange of gunfire, in fact the military would not have even been there or needed.

Now Geo digest that for a moment before responding. There is no need for you and your group to look so foolish any longer, trying to defend terrorist.

Now after all this time, you, want to argue the scale of gunfire exchanged

Think fire fight, you recall the actions outside the protest camp? returning fire and I have no sympathy for those who entered into such confrontation, then cast your mind across to the Temple incident, now was fire returned? or was the action of the military excessive as has been suggested, As usual here we see an attempted blanket covering by you of all aspects, that's your flaw dcutman, you follow the same route as the government did, lack of attention to detail......and it is all in the detail....

Just curios what did the red shirts get out of paying of to the detail other than 90 dead. Well some of them got a ton of money. But other than that what?

Are you saying that the red shirts were in the wrong until the temple incident. If it hadn't been for that you would be anti Thaksin?

[A_Traveller]

Those responsible and in command will, I hope, eventually be brought to court.

From the top down.

Thaksin Skypes

.

The image above is referring, I assume, to the recent 25 Jan 2013 article in the International Herald Tribune by Thomas Fuller which presently resides behind pay-walls. I referred to it yesterday in another thread http://www.thaivisa....25#entry6054837 The article seems to underscore just how much Thaksin is actively involved today and was it ever so.

Regards

Edited January 27, 2013 by A_Traveller

[473geo]

Sure there were occasions where shots were fired from both sides, the majority of prolonged exchanges took place outside the protest camp, the questions being raised here surround the exchanges where fire was not returned on a scale which merited actions taken by the mlitary. The strange thing here is the clamour to blame Thaksin for all the mayhem.....when in reality the government committed the major gaff, the government understimated, lost control, tried to disperse at Phan Fah used live ammunition, failed, exacerbated the situation, lost control again, and subsequently used live ammunition on their fellow Thai in an attempt to rectify their incompetent handling of the whole situation.

OMG!!! Mark this moment in TVF history. A through and through red apologist admits, armed protesters firing at military

."fire was not returned on a scale which merited actions taken by the mlitary".

You are joking right?

If a protest is peaceful, as you and your redshirt loving group have defended like a dogs love for a bone, there would been no exchange of gunfire, in fact the military would not have even been there or needed.

Now Geo digest that for a moment before responding. There is no need for you and your group to look so foolish any longer, trying to defend terrorist.

Now after all this time, you, want to argue the scale of gunfire exchanged

Think fire fight, you recall the actions outside the protest camp? returning fire and I have no sympathy for those who entered into such confrontation, then cast your mind across to the Temple incident, now was fire returned? or was the action of the military excessive as has been suggested, As usual here we see an attempted blanket covering by you of all aspects, that's your flaw dcutman, you follow the same route as the government did, lack of attention to detail......and it is all in the detail....

Just curios what did the red shirts get out of paying of to the detail other than 90 dead. Well some of them got a ton of money. But other than that what?

Are you saying that the red shirts were in the wrong until the temple incident. If it hadn't been for that you would be anti Thaksin?

Sorry Dolly can't make out exactly what words you are trying to put in my mouth......what I will say is please do not make stuff up that I am supposed to be saying, as you appear already to be rather struggling to comprehend what I do actually say.....the protest if you recall was to get the government who did not have a mandate from the electorate, to step down....you think this wasn't achieved....fine up to you.....the detail missing from this scenario is why the government felt the need to cling to power for a few more measley months, and why they employed such excessive measures to achieve this end....any ideas?

[whybother]

Sorry Dolly can't make out exactly what words you are trying to put in my mouth......what I will say is please do not make stuff up that I am supposed to be saying, as you appear already to be rather struggling to comprehend what I do actually say.....the protest if you recall was to get the government who did not have a mandate from the electorate, to step down....you think this wasn't achieved....fine up to you.....the detail missing from this scenario is why the government felt the need to cling to power for a few more measley months, and why they employed such excessive measures to achieve this end....any ideas?

They had the support of the majority of MPs (ie the majority of the representatives of the electorate). Why should they step down? They had every right to wait until the election was due.

[A_Traveller]

[in reply to 473geo default response Post 52]

What unmitigated nonsense. Given your reply in another thread about remote control Thaksin, I had begun to wonder if you were in fact David Icke. [No politicians govern etc. since they are shape-shifting trans-dimensional reptilian aliens, thanks David].

The cognitive dissonance of the post is striking, and is back to the constitutionally invalid [be it present or '97 or prior charters] position that the election of a Prime Minster under the law by the peoples representatives is magically insufficient to form a government. Secondly you yourself make the point that the parliamentary session had little time left to run, so why ignore the law and try to force [in every meaning of the word] an election. It is equally nonsensical but you don't see that, despite your written words.

Curiouser and curiouser.

Edit Typo

Edited January 27, 2013 by A_Traveller

[473geo]

Sorry Dolly can't make out exactly what words you are trying to put in my mouth......what I will say is please do not make stuff up that I am supposed to be saying, as you appear already to be rather struggling to comprehend what I do actually say.....the protest if you recall was to get the government who did not have a mandate from the electorate, to step down....you think this wasn't achieved....fine up to you.....the detail missing from this scenario is why the government felt the need to cling to power for a few more measley months, and why they employed such excessive measures to achieve this end....any ideas?

They had the support of the majority of MPs (ie the majority of the representatives of the electorate). Why should they step down? They had every right to wait until the election was due.

Let's not go down this off topic route whybother....in my opinion they had no mandate from the electorate, your opinion differs I can accept that......but why did the government of the day feel the need to use the tactics they did when they had the option step down and correctly let the electorate have their say? all this who shot first would have been avoided

[marstons]

Som num na, they got what they deserved. No city in the world would have been as tolerant as long as this one was, before finally having to relieve Bangkok of these people. First negotiation, offers of settlement (which were ignored), then requests to disperse, then demands to vacate, and finally military - what did they expect? Try laying siege to any western country and see what the police will do. No sympathy from me that's for sure.

agreed and no other country in the world would let a mob just walk into its major airport and close it down totally unopposed.

Reds, yellows, blues etc all deserve each other and will as a result of their actions suffer the consequences in the future. Just cant handle democracy ?

[473geo]

[in reply to 473geo default response Post 52]

What unmitigated nonsense. Given your reply in another thread about remote control Thaksin, I had begun to wonder if you were in fact David Icke. [No politicians govern etc. since they are shape-shifting trans-dimensional reptilian aliens, thanks David].

The cognitive dissonance of the post is striking, and is back to the constitutionally invalid [be it present or '97 or prior charters] position that the election of a Prime Minster under the law by the peoples representatives is magically insufficient to form a government. Secondly you yourself make the point that the parliamentary session had little time left to run, so why ignore the law and try to force [in every meaning of the word] an election. It is equally nonsensical but you don't see that, despite your written words.

Curiouser and curiouser.

Edit Typo

Ah yes the eventual attempt to insult and goad, and as usual on the off topic part of the thread, no cognative response to all my other entries? being waiting for achance to jump in have we? not much in your post contributing to the thread....so all I can say is failed

[dcutman]

Sure there were occasions where shots were fired from both sides, the majority of prolonged exchanges took place outside the protest camp, the questions being raised here surround the exchanges where fire was not returned on a scale which merited actions taken by the mlitary. The strange thing here is the clamour to blame Thaksin for all the mayhem.....when in reality the government committed the major gaff, the government understimated, lost control, tried to disperse at Phan Fah used live ammunition, failed, exacerbated the situation, lost control again, and subsequently used live ammunition on their fellow Thai in an attempt to rectify their incompetent handling of the whole situation.

OMG!!! Mark this moment in TVF history. A through and through red apologist admits, armed protesters firing at military

."fire was not returned on a scale which merited actions taken by the mlitary".

You are joking right?

If a protest is peaceful, as you and your redshirt loving group have defended like a dogs love for a bone, there would been no exchange of gunfire, in fact the military would not have even been there or needed.

Now Geo digest that for a moment before responding. There is no need for you and your group to look so foolish any longer, trying to defend terrorist.

Now after all this time, you, want to argue the scale of gunfire exchanged

Think fire fight, you recall the actions outside the protest camp? returning fire and I have no sympathy for those who entered into such confrontation, then cast your mind across to the Temple incident, now was fire returned? or was the action of the military excessive as has been suggested, As usual here we see an attempted blanket covering by you of all aspects, that's your flaw dcutman, you follow the same route as the government did, lack of attention to detail......and it is all in the detail....

Geo, it is only your thinking that is flawed. You talk of fire fights and shooting incidents as if there was no choices. The fact of the matter is, if the redshirt leaders had peaceful intentions and composed themselves, as true leaders should, there would have been no military presence needed for crowd control, no fire fights, incidents at temples, and certainly no deaths.

But instead these so called leaders where looking for a fight and enraged their supporters with hateful destructive speeches, with one goal in mind, to cause total chaos within the city/country.

lack of attention to detail......and it is all in the detail....Sorry. but not sure what all that babble is about.

[473geo]

Well not much point in trying to debate with those who cannot accept the government made mistakes....such a shallow pro authoritarian attitude is disconcerting for sure......you want to see who had peaceful intentions....dig this thread out running at the time of the run up to the protests....quite an eye opener the early posts by Tvisa members.......

Bangkok Traffic Police Preparing For A Tough Saturday

Started by webfact, 2010-03-19 07:25

[kimamey]

Those responsible and in command will, I hope, eventually be brought to court.

From the top down.

Thaksin Skypes

.

Nice pic of a man using a telephone.

Not exactly a rare occurrence.

Does you photo collection extend to a pic of a person holding a pen or pencil ???

If so, do please share.

It's also a picture of a man wearing a shirt and sitting in a chair but I don't think that's the point is it?