' Bullets Came From Thai Military Side': Witness To The Death Of Italian Journalist 2010

[jayboy]

Because they were being fired upon by real live killer bullets and they responded in kind.

What was the Thai military's excuse for using live ammunition before they were fired upon?

They lied about firing live ammo and said they were firing blanks. Video evidence clearly showed them firing live ammunition towards unarmed protesters, using M16's without muzzle adapters.

The Thai military has (and still maintains) a disgraceful record and attitude towards human rights. I do wonder why so many posters take their word at face value? Blinkered hatred and obsession for the man in Dubai I suspect.

With regards the protests in 2010, some of us don't need to take the military's word for anything, because we were here in Bangkok and saw with our own eyes exactly what the situation was and exactly what the dangers were out there.

And with regards the military's "disgraceful human rights record", there is not much the military can do now about things that happened 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago, things that happened before many of them were even born, they can only deal with the now and try and do what is right at this moment; and judging events over the last decade, it's not the military the ones with the disgraceful human rights record, it's the politicians, the protest leaders and the protesters themselves who have clearly taken that particular mantle.

Agreed many of us were in Bangkok at the time, including me, and were able to assess the situation personally.Nobody but a fool would claim that presence on the ground gave an all embracing understanding - though some fools do just that.

As to the military's appalling record of murdering civilians (I was around for much of that in the 1970's and 1980's) I think the onus of proof is on those who maintain the army's attitude and behaviour has changed.I don't see much evidence for that.As for politicians responsibility I tend to agree, and this is why Abhisit and Suthep are being investigated.Your suggestion that protestors (whether yellow or red) are somehow human rights abusers is just plain silly however.Still any old nonsense will do if it diverts attention away from the thread - responsibility for the murder of the Italian journalist.Right?

[rixalex]

Agreed many of us were in Bangkok at the time, including me, and were able to assess the situation personally.Nobody but a fool would claim that presence on the ground gave an all embracing understanding - though some fools do just that.

Must be my memory failing me, but i seem to have distinct recollections of prior discussions with you around the actual time of the protests, in which you argued that just because you weren't living in Thailand, you were no less able to judge on the situation than anybody else.

Anyway, my failing memory aside, i don't think being present gives one an all embracing understanding, but it does go a long way. Were this a discussion about any other event of historical importance in some other part of the world, i'd certainly be more interested in hearing from those people who lived through it and who saw things with their own eyes, than those who were miles and miles away and who have done a bit of googling.

[rixalex]

As to the military's appalling record of murdering civilians (I was around for much of that in the 1970's and 1980's) I think the onus of proof is on those who maintain the army's attitude and behaviour has changed.

I think you have the onus of proof thing back to front. When it comes to murdering civilians, you can't simply surmise, well they've done it before, they must have done it again.

[rixalex]

Your suggestion that protestors (whether yellow or red) are somehow human rights abusers is just plain silly however.

Why? and do you also include protest leaders as being incapable of committing this crime?

[OzMick]

Agreed many of us were in Bangkok at the time, including me, and were able to assess the situation personally.Nobody but a fool would claim that presence on the ground gave an all embracing understanding - though some fools do just that.

Must be my memory failing me, but i seem to have distinct recollections of prior discussions with you around the actual time of the protests, in which you argued that just because you weren't living in Thailand, you were no less able to judge on the situation than anybody else.

Anyway, my failing memory aside, i don't think being present gives one an all embracing understanding, but it does go a long way. Were this a discussion about any other event of historical importance in some other part of the world, i'd certainly be more interested in hearing from those people who lived through it and who saw things with their own eyes, than those who were miles and miles away and who have done a bit of googling.

An interesting debating tactic - to take your statement, raise it to an impossibly high level, then say that only a fool could believe this. That may be true, but bears little resemblance to your original statement, which you then have to defend, leading into a strawman argument.

OTOH flat statements that HE makes are defended as "not-even-suggested" remotely possible options. And of course, almost anything is remotely possible, even lies.

[rubl]

It's getting real nice here again. Nothing new though.

BTW rubber bullets have somewhat limited effect when you have an incoming grenade lobbed by peaceful protesters who want to show they're not terrorists like those down South who kill to frighten.

[waza]

I know it is off topic but I would like to address some other members post.

Firstly yourauntbob claimed that "Democracy monument was the first time that shots were fired, "i dont see any MIB or weapons among the protesters. Who was antagonizing who in the beginning? The military shooting while having no threat to them." http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/626195-bullets-came-from-thai-military-side-witness-to-the-death-of-italian-journalist-2010/?p=6211267

The following video clearly shows the MIB took first blood with their granade attack on the army command post............

Secondly I would like to address oldsailor35 post , " As clearly seen in the second video the Army did initially use rubber bullets against the unarmed protestors, However, once the protestor commenced the use of live fire against the troop the troop retaliated by firing live rounds over their heads......... http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/626195-bullets-came-from-thai-military-side-witness-to-the-death-of-italian-journalist-2010/?p=6212706

Thirdly, FarangTalk claim that....."They lied about firing live ammo and said they were firing blanks. Video evidence clearly showed them firing live ammunition towards unarmed protesters, using M16's without muzzle adapters." http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/626195-bullets-came-from-thai-military-side-witness-to-the-death-of-italian-journalist-2010/?p=6212843

The video clearly shows the troops open fired with live rounds after the redshirts/blackshirts/ronins took first blood and the didnt fire directly towards the protestor as this would have been a massacre and there would have been hundreds of casualties, they did in fact fire in the air as clearly seen in the following video. Furthermore, I believe the troops showed amazing restraint, they were under live fire and their command center was taken out but they still fired in the air, not at the armed protestors who were using the unarmed protestors as a human shield.........

Edited March 17, 2013 by waza

[Orac]

Agreed many of us were in Bangkok at the time, including me, and were able to assess the situation personally.Nobody but a fool would claim that presence on the ground gave an all embracing understanding - though some fools do just that.

Must be my memory failing me, but i seem to have distinct recollections of prior discussions with you around the actual time of the protests, in which you argued that just because you weren't living in Thailand, you were no less able to judge on the situation than anybody else.

Anyway, my failing memory aside, i don't think being present gives one an all embracing understanding, but it does go a long way. Were this a discussion about any other event of historical importance in some other part of the world, i'd certainly be more interested in hearing from those people who lived through it and who saw things with their own eyes, than those who were miles and miles away and who have done a bit of googling.

Surely the whole point of this thread is it is about the testimony to an inquest of someone who not only lived through these events but is also an accreditted journalist who took a bullet in the process. He has clearly stated that the gunfire came from the military positions and that was where the bullet that hit him came from as well - no mention of any firing from other directions.

[473geo]

It's getting real nice here again. Nothing new though.

BTW rubber bullets have somewhat limited effect when you have an incoming grenade lobbed by peaceful protesters who want to show they're not terrorists like those down South who kill to frighten.

Perhaps just firing into the air Rubl......apparently aceptable to some here, even if the occasional death appears as a result of the action!!

[rixalex]

Agreed many of us were in Bangkok at the time, including me, and were able to assess the situation personally.Nobody but a fool would claim that presence on the ground gave an all embracing understanding - though some fools do just that.

Must be my memory failing me, but i seem to have distinct recollections of prior discussions with you around the actual time of the protests, in which you argued that just because you weren't living in Thailand, you were no less able to judge on the situation than anybody else.

Anyway, my failing memory aside, i don't think being present gives one an all embracing understanding, but it does go a long way. Were this a discussion about any other event of historical importance in some other part of the world, i'd certainly be more interested in hearing from those people who lived through it and who saw things with their own eyes, than those who were miles and miles away and who have done a bit of googling.

Surely the whole point of this thread is it is about the testimony to an inquest of someone who not only lived through these events but is also an accreditted journalist who took a bullet in the process. He has clearly stated that the gunfire came from the military positions and that was where the bullet that hit him came from as well - no mention of any firing from other directions.

I agree.

I was responding at the beginning of what you have quoted, to FarangTalk, who was questioning why people took the military's words with regards what happened in 2010 at face value, by pointing out that if you were actually here experiencing it, it need not only be about what someone else is saying, it's also about what you were seeing with your own eyes. Not that being here would necessarily give you the all embracing understanding that jayboy misrepresented me as meaning, but simply that you have something first hand to go on.

The accredited journalist who was shot certainly has a lot of first hand information to go on and i take anything he says extremely seriously.

[bigbamboo]

Because they were being fired upon by real live killer bullets and they responded in kind.

What was the Thai military's excuse for using live ammunition before they were fired upon?

They lied about firing live ammo and said they were firing blanks. Video evidence clearly showed them firing live ammunition towards unarmed protesters, using M16's without muzzle adapters.

The Thai military has (and still maintains) a disgraceful record and attitude towards human rights. I do wonder why so many posters take their word at face value? Blinkered hatred and obsession for the man in Dubai I suspect.

If only the man in Dubai hadn't incited the trouble in the first place then no one would have been killed.

[Pimay1]

Because they were being fired upon by real live killer bullets and they responded in kind.

What was the Thai military's excuse for using live ammunition before they were fired upon?

They lied about firing live ammo and said they were firing blanks. Video evidence clearly showed them firing live ammunition towards unarmed protesters, using M16's without muzzle adapters.

The Thai military has (and still maintains) a disgraceful record and attitude towards human rights. I do wonder why so many posters take their word at face value? Blinkered hatred and obsession for the man in Dubai I suspect.

If only the man in Dubai hadn't incited the trouble in the first place then no one would have been killed.

You are right on the money. I find it really odd that the foreigners knowing Thaksin organized the reds, funded them and directed them like a herd of sheep during the Bangkok campaign through the numerous Skype calls to the center stage, still defend him and deny he is responsible for mess the country is in today.

[473geo]

Because they were being fired upon by real live killer bullets and they responded in kind.

What was the Thai military's excuse for using live ammunition before they were fired upon?

They lied about firing live ammo and said they were firing blanks. Video evidence clearly showed them firing live ammunition towards unarmed protesters, using M16's without muzzle adapters.

The Thai military has (and still maintains) a disgraceful record and attitude towards human rights. I do wonder why so many posters take their word at face value? Blinkered hatred and obsession for the man in Dubai I suspect.

If only the man in Dubai hadn't incited the trouble in the first place then no one would have been killed.

You are right on the money. I find it really odd that the foreigners knowing Thaksin organized the reds, funded them and directed them like a herd of sheep during the Bangkok campaign through the numerous Skype calls to the center stage, still defend him and deny he is responsible for mess the country is in today.

Perhaps they feel that those who created the void that Thaksin conveniently stepped into, carry an equal part of the blame for ' the mess the country is in today'

[philw]

Very perceptive point, 473.

Very.

[philw]

Because they were being fired upon by real live killer bullets and they responded in kind.

What was the Thai military's excuse for using live ammunition before they were fired upon?

They lied about firing live ammo and said they were firing blanks. Video evidence clearly showed them firing live ammunition towards unarmed protesters, using M16's without muzzle adapters.

The Thai military has (and still maintains) a disgraceful record and attitude towards human rights. I do wonder why so many posters take their word at face value? Blinkered hatred and obsession for the man in Dubai I suspect.

If only the man in Dubai hadn't incited the trouble in the first place then no one would have been killed.

You are right on the money. I find it really odd that the foreigners knowing Thaksin organized the reds, funded them and directed them like a herd of sheep during the Bangkok campaign through the numerous Skype calls to the center stage, still defend him and deny he is responsible for mess the country is in today.

Can you point to ANY posts defending Thaksin ??

Any ???

[OzMick]

Perhaps they feel that those who created the void that Thaksin conveniently stepped into, carry an equal part of the blame for ' the mess the country is in today'

A corrupt businessman who used his ill-gotten gains to buy equally corrupt politicians - stepped into a void. And helped himself.

[A_Traveller]

Perhaps they feel that those who created the void that Thaksin conveniently stepped into, carry an equal part of the blame for ' the mess the country is in today'

What a breathtakingly foolish statement. Thakisn did not step into any void, he used the legendary "blessed" 1997 Constitution to maximise the ability of his "new" [in point of fact a crafted amalgam of existing politicos, money networks [predominantly the money lenders and loans sharks] party to portray itself as some great beacon of development [no corruption, after all he was too rich for that so he said] and used [by virtue of a raft of foreign campaign advisers {US, Brits, Germans}] the promises to sell TRT as a third way party [remember that nonsense] to them [international] and a xenophobic "Thailand First" to the local audience.

By using his wife's money [thereby being legal] to bankroll the deals, the grandstanding and the behemoth of a campaign, which the others here had no experience or even, it has to be said understanding of, the TRT creation arrived in power. From there Thaksin showed, in the words of a contemporaneous Economist article to be a Thai Con not a Tycoon.

Thus from that, all flows. Just starting with iTv, then AMLO actions against unfriendly journalists, [and publications] and so the elected authoritarianism began ...

[473geo]

Perhaps they feel that those who created the void that Thaksin conveniently stepped into, carry an equal part of the blame for ' the mess the country is in today'

A corrupt businessman who used his ill-gotten gains to buy equally corrupt politicians - stepped into a void. And helped himself.

And to answer a relevant question Mick, rather than using my post to have yet another tiresome pop at Thaksin......WHO created the void? that you admit existed and Thaksin stepped into

[473geo]

Perhaps they feel that those who created the void that Thaksin conveniently stepped into, carry an equal part of the blame for ' the mess the country is in today'

What a breathtakingly foolish statement. Thakisn did not step into any void, he used the legendary "blessed" 1997 Constitution to maximise the ability of his "new" [in point of fact a crafted amalgam of existing politicos, money networks [predominantly the money lenders and loans sharks] party to portray itself as some great beacon of development [no corruption, after all he was too rich for that so he said] and used [by virtue of a raft of foreign campaign advisers {US, Brits, Germans}] the promises to sell TRT as a third way party [remember that nonsense] to them [international] and a xenophobic "Thailand First" to the local audience.

By using his wife's money [thereby being legal] to bankroll the deals, the grandstanding and the behemoth of a campaign, which the others here had no experience or even, it has to be said understanding of, the TRT creation arrived in power. From there Thaksin showed, in the words of a contemporaneous Economist article to be a Thai Con not a Tycoon.

Thus from that, all flows. Just starting with iTv, then AMLO actions against unfriendly journalists, [and publications] and so the elected authoritarianism began ...

So everything was running just fine, and a guy came along promised to lead the non poor electorate out of the poverty that did not exist......and these affluent contented people voted for him.....rather than those who for years had strived to bring the electorate to the financial pinacle of the day......must be a smart guy.

[Buchholz]

.

Do you have an inkling of your own ignorance and insensitivity?

it is not about making political points which is all you are apparently seeking to do, albeit not very intelligently.

.

.

Do you have an inkling of your own boorish condescension, coupled with innate ability to insult while agreeing

.

.

The trouble with you people

.

.

.

[watcharacters]

.

I sincerely believe social media and sites like youtube will have the greatest impact imaginable on LOS's government as well as that of similar countries. It's only a matter of time.

Everything is now instant and the rules are changing in a flash.

[bigbamboo]

Perhaps they feel that those who created the void that Thaksin conveniently stepped into, carry an equal part of the blame for ' the mess the country is in today'

A corrupt businessman who used his ill-gotten gains to buy equally corrupt politicians - stepped into a void. And helped himself.

And to answer a relevant question Mick, rather than using my post to have yet another tiresome pop at Thaksin......WHO created the void? that you admit existed and Thaksin stepped into

What 'void'...? Thailand was doing nicely in difficult circumstances when the credit crunch had decimated most economies until Thaksin put his oar in.

And the only void I can think of is that one the MiB disappeared into.........

[473geo]

Perhaps they feel that those who created the void that Thaksin conveniently stepped into, carry an equal part of the blame for ' the mess the country is in today'

A corrupt businessman who used his ill-gotten gains to buy equally corrupt politicians - stepped into a void. And helped himself.

And to answer a relevant question Mick, rather than using my post to have yet another tiresome pop at Thaksin......WHO created the void? that you admit existed and Thaksin stepped into

What 'void'...? Thailand was doing nicely in difficult circumstances when the credit crunch had decimated most economies until Thaksin put his oar in.

And the only void I can think of is that one the MiB disappeared into.........

Nicely for whom is the question? and Thaksin may have had good fortune in the economic turn around but the economy did improve by a massive margin during his tenure and poverty decreased by another significant margin...........of course all this does not deflect from the fact that an eyewitness was shot and he stated the bullets were fired from the RTA side, I guess letting a situation develop whereby you are shooting your own people in the streets is the best we could hope for from a military backed government, so no culpability there for the situation Thailand has arrived at today!!

[OzMick]

Perhaps they feel that those who created the void that Thaksin conveniently stepped into, carry an equal part of the blame for ' the mess the country is in today'

A corrupt businessman who used his ill-gotten gains to buy equally corrupt politicians - stepped into a void. And helped himself.

And to answer a relevant question Mick, rather than using my post to have yet another tiresome pop at Thaksin......WHO created the void? that you admit existed and Thaksin stepped into

Pop at Thaksin? I was laughing at you!

[philw]

Perhaps they feel that those who created the void that Thaksin conveniently stepped into, carry an equal part of the blame for ' the mess the country is in today'

A corrupt businessman who used his ill-gotten gains to buy equally corrupt politicians - stepped into a void. And helped himself.

Close to another family that.........

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.

[backtonormal]

Perhaps they feel that those who created the void that Thaksin conveniently stepped into, carry an equal part of the blame for ' the mess the country is in today'

A corrupt businessman who used his ill-gotten gains to buy equally corrupt politicians - stepped into a void. And helped himself.

And to answer a relevant question Mick, rather than using my post to have yet another tiresome pop at Thaksin......WHO created the void? that you admit existed and Thaksin stepped into

What 'void'...? Thailand was doing nicely in difficult circumstances when the credit crunch had decimated most economies until Thaksin put his oar in.

And the only void I can think of is that one the MiB disappeared into.........

Doing nicely. Would the 30 million people living below the poverty line agree with you. The same families were doing nicely. Democrats masters of there own ignorance. Go to the village at election time and say "vote for us it will be different next time" with no options the villages did vote for them. Guess what it was still the same.

Along comes Thaksin "vote for me and you will get 30 baht healthcare" they voted and they got it.

[waza]

corrupt businessman who used his ill-gotten gains to buy equally corrupt politicians - stepped into a void. And helped himself.

Perhaps they feel that those who created the void that Thaksin conveniently stepped into, carry an equal part of the blame for ' the mess the country is in today'

And to answer a relevant question Mick, rather than using my post to have yet another tiresome pop at Thaksin......WHO created the void? that you admit existed and Thaksin stepped into

What 'void'...? Thailand was doing nicely in difficult circumstances when the credit crunch had decimated most economies until Thaksin put his oar in.

And the only void I can think of is that one the MiB disappeared into.........

Doing nicely. Would the 30 million people living below the poverty line agree with you. The same families were doing nicely. Democrats masters of there own ignorance. Go to the village at election time and say "vote for us it will be different next time" with no options the villages did vote for them. Guess what it was still the same.

Along comes Thaksin "vote for me and you will get 30 baht healthcare" they voted and they got it.

You sound a bit insincere considering a Thaksin government has been in power for 10 of the last 13 years

[AleG]

Doing nicely. Would the 30 million people living below the poverty line agree with you. The same families were doing nicely. Democrats masters of there own ignorance. Go to the village at election time and say "vote for us it will be different next time" with no options the villages did vote for them. Guess what it was still the same.

Along comes Thaksin "vote for me and you will get 30 baht healthcare" they voted and they got it.

You sound a bit insincere considering a Thaksin government has been in power for 10 of the last 13 years

And that he got into power by buying up the quasi feudal lords whom the people had been voting for since ever; they voted for the same dinosaurs, Thaksin just herded them.