Soldier Killed By Friendly Fire, Court Concludes

[nicknostitz]

It's strange in amongst being there from the beginning you have NO footage of black shirts firing guns and grenades!!!

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

There is nothing strange about it.

The so-called men in Black did mostly operate at night, and away from the attention of the media. I had one encounter with them during the May fights late at night, and they asked me not to photograph them. I am not going to argue with armed men in such a situation. I soon also decided not to work at night at the frontlines anymore, because it was simply too dangerous with all the military snipers on high rises.

But this discussion is anyhow about April 28, and not April 10 or the May days where there were exchanges of fire between armed militants and soldiers. During this particular day there were no armed militants exchanging fire with soldiers. There were soldiers killing one of their own after the clashes stopped already.

Edited April 30, 2013 by nicknostitz

[Rimmer]

Two posts with messed up quotes removed. sorry about that guys.

[hellodolly]

'Friendly fire' <deleted> who invented that dumb words ? Shooting bullets at people or animals you cannot call 'friendly'

If you are on Thaksins payroll you can. This is Thailand and what Thaksin says is IS.

If you don't believe me ask Yingluck.

[DRONGOH]

Narongrit was gunned down at 3pm on the outbound Vibhavadi Rangsit Roa. A
high-velocity bullet entered his left elbow, travelled through to the
skull and destroyed brain tissue, according to the inquest. The court
concluded that the bullet was fired by a soldier operating in the area.

Fair enough.

After that, low velocity investigation and once again, hight velocity conclusion.

[hellodolly]

Accept the courts decision and very unfortunate that should ever have happened.

However had it not been necessary to return fire against an armed mob who had already killed army personal it would never have happened.

RIP soldier, you died serving your country.

Lets hope the reds never take up arms again.

Let's hope that thinks eventually change so they don't have to.

You are implying the reds had to take up arms.

Why did they just not go home when they were told they could not shut down part of Bangkok. (most people are smart enough to know that) but not them they had to be told.

I can hardly wait to here your justification for trying to burn Bangkok down and burning down other civic buildings and even burning up a fire truck.

Lay your wisdom on me I can hardly wait to hear it.

I am not in a good mood and can use a good laugh.

[hellodolly]

It's strange in amongst being there from the beginning you have NO footage of black shirts firing guns and grenades!!!

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

There is nothing strange about it.

The so-called men in Black did mostly operate at night, and away from the attention of the media. I had one encounter with them during the May fights late at night, and they asked me not to photograph them. I am not going to argue with armed men in such a situation. I soon also decided not to work at night at the frontlines anymore, because it was simply too dangerous with all the military snipers on high rises.

But this discussion is anyhow about April 28, and not April 10 or the May days where there were exchanges of fire between armed militants and soldiers. During this particular day there were no armed militants exchanging fire with soldiers. There were soldiers killing one of their own after the clashes stopped already.

That is not the story you told earlier. Where did it go did you ask the mods to remove it?

[nicknostitz]

It's strange in amongst being there from the beginning you have NO footage of black shirts firing guns and grenades!!!

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

There is nothing strange about it.

The so-called men in Black did mostly operate at night, and away from the attention of the media. I had one encounter with them during the May fights late at night, and they asked me not to photograph them. I am not going to argue with armed men in such a situation. I soon also decided not to work at night at the frontlines anymore, because it was simply too dangerous with all the military snipers on high rises.

But this discussion is anyhow about April 28, and not April 10 or the May days where there were exchanges of fire between armed militants and soldiers. During this particular day there were no armed militants exchanging fire with soldiers. There were soldiers killing one of their own after the clashes stopped already.

That is not the story you told earlier. Where did it go did you ask the mods to remove it?

What are you on?

This is exactly what i have always said.

What has been removed by the moderators is a post where somebody has completely garbled up my quote. Go and have a look at page 1 of this topic and you can see a slightly more detailed account of what i have seen on April 28.

[allan michaud]

It raises more questions. High Velocity, why not say sniper. Who was the bullet intended for. I can only conclude it was a head shot intended for a protestor. It would appear that 'shoot to kill' orders were given way before 'live fire zones' and the eventually crackdown at Rajaprasong. Evidence is slowly creeping out about who escalated the violence (in order to justify the killing).

You concluded all that from the use of the term 'High Velocity'?

[metisdead]

Off topic trolling post has been removed.

[thaicbr]

Two posts with messed up quotes removed. sorry about that guys.

I know this should be n moderation. But maybe if TV fixed the quotes in the Android and IOS apps.. then you all would not be so busy

[thaicbr]

It's strange in amongst being there from the beginning you have NO footage of black shirts firing guns and grenades!!!

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

There is nothing strange about it.

The so-called men in Black did mostly operate at night, and away from the attention of the media. I had one encounter with them during the May fights late at night, and they asked me not to photograph them. I am not going to argue with armed men in such a situation. I soon also decided not to work at night at the frontlines anymore, because it was simply too dangerous with all the military snipers on high rises.

But this discussion is anyhow about April 28, and not April 10 or the May days where there were exchanges of fire between armed militants and soldiers. During this particular day there were no armed militants exchanging fire with soldiers. There were soldiers killing one of their own after the clashes stopped already.

Ok.. so you have admitted seeing armed black shirts.. Thanks

But really. How can you be so SURE that there were no reds/blacks firing back?

[nicknostitz]

It's strange in amongst being there from the beginning you have NO footage of black shirts firing guns and grenades!!!

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

There is nothing strange about it.

The so-called men in Black did mostly operate at night, and away from the attention of the media. I had one encounter with them during the May fights late at night, and they asked me not to photograph them. I am not going to argue with armed men in such a situation. I soon also decided not to work at night at the frontlines anymore, because it was simply too dangerous with all the military snipers on high rises.

But this discussion is anyhow about April 28, and not April 10 or the May days where there were exchanges of fire between armed militants and soldiers. During this particular day there were no armed militants exchanging fire with soldiers. There were soldiers killing one of their own after the clashes stopped already.

Ok.. so you have admitted seeing armed black shirts.. Thanks

But really. How can you be so SURE that there were no reds/blacks firing back?

I have always said that i have seen armed militants, the first time i said that in public already on May 16 or may 17, 2010, on New Mandala.

Well, i was on the side of the soldiers during the clash on April 28. The frontline was quite narrow - just covering the outbound section of Vibhavadi Rangsit Road near the National Memorial. I obviously cannot say if Red Shirt protesters fired a handgun or not, but there was not a single injured soldier or police officer during the clashes. There was no automatic gunfire coming from the Red Shirts towards the soldiers, there were no grenades fired towards the security forces.

What i can clearly state though was that the whole operation led by the military and comprised of a combined military/police force was completely screwed up from the start. The security forces blocked the road and used the resulting traffic jam as a barricade against protesters, fired rubber bullets through the cars of the normal citizens stuck in the jam (i have pictures of people ducking behind their steering wheels, and windscreens shattered by rubber bullets while soldiers fired through the gaps between the cars).

And even worse, when they ran out of rubber bullets, they just used buckshot instead (i have kept a cartridge from that day).

Security forces advanced without having first secured the tollway above, resulting at one point of protesters having thrown stones from the tollway ramp at the security forces below. This was answered by soldiers firing bursts of automatic rifles (only soldiers were equipped with automatic rifles, cops there had just shotguns) at these protesters above. One man on the tollway was hit in the head by a bullet shot from below, but survived it. Videos from a surveillance camera of soldiers firing rifles at protesters are existing, and were also shown during the trial.

This whole disastrous day ended with soldiers shooting one of their own. In front of me and maybe 4 or 5 other western photographers. It was a horrible sight, and yes, i have pictures of the dead soldier. They are not nice.

It happened this way. The court judgement was just. There is no denying of this.

Edited April 30, 2013 by nicknostitz

[Dap]

Very quiet on this topic, perhaps it is not to the taste of many of the Thai Visa members as it places responsibility for the death of a soldier on another soldier. If that old American favourite "Friendly Fire" is responsible for this death then maybe it was responsible for the few other deaths of soldiers during the attacks on the protesters in Bangkok.

And of course, maybe not.

Your use of the words "if" and "maybe" makes you not so sure. Good enough.

[Thai at Heart]

It's strange in amongst being there from the beginning you have NO footage of black shirts firing guns and grenades!!!

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

There is nothing strange about it.

The so-called men in Black did mostly operate at night, and away from the attention of the media. I had one encounter with them during the May fights late at night, and they asked me not to photograph them. I am not going to argue with armed men in such a situation. I soon also decided not to work at night at the frontlines anymore, because it was simply too dangerous with all the military snipers on high rises.

But this discussion is anyhow about April 28, and not April 10 or the May days where there were exchanges of fire between armed militants and soldiers. During this particular day there were no armed militants exchanging fire with soldiers. There were soldiers killing one of their own after the clashes stopped already.

Ok.. so you have admitted seeing armed black shirts.. Thanks

But really. How can you be so SURE that there were no reds/blacks firing back?

I have always said that i have seen armed militants, the first time i said that in public already on May 16 or may 17, 2010, on New Mandala.

Well, i was on the side of the soldiers during the clash on April 28. The frontline was quite narrow - just covering the outbound section of Vibhavadi Rangsit Road near the National Memorial. I obviously cannot say if Red Shirt protesters fired a handgun or not, but there was not a single injured soldier or police officer during the clashes. There was no automatic gunfire coming from the Red Shirts towards the soldiers, there were no grenades fired towards the security forces.

What i can clearly state though was that the whole operation led by the military and comprised of a combined military/police force was completely screwed up from the start. The security forces blocked the road and used the resulting traffic jam as a barricade against protesters, fired rubber bullets through the cars of the normal citizens stuck in the jam (i have pictures of people ducking behind their steering wheels, and windscreens shattered by rubber bullets while soldiers fired through the gaps between the cars).

And even worse, when they ran out of rubber bullets, they just used buckshot instead (i have kept a cartridge from that day).

Security forces advanced without having first secured the tollway above, resulting at one point of protesters having thrown stones from the tollway ramp at the security forces below. This was answered by soldiers firing bursts of automatic rifles (only soldiers were equipped with automatic rifles, cops there had just shotguns) at these protesters above. One man on the tollway was hit in the head by a bullet shot from below, but survived it. Videos from a surveillance camera of soldiers firing rifles at protesters are existing, and were also shown during the trial.

This whole disastrous day ended with soldiers shooting one of their own. In front of me and maybe 4 or 5 other western photographers. It was a horrible sight, and yes, i have pictures of the dead soldier. They are not nice.

It happened this way. The court judgement was just. There is no denying of this.

Sounds like complete and utter uncontrolled, unplanned chaos.

[Pi Sek]

I hope I'm allowed to chip in and "play the game".

The govt at the time announced the live fire zone 14 May I think? So, yes, this happened before the live fire zones were announced.

But, remember, the live fire zone was basically a clearance operation with shoot-on-sight orders. It was condemned by HRW & Amnesty International, vilified on CNN & BCC but, funnily enough, not many Rajprasong residents objected to it.

This 28 April operation was something completely different. The Queen's Regiment were called out from their Don Meuang barracks after Kwanchai Praiphana (the same one whose fire-bombing of the army's 1st Infantry barracks pre-empted the 10 April clearance operation) was leading a lot of protesters to break 6 prisoners out of Pathum Thani. These protesters were told to stop and turn back but instead there was a firefight with bullets coming from both sides.

Doesn't anyone else see that it's strange that 1 soldier died and 18 protesters were injured if the orders were "shoot-to-kill"? Are you suggesting the army decided to kill one of their own for public sympathy (honest question)? Does anyone think that armed protesters looking to commit a jail break are innocent?

Sorry, but this is a complete distortion of what took place that day.

I don't know where you read that 6 arrested Red Shirt protesters should have been freed from prison. What was announced was that a Red Shirt protest caravan was going to visit Pathum Thani Red Shirts at Dalat Thai to give them moral support for having blocked a large contingent of police officers on the way to Bangkok a few days before.

Can you please provide any article or documentation that could substantiate your claim?

I do not know where you got the idea that there was a supposed fire fight with bullets coming from both sides. I have been at the clash from the beginning until the military left the scene, on the side of the military. I have not seen any bullet coming from the Red Shirts, i have not seen a single soldier (or police officer) having been injured during the several rounds of clashes. I have seen though rubber bullets, buckshot, and rounds of automatic rifles seen fired at the protesters (and i have photographed this as well).

The killed soldier was killed about half an hour after the clashes stopped (by the rain), when Red Shirt protesters and security forces were in a distance of between 300 meters and 500 meters from each other. The soldier was killed by friendly fire in front of me, when security forces panicked and shot at the motorcycles.

Government propaganda at the time tried to link the death of the soldier with footage shot by Al Jazeera of a man within the Red Shirt protesters holding a hand gun. The footage was shot one or two hours before the death of the soldier, during the clashes, and it is not clear if the gun was even fired during the clashes.

The courts have given a fair judgement based on overwhelming evidence.

Thank you for clarifying my mistakes, I have done a little reading up and refreshed my memory.

1) Bullets were NOT going in both directions - I said this in error as I can remember the CNN reporter saying it. I have looked for it on Youtube, can't find it. The term I remember CNN using during the event (i.e. 28 April afternoon) was "major gun battle"; it could have been CNN's usual tabloid over-dramatisation, I suppose, but this surprised me as CNN basically had been saying that the protesters were peaceful and the only people with guns were the army.

2) They were not going to commit a jail break, they were going to offer "moral support" to the arrested protesters at a market. Forgive me for my distrust, but the previous time Kwanchai had led protesters out, the result was the 10 April turmoil. And also, see #4 below!

I also found:

3) There were not 6 arrested protesters in Pathum Thani, there were 20. They had been arrested for performing illegal vehicle searches.

4) Kwanchai Praiphana had stated that morning that their intention was "to block troops from travelling to Bangkok to break up the rally at the Rajprasong" and that, "if protesters encounter police checkpoints or barricades, they may try to break through with force".

And finally:

5) I don't think anyone is doubting the court verdict, the friendly fire story was reported that evening (I think) on quite a few channels but there were still quite a few (including the CRES) who said otherwise - that the bullet came from a gun not used in the operation (possibly a misunderstanding of the term "high-velocity" as another poster made above?)

[nicknostitz]

I hope I'm allowed to chip in and "play the game".

The govt at the time announced the live fire zone 14 May I think? So, yes, this happened before the live fire zones were announced.

But, remember, the live fire zone was basically a clearance operation with shoot-on-sight orders. It was condemned by HRW & Amnesty International, vilified on CNN & BCC but, funnily enough, not many Rajprasong residents objected to it.

This 28 April operation was something completely different. The Queen's Regiment were called out from their Don Meuang barracks after Kwanchai Praiphana (the same one whose fire-bombing of the army's 1st Infantry barracks pre-empted the 10 April clearance operation) was leading a lot of protesters to break 6 prisoners out of Pathum Thani. These protesters were told to stop and turn back but instead there was a firefight with bullets coming from both sides.

Doesn't anyone else see that it's strange that 1 soldier died and 18 protesters were injured if the orders were "shoot-to-kill"? Are you suggesting the army decided to kill one of their own for public sympathy (honest question)? Does anyone think that armed protesters looking to commit a jail break are innocent?

Sorry, but this is a complete distortion of what took place that day.

I don't know where you read that 6 arrested Red Shirt protesters should have been freed from prison. What was announced was that a Red Shirt protest caravan was going to visit Pathum Thani Red Shirts at Dalat Thai to give them moral support for having blocked a large contingent of police officers on the way to Bangkok a few days before.

Can you please provide any article or documentation that could substantiate your claim?

I do not know where you got the idea that there was a supposed fire fight with bullets coming from both sides. I have been at the clash from the beginning until the military left the scene, on the side of the military. I have not seen any bullet coming from the Red Shirts, i have not seen a single soldier (or police officer) having been injured during the several rounds of clashes. I have seen though rubber bullets, buckshot, and rounds of automatic rifles seen fired at the protesters (and i have photographed this as well).

The killed soldier was killed about half an hour after the clashes stopped (by the rain), when Red Shirt protesters and security forces were in a distance of between 300 meters and 500 meters from each other. The soldier was killed by friendly fire in front of me, when security forces panicked and shot at the motorcycles.

Government propaganda at the time tried to link the death of the soldier with footage shot by Al Jazeera of a man within the Red Shirt protesters holding a hand gun. The footage was shot one or two hours before the death of the soldier, during the clashes, and it is not clear if the gun was even fired during the clashes.

The courts have given a fair judgement based on overwhelming evidence.

Thank you for clarifying my mistakes, I have done a little reading up and refreshed my memory.

1) Bullets were NOT going in both directions - I said this in error as I can remember the CNN reporter saying it. I have looked for it on Youtube, can't find it. The term I remember CNN using during the event (i.e. 28 April afternoon) was "major gun battle"; it could have been CNN's usual tabloid over-dramatisation, I suppose, but this surprised me as CNN basically had been saying that the protesters were peaceful and the only people with guns were the army.

2) They were not going to commit a jail break, they were going to offer "moral support" to the arrested protesters at a market. Forgive me for my distrust, but the previous time Kwanchai had led protesters out, the result was the 10 April turmoil. And also, see #4 below!

I also found:

3) There were not 6 arrested protesters in Pathum Thani, there were 20. They had been arrested for performing illegal vehicle searches.

4) Kwanchai Praiphana had stated that morning that their intention was "to block troops from travelling to Bangkok to break up the rally at the Rajprasong" and that, "if protesters encounter police checkpoints or barricades, they may try to break through with force".

And finally:

5) I don't think anyone is doubting the court verdict, the friendly fire story was reported that evening (I think) on quite a few channels but there were still quite a few (including the CRES) who said otherwise - that the bullet came from a gun not used in the operation (possibly a misunderstanding of the term "high-velocity" as another poster made above?)

CRES made many claims that were simply outrageous.

If you see high level former CRES members testifying at court cases you can see quite unbelievable scenes, where at times their rather bewildering explanation for deaths of protesters were against all evidence - forensic, video, witness testimonies, etc. In the Channarong Ponsrila case, for example, the military's explanation was that a unknown shooter has killed the protester from a location that would have made it necessary that the 5.56 NATO round that killed Channarong made a curve in order to hit his stomach, which was facing the soldiers who were about 80 meters away when he tried to crawl out of the barrage of bullets coming from the military. Just followed by a bullet hitting him in the arm with a sickening sound, smashing all bones there.

Sorry, i am digressing...

If it would not have been for a few foreign photographers who were at the scene of the dead soldier on April 28 (and we had to get quite physical to be able to get our images as the soldiers tried to stop us), and a Spring News team that filmed the incident from the side of the Red Shirts, CRES may have gotten away with their propaganda that day. Unfortunately still many Thais who just got their information from government controlled media are convinced that Priv. Narongrit was killed by Red Shirts.

And also quite unfortunately, as we have seen here in a few posts, there are a few foreigners who still seem to be convinced that this was a misjudgement. Against all evidence, just following their political opinions...

[waza]

This was one of the most publicized deaths during the 2010 redshirt riots as it was caught on video.

Sanitised version

Unedited footage

I dont think at any time did anyone suggest it was anything but friendly fire

Edited April 30, 2013 by waza

[Pi Sek]

This was one of the most publicized deaths during the 2010 redshirt riots as it was caught on video.

Sanitised version

Unedited footage

I dont think at any time did anyone suggest it was anything but friendly fire

Actually, Khun Waza, yes they did. Some reports said he was killed by a red shirt sniper, some said he was killed by a broken bottle. Trust me, I've been researching in order to find that damned CNN "major gun battle" report with "bullets coming from both sides". I assume Nick Nostitz knows the CNN (affiliate?) reporter, as he was also reporting live at the scene (male, I think in his 30s).

[nicknostitz]

This was one of the most publicized deaths during the 2010 redshirt riots as it was caught on video.

Sanitised version

Unedited footage

I dont think at any time did anyone suggest it was anything but friendly fire

Actually, Khun Waza, yes they did. Some reports said he was killed by a red shirt sniper, some said he was killed by a broken bottle. Trust me, I've been researching in order to find that damned CNN "major gun battle" report with "bullets coming from both sides". I assume Nick Nostitz knows the CNN (affiliate?) reporter, as he was also reporting live at the scene (male, I think in his 30s).

If you mean Dan Rivers, yes i know him. Wayne from Al Jazeera was at the scene as well, i spoke with him a few times during the lulls in the clashes. Several have reported of a gun battle there, and fire also from the Red Shirts towards the soldiers. Only thing is that i personally saw no evidence of this. No bullet holes in the tollway pillars facing the Red Shirts (i have looked, after everything calmed down, and could only find bullet holes from the side of the soldiers. I have seen no injured soldiers or police officers, neither heard of any, other than the ones injured during the friendly fire incident, in which Priv. Narongrit died.

The only sighting of a gun in a hand of a Red Shirt was filmed by Al Jazeera, who got a lucky shot, but none of my friends and colleges that were on the side of the Red Shirts have been able to see Red Shirts firing at the soldiers. I can't say 100% that one or the other Red Shirt may not have fired a handgun, but if that happened, i could not see any effect of this. And i am sure that i would have seen effects of this as i was in the front all the time, either just behind the first line of advancing soldiers, or hopping in an out from hiding behind the pillars of the tollway, from where i had quite a good overview of what took place at the lines of the security forces.

There were no grenades fired at the military lines, which i can state with absolute certainty, neither were assault rifles used against soldiers. That makes it quite clear that the so called Men in Black did not take an active part in this clash.

Many journalists completely missed the event, because at the time most did not expect a clash to happen (i got advance notice of the roadblock, and that security forces will not let the protesters pass, so i made sure that i am going to be there). Other reporters, who heard of it, got stuck in the massive traffic jams, and came too late.

[Wat dee]

Accept the courts decision and very unfortunate that should ever have happened.

However had it not been necessary to return fire against an armed mob who had already killed army personal it would never have happened.

RIP soldier, you died serving your country.

Lets hope the reds never take up arms again.

Let's hope that thinks eventually change so they don't have to.

You are implying the reds had to take up arms.

Why did they just not go home when they were told they could not shut down part of Bangkok. (most people are smart enough to know that) but not them they had to be told.

I can hardly wait to here your justification for trying to burn Bangkok down and burning down other civic buildings and even burning up a fire truck.

Lay your wisdom on me I can hardly wait to hear it.

I am not in a good mood and can use a good laugh.

In every society, eventually, poor masses start demanding same priviledges as the upper-class.

I honestly think, some of the Hi-So wealth should be divided to masses somehow. I hope the way is f.ex taxation,not poor people looting.

Burned fire-engine and department store are unfortunate.I fear there is more to come.

In America they have 2nd.amendment for situations like this.Unfortunately masses there are too dumb to exercise that right.

[whybother]

So you are saying that there is no on-going case against any 'Red' with regard to these soldiers deaths? Perhaps, as in yesterdays case, they were all 'friendly fire'.

I am not saying that there are no cases. I am asking what the status of them is, assuming there are some.

If you want to believe that the red shirts didn't kill any soldiers or weren't armed with guns and grenades or didn't light any fires, then that's up to you. The evidence I have seen and heard makes me believe otherwise.

Surely it is the evidence that the courts see that will be important, what a farang "has seen and heard" is really of no consequence.

The evidence that the courts see is important. What (any) people believe has consequences.

[Bobobirdiebuddy]

Do you really think this court is unbiased? This entire time since Yingluck has been in power, the courts have bent over backwards to portray Abhisit as a murderer and the red shirt terrorists and (as BBC and Thomas Fuller mistakenly believe) poor, innocent country people crushed under the boots of the army. Who the hell burnt down half of Central? The Klongtoey MEA office? The SET building? Banks, shops and tried to blow up Chula hospital? That's right, Thaksin's lads. Thugs, the lot of them and now the spineless courts are exonerating them. Amazing Thailand.

[nicknostitz]

Do you really think this court is unbiased? This entire time since Yingluck has been in power, the courts have bent over backwards to portray Abhisit as a murderer and the red shirt terrorists and (as BBC and Thomas Fuller mistakenly believe) poor, innocent country people crushed under the boots of the army. Who the hell burnt down half of Central? The Klongtoey MEA office? The SET building? Banks, shops and tried to blow up Chula hospital? That's right, Thaksin's lads. Thugs, the lot of them and now the spineless courts are exonerating them. Amazing Thailand.

A court has to decide on investigation of evidence and witness testimonials, and not on opinion based on second or third hand information, or pure speculation.

The select cases regarding the 2010 incident i have followed (and/or been involved in) directly from inside the court rooms i found to have been to the most part well judged, so far.

If you do not like the judgements, i would suggest the next time to sit in court and watch what is presented, hear the witnesses yourself, and make up your mind based on this. These trials are public - that means you are allowed to attend.

[Pi Sek]

Do you really think this court is unbiased? This entire time since Yingluck has been in power, the courts have bent over backwards to portray Abhisit as a murderer and the red shirt terrorists and (as BBC and Thomas Fuller mistakenly believe) poor, innocent country people crushed under the boots of the army. Who the hell burnt down half of Central? The Klongtoey MEA office? The SET building? Banks, shops and tried to blow up Chula hospital? That's right, Thaksin's lads. Thugs, the lot of them and now the spineless courts are exonerating them. Amazing Thailand.

I don't agree with you at all about the courts. The DSI, yes, but not the courts.

As for the BBC (and CNN), they have a duty to spread the notion of Western democracy...

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.

[oldsailor35]

Snipers with high velocity ammunition! A great new innovative RTA way to control protesters.

[Pi Sek]

Snipers with high velocity ammunition! A great new innovative RTA way to control protesters.

Read the thread, been through this already.

[oldsailor35]

Once again, the selective memory syndrome is in evidence. How about the M16's and AR-15's the men in black and self-proclaimed "Ronin" were proudly firing?

Is that the men in black uniforms and army boots, the ones you are talking about ?

[oldsailor35]

Accept the courts decision and very unfortunate that should ever have happened.

However had it not been necessary to return fire against an armed mob who had already killed army personal it would never have happened.

RIP soldier, you died serving your country.

Lets hope the reds never take up arms again.

Let's hope that thinks eventually change so they don't have to.

You are implying the reds had to take up arms.

Why did they just not go home when they were told they could not shut down part of Bangkok. (most people are smart enough to know that) but not them they had to be told.

I can hardly wait to here your justification for trying to burn Bangkok down and burning down other civic buildings and even burning up a fire truck.

Lay your wisdom on me I can hardly wait to hear it.

I am not in a good mood and can use a good laugh.

YES, why did'nt they go home when they were told, like the Yellow shirts at the airport.

[oldsailor35]

Do you really think this court is unbiased? This entire time since Yingluck has been in power, the courts have bent over backwards to portray Abhisit as a murderer and the red shirt terrorists and (as BBC and Thomas Fuller mistakenly believe) poor, innocent country people crushed under the boots of the army. Who the hell burnt down half of Central? The Klongtoey MEA office? The SET building? Banks, shops and tried to blow up Chula hospital? That's right, Thaksin's lads. Thugs, the lot of them and now the spineless courts are exonerating them. Amazing Thailand.

Well, if Abhisit ordered the army in with live ammo , then he must be. Although we all know that Abhisit is only the lacky of Suthep the real boss of the Dems.