Thai Army Officer Insists To Court Japanese Reporter Killed By 'Blackshirts'

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and other nonsense has been removed.

[smedly]

The second video on previous page says it all for me unless of course the army were shooting at themselves, you can clearly see they are dodging bullets - taking cover - removing the injured - and an army vehicle very clearly with bullet damage, anyone thinks that they were pretending to be under live fire (including the foreign cameraman) needs to a long look at what is going on there and think again, and additionally anyone that remains on the street in this very live fire zone were either involved or taking risks that they can only blame themselves including the press

The reds were either shooting at the army or they weren't - that video shows compelling evidence that they were

[SICHONSTEVE]

The second video on previous page says it all for me unless of course the army were shooting at themselves, you can clearly see they are dodging bullets - taking cover - removing the injured - and an army vehicle very clearly with bullet damage, anyone thinks that they were pretending to be under live fire (including the foreign cameraman) needs to a long look at what is going on there and think again, and additionally anyone that remains on the street in this very live fire zone were either involved or taking risks that they can only blame themselves including the press

The reds were either shooting at the army or they weren't - that video shows compelling evidence that they were

Unless the army were using boomerang bullets or were extremely unlucky on the ricochet front, that is........ and those shadowy figures were only firing blanks!! Possible, yes, possible!!

[Pi Sek]

Read the OP

However, yes I believe the military did fire live rounds into the air above the protesters. as the did in 2009 as is amply shown in many videos and witness accounts.

<snip>

That is wrong - in 2009 the military fired directly at the protesters during the early morning attack that lasted from about 3.30 until 7.30 in the morning. I was there and bullets passed way too close for comfort.

Two of the badly injured Red Shirts got compensation awarded from the military by the civil court about 11/2 or 2 years ago.

I never knew you were there at the time. Isn't that the occasion when, some UDD claims say, 20 protesters were killed and their bodies taken away in army trucks? From what I gather there is no evidence to support this and no names had been given nor missing person reports filed... you didn't manage to get photos of this army atrocity did you?

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

I'd say the major's testimony sounds pretty plausible, at least in so far as the order that his unit received that day.

And to some of the posters here, if you real the full Khao Sod article, you'll see the guy testifying that his troops did have weapons -- armed with rubber bullets -- but that their rifles with regular bullets were stored away in their trucks.

The article clearly has the major testifying that his troops were attacked, fired on, and injured. But the article is silent on the subject of whether they returned fire with their rubber bullets, or eventually with live ammunition. The article is silent on those details.

At any rate, the PM at that time certainly didn't want a blood bath. He'd held off for weeks and did little while the Reds took over good parts of the city and refused to budge. The kind of order the major testified having received from his command would have been entirely consistent with the approach the government at the time had been taking.

Now, that's not to say no one from the Army anywhere in the city that day returned fire. Clearly, their orders allowed them to return fire with live ammo in the case of self defense. Given that the major reported that some 30+ of the 150 men in his unit were wounded by the Red Shirt attacks, that seems a pretty plausible argument for self defense.

[gemini81]

The second video on previous page says it all for me unless of course the army were shooting at themselves, you can clearly see they are dodging bullets - taking cover - removing the injured - and an army vehicle very clearly with bullet damage, anyone thinks that they were pretending to be under live fire (including the foreign cameraman) needs to a long look at what is going on there and think again, and additionally anyone that remains on the street in this very live fire zone were either involved or taking risks that they can only blame themselves including the press

The reds were either shooting at the army or they weren't - that video shows compelling evidence that they were

Unless the army were using boomerang bullets or were extremely unlucky on the ricochet front, that is........ and those shadowy figures were only firing blanks!! Possible, yes, possible!!

Was the vid with Chalerm proclaiming black shirts as trained police special task forces taken off youtube? Can't find it. It was aired on channel 3 back when they were first spotted...despite the other two possibilities (camodian soldiers...forces under she daeng) No one knows more than Chalerm, as he is in all the graft, lies, cheating, scandals, murder under his master...

[nicknostitz]

Was the vid with Chalerm proclaiming black shirts as trained police special task forces taken off youtube? Can't find it. It was aired on channel 3 back when they were first spotted...despite the other two possibilities (camodian soldiers...forces under she daeng) No one knows more than Chalerm, as he is in all the graft, lies, cheating, scandals, murder under his master...

Chalerm knows nothing of what took place in 2010, or in the Red Shirts in general. He never was a friend of the Red Shirts, is disliked and distrusted by the Red Shirts as well. he also does not share the political aims of the Red Shirts, and he basically stands for himself only. A typical old style politician.

[Orac]

I'd say the major's testimony sounds pretty plausible, at least in so far as the order that his unit received that day.

And to some of the posters here, if you real the full Khao Sod article, you'll see the guy testifying that his troops did have weapons -- armed with rubber bullets -- but that their rifles with regular bullets were stored away in their trucks.

The article clearly has the major testifying that his troops were attacked, fired on, and injured. But the article is silent on the subject of whether they returned fire with their rubber bullets, or eventually with live ammunition. The article is silent on those details.

At any rate, the PM at that time certainly didn't want a blood bath. He'd held off for weeks and did little while the Reds took over good parts of the city and refused to budge. The kind of order the major testified having received from his command would have been entirely consistent with the approach the government at the time had been taking.

Now, that's not to say no one from the Army anywhere in the city that day returned fire. Clearly, their orders allowed them to return fire with live ammo in the case of self defense. Given that the major reported that some 30+ of the 150 men in his unit were wounded by the Red Shirt attacks, that seems a pretty plausible argument for self defense.

Actually his testimony states that it was not only self defence that they were allowed to respond with live fire to:

He claimed that the order explicitly instructed the soldiers to treat the protesters as innocent civilians, and firearms would be used only for ′self-defense′ or when the protesters started attacking public properties.

Which seems a bit more vague. I am sure this does not mean they could shoot someone doing a bit of grafitti or kicking a wheely bin but it does give a lot of leeway for interpretation.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

I think the point was... the orders that the major recounted are the kind that most people would expect a reasonably level-headed civilian government to give, that most people would expect Abhisit to have given, in a case of major public protests... not the kind of orders that would be the basis for a criminal prosecution.

In any event, I did like the major's explanation for how it knew it was the Black shirts rather than his own troops that were responsible for shooting the journalist. In essence he testified...the Black shirts are better, more precise shots than my troops.

And he's probably right on that count, considering that his unit from Prachinburi probably wasn't/isn't one of the Thai army's elite commands.

[GentlemanJim]

I think the point was... the orders that the major recounted are the kind that most people would expect a reasonably level-headed civilian government to give, that most people would expect Abhisit to have given, in a case of major public protests... not the kind of orders that would be the basis for a criminal prosecution.

In any event, I did like the major's explanation for how it knew it was the Black shirts rather than his own troops that were responsible for shooting the journalist. In essence he testified...the Black shirts are better, more precise shots than my troops.

And he's probably right on that count, considering that his unit from Prachinburi probably wasn't/isn't one of the Thai army's elite commands.

Good point. Many will be conscripts John.

[rubl]

"My apologies for being of topic, but it is essential to get the details right, so we can come close to an understanding of what took place in 2010, what the perceptions of the different sides were, and the actions that resulted thereof."

In itself true, but irrelevant to the topic. Here we want facts, not perceptions and only regarding the death of Mr. Hiro. IMHO

[metisdead]

My apologies for being of topic, but it is essential to get the details right, so we can come close to an understanding of what took place in 2010, what the perceptions of the different sides were, and the actions that resulted thereof.

Off topic posts have been removed.

[mikemac]

When trying sort out a mess like this (regarding the people killed during the redshirt protests in Bangkok) you have to find the source of the problem. In this case the answer lies in Dubai. If not for this evil despot's orders none of this would have happened. And if the tables were turned and it was yellowshirts holding the city to ransom and throwing grenades and bullets at the soldiers, and Thaksin was in power, there would have been hundreds perhaps thousands killed. He has already proved he is capable of doing this in the past. The people who support the redshirts and the PTP puppets, both Thai and foreigners, are hypocritical retards.

[Publicus]

I think the point was... the orders that the major recounted are the kind that most people would expect a reasonably level-headed civilian government to give, that most people would expect Abhisit to have given, in a case of major public protests... not the kind of orders that would be the basis for a criminal prosecution.

In any event, I did like the major's explanation for how it knew it was the Black shirts rather than his own troops that were responsible for shooting the journalist. In essence he testified...the Black shirts are better, more precise shots than my troops.

And he's probably right on that count, considering that his unit from Prachinburi probably wasn't/isn't one of the Thai army's elite commands.

Good point. Many will be conscripts John.

A conscript can become an ace shooter as much as a volunteer can. That's a soldier's most fundamental function, i.e., being able to fire his weapon efficiently, accurately, with deadly force They practice it regularly.

In all of the movement and activity of the event, involving many people in many places, even a crack shot can hit an unintended target. Journalists are dying in war zones with an unprecedented frequency during recent times. An important factor in the deaths of so many journalists is the increased lethality of modern weapons and ammunition, and the journalists becoming "imbedded" with the troops. Although the journalists killed in Bangkok during the lethal civil disturbance of 2010 were not imbedded, they were in the line of fire of each side, which is not a good place for anyone to be.

Thaksin initiated the occupation but the government made the decisions concerning how to respond, in what ways, when and where, how. However, the presence of the black shirts made the whole of the event a preview of what a civil war would be like. That's the take-away from the events of the time. A civil war is an ugly event, as are events that resemble it, such as the developments of mid-2010.

It would be a radical departure of the Thai past if anyone in the events of the time were ever to be held accountable. The emotions are intense, but neither side, or the many sides, are not ready to be subjected to the rule of law. They never have been, they never will be. TiT.

[smedly]

I wouldn't go as far as describing the events in 2010 as "civil war" that is usually the result of dictator type leadership and factional uprising such as Syria or Iraq

What happened in Thailand is pretty simple to understand - Thaksin overstepped his mandate while he was PM - he robbed and abused the Thai people at ever increasing levels - he was abusing power and covering it up with the odd offer of good will to the poor, it was like holding out his left hand with a 10b while his right hand was stealing their wallet unfortunately the average Thai doesn't see this, the man was removed in a peaceful coup and legal proceedings taken to expose who he really was but of course he did a runner before it was finished

He then proceeded to recruit and buy a private following of very gullible people now known as the reds, he bought their support and drove them like lemmings to destruction with what once was their own money, now he is driving this country to oblivion and liking it, there is more division here now than ever before at the hands of this mad man.

He put lethal weapons in the hands of civilians on the streets of Bangkok, the authorities played soft for weeks and weeks but it was only going to end in one way - the Thaksin way

There is only one person responsible for the deaths in 2010 - the paymaster in Dubai, there have only been a handful in the history of man with this level of evil - and if allowed to continue "we ain't seen nothing yet" pure evil

Why is this man still involved in Thailand, does anyone actually think if he died today that the problems here would continue ?

Edited June 22, 2013 by smedly

[Pi Sek]

I think the point was... the orders that the major recounted are the kind that most people would expect a reasonably level-headed civilian government to give, that most people would expect Abhisit to have given, in a case of major public protests... not the kind of orders that would be the basis for a criminal prosecution.

In any event, I did like the major's explanation for how it knew it was the Black shirts rather than his own troops that were responsible for shooting the journalist. In essence he testified...the Black shirts are better, more precise shots than my troops.

And he's probably right on that count, considering that his unit from Prachinburi probably wasn't/isn't one of the Thai army's elite commands.

Good point. Many will be conscripts John.

A conscript can become an ace shooter as much as a volunteer can. That's a soldier's most fundamental function, i.e., being able to fire his weapon efficiently, accurately, with deadly force They practice it regularly.

In all of the movement and activity of the event, involving many people in many places, even a crack shot can hit an unintended target. Journalists are dying in war zones with an unprecedented frequency during recent times. An important factor in the deaths of so many journalists is the increased lethality of modern weapons and ammunition, and the journalists becoming "imbedded" with the troops. Although the journalists killed in Bangkok during the lethal civil disturbance of 2010 were not imbedded, they were in the line of fire of each side, which is not a good place for anyone to be.

Thaksin initiated the occupation but the government made the decisions concerning how to respond, in what ways, when and where, how. However, the presence of the black shirts made the whole of the event a preview of what a civil war would be like. That's the take-away from the events of the time. A civil war is an ugly event, as are events that resemble it, such as the developments of mid-2010.

It would be a radical departure of the Thai past if anyone in the events of the time were ever to be held accountable. The emotions are intense, but neither side, or the many sides, are not ready to be subjected to the rule of law. They never have been, they never will be. TiT.

I don't "like" your logic but I do agree with it

[metisdead]

Off topic posts removed.

[GentlemanJim]

A conscript can become an ace shooter as much as a volunteer can. That's a soldier's most fundamental function, i.e., being able to fire his weapon efficiently, accurately, with deadly force They practice it regularly.

In all of the movement and activity of the event, involving many people in many places, even a crack shot can hit an unintended target. Journalists are dying in war zones with an unprecedented frequency during recent times. An important factor in the deaths of so many journalists is the increased lethality of modern weapons and ammunition, and the journalists becoming "imbedded" with the troops. Although the journalists killed in Bangkok during the lethal civil disturbance of 2010 were not imbedded, they were in the line of fire of each side, which is not a good place for anyone to be.

Thaksin initiated the occupation but the government made the decisions concerning how to respond, in what ways, when and where, how. However, the presence of the black shirts made the whole of the event a preview of what a civil war would be like. That's the take-away from the events of the time. A civil war is an ugly event, as are events that resemble it, such as the developments of mid-2010.

It would be a radical departure of the Thai past if anyone in the events of the time were ever to be held accountable. The emotions are intense, but neither side, or the many sides, are not ready to be subjected to the rule of law. They never have been, they never will be. TiT.

Conscripts can become excellent shots you are correct, but that is not the norm. Conscripts do not receive the same annual firearms training as regular soldiers. They will be lucky to get 100 rounds per year.

An important factor in the deaths of so many journalists is the increased lethality of modern weapons and ammunition

I disagree, the weapons have had the same lethality for decades. The factors are that in the age of the digital camera, anyone can do it and get excellent results, especially when you can take 2000 photos at a time instead of photographers in the past being limited to 100-200 maximum at a time requiring skill and expertise. There is big money for the right photographs, so more people are inclined to take the risk and have a go. Also with the 'embedding' of journalists and photographers they are in the ridiculous situation of being as exposed as the frontline soldier with nothing but a digital Cannon (the wrong type) for defence, and that is not brave, it's stupid, it is done for money and fame.

Although the journalists killed in Bangkok during the lethal civil disturbance of 2010 were not imbedded, they were in the line of fire of each side, which is not a good place for anyone to be.

100% correct, and once again, it's stupid. It is unfortunate the Japanese photographer was killed, but honestly, why is anyone surprised or upset? He was right in the middle of two armed parties taking pot shots at each other. Perhaps if they wore florescent high viz vests with a sign saying journo on them it would help, instead of many of them being in camouflage clothing. High viz vests would not stop random shots hitting them but would very likely prevent legitimate security forces from targeting you, not so the case with cam clothing. Very few of the soldiers had M16's with telescopic sights did they, so a journo wearing what the japanese photographer was wearing will look just the same as anyone else from 100M.

[ggold]

Red Shirt's gunmen fire on unarmed soldiers in Bangkok 2010

[GentlemanJim]

Red Shirt's gunmen fire on unarmed soldiers in Bangkok 2010

Thank you for posting. Thank you for providing some well needed balance.

Nick

Where are your photo's like this? Did you miss it all? A far better representation of what was going on than photo's of car bumpers and walls. A peaceful red-shirt protest? Are you still sticking with that story all the red apologists. And there were the reds, carrying the same weapons, same munitions as the army (no doubt part of the large haul that was stolen before the protest). No wonder the journo was shot by a military round, I just don't believe the military fired it.!

Edited June 22, 2013 by GentlemanJim

[waza]

Red Shirt's gunmen fire on unarmed soldiers in Bangkok 2010

Pretty damming footage

[Thai at Heart]

Did anyone deny that the reds had a supporting black shirt contingent?

Amazingly as yet unfound? They can find a person who nicks 20 baht from 7-11 in a minute.

I would presume ex or current army, why are they untouchable? But this story is about rules of engagement at specific times and what orders were issued to soldiers.

Convicting a person shooting on soldiers should be easy. Attributing blame for what happened during the crackdown is complicated because the Thai army apparently never does wrong. Never breaks an order, never gives conflicting orders.

They are right up there with the best of them apparently?????

[waza]

Did anyone deny that the reds had a supporting black shirt contingent?

Amazingly as yet unfound? They can find a person who nicks 20 baht from 7-11 in a minute.

I would presume ex or current army, why are they untouchable? But this story is about rules of engagement at specific times and what orders were issued to soldiers.

Convicting a person shooting on soldiers should be easy. Attributing blame for what happened during the crackdown is complicated because the Thai army apparently never does wrong. Never breaks an order, never gives conflicting orders.

They are right up there with the best of them apparently?????

Apparently not for Tarit and the DSI, they are of the opinion its all down to Abhist and Suthep simple as that. The army, the redshirts all were faultless.

Edited June 22, 2013 by waza

[Thai at Heart]

Did anyone deny that the reds had a supporting black shirt contingent?

Amazingly as yet unfound? They can find a person who nicks 20 baht from 7-11 in a minute.

I would presume ex or current army, why are they untouchable? But this story is about rules of engagement at specific times and what orders were issued to soldiers.

Convicting a person shooting on soldiers should be easy. Attributing blame for what happened during the crackdown is complicated because the Thai army apparently never does wrong. Never breaks an order, never gives conflicting orders.

They are right up there with the best of them apparently?????

Apparently not for Tarit and the DSI, they are of the opinion its all down to Abhist and Suthep simple as that. The army, the redshirts all were faultless.

Did you read the charges? Conspiring with armed forces to do bla black bla.

There is a limit to what even a Thai court can deliver.... They need proof that abhisit ordered the army to shoot people.

Now I didn't go to Eton or Oxford, but I wasn't a million miles away, and having a dad who was involved in a crackdown probably worse than this last one, he got plenty of advice about what he should sign.

[Rich teacher]

So the black shirts turned around and started firing at their own people and in the process shot a Japanese photographer. Well I guess that made them oh so popular with the red shirts. Ludicrous.

[Thai at Heart]

So the black shirts turned around and started firing at their own people and in the process shot a Japanese photographer. Well I guess that made them oh so popular with the red shirts. Ludicrous.

As though absolutely no one on red side noticed? Nuts isn't it.

[rubl]

So, we need normal teachers to explain to us logic, truth, half-truths, suggestions, insinuations and believes and the difference.

Regarding this particular inquest into the death of Mr. Hiro the outcome might be that most likely the army in firing while retreating from heavy fire and grenades by 'unknowns' may have caused deaths including that of Mr. Hiro. On the other hand with 'unknowns' firing and lobbing the odd grenade it may be difficult to say so without a shadow of doubt.

The absurd situation of an army having to retreat from peacefully gun firing and grenade lobbing protesters is not part of the topic.

[waza]

So the black shirts turned around and started firing at their own people and in the process shot a Japanese photographer. Well I guess that made them oh so popular with the red shirts. Ludicrous.

I guess all those videos present in this topic that all show it was the blackshirts doing the shooting and killing and the army doing the retreating are just democrat propaganda.

[Rich teacher]

So the black shirts turned around and started firing at their own people and in the process shot a Japanese photographer. Well I guess that made them oh so popular with the red shirts. Ludicrous.

I guess all those videos present in this topic that all show it was the blackshirts doing the shooting and killing and the army doing the retreating are just democrat propaganda.

Yes but this article is about the Japanese reporter who was amongst red shirts. Are you claiming the 'MIB' turned and fired on the red protesters?

[rubl]

The final footage from Reuters reporter Hiroyuki Muramoto:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5dd_1271094999