Chalerm told to clarify “men in black” at the Labour Ministry

[JRSoul]

OK, you read right to left, Chinese style, twice.

If these are riot police, and the police officer was shot from a height as reported by police officials, wouldn't a reasonable amount of suspicion that the shot came from this location be necessary in any investigation?

It wasn't filmed with a drone so how about the location from where the video was shot? or any other location?

I am saying on the evidence of this video these guys are definitely not snipers, anti-riot police throw gas canisters and run around snipers do not.

I commented on the video but now if you want to completely speculate and have the last word be my guest.

Professional snipers deliver carefully aimed shots, which was unnecessary here. A few rounds into the front of the crowd would have the desired effect. No need for high power specialist rifles and equipment, a hand gun would do.

Certainly any location with line of sight and range should be looked at, and this is the prime example. Protesters have every right of an explanation as to the presence and identity of these men (maintenance or not, ratty).

[Mosha]

Suthep is claiming those guys are Cambodian. No point asking Chalerm, he's not got long to live if he keeps his word,

[LuckyLew]

Will Smith making an MIB sequel

Now who will play the alien leader ... Yingluck or Suthep .

[Maha Sarakham Marty]

Suthep is claiming those guys are Cambodian. No point asking Chalerm, he's not got long to live if he keeps his word,

Will the beheading be shown live on Oaf's Voice TV channel?

[Skywalker69]

Will Smith making an MIB sequel

Now who will play the alien leader ... Yingluck or Suthep .

Now who will play the alien leader

The man afar!

[Yunla]

I like the way that photo has been framed so elegantly, and ironically too, in a way.

[brianP]

Hunker down mates.

[smedly]

No weapons there, probably gathering intel on movements in order to inform those on the ground.

there is not enough detail in the photo to make that conclusion, pity the shot wasn't a little closer or taken with a half decent lens - this is were I'd have had foreign press involved taking those shots

none the less highly suspect and sinister

[wprime]

No weapons there, probably gathering intel on movements in order to inform those on the ground.

there is not enough detail in the photo to make that conclusion, pity the shot wasn't a little closer or taken with a half decent lens - this is were I'd have had foreign press involved taking those shots

none the less highly suspect and sinister

Have a look at the video, they have guns and they are shooting.

Also those comments about them not being snipers, Thai people seem to use the word sniper for any gunman shooting from a distance.

[whybother]

The dead policeman was apparently shot from a height. These "men in black" are shooting something from a height. This has to be explained by the government.

[smedly]

The video of the roof shows one of the men in black firing at 11 seconds, as there is a clear puff of smoke.

So now I have a question, as I do not know much about firearms:

Would guns that fire live rounds emit such an obvious puff of smoke? I thought that modern rifles used smokeless powder based on cordite etc rather than non-gaseous black powder.

However, when I have seen (on video) the firing of rubber bullets or tear gas these do seem to give a puff of smoke.

Rubber rounds are designed to be fired at ground level and hitting the ground first they lose a lot of energy over a short distance due to their size, at close range or if fired from above could be quite dangerous or perhaps lethal

The video footage being shown on this thread so far is quite shocking, I could be wrong but I can hear gunshots in most of them

[smedly]

I looked at the video again. It's been more than a hundred years since rifles are smokeless, as it gave the shooters position. I know the Thais are a little behind but come on.

when I fired my 357 there was a 2 foot flame from the barrel (with smoke) actually it's not smoke as such it's un-burnt particles that are ejected along with the round

[Mosha]

The dead policeman was apparently shot from a height. These "men in black" are shooting something from a height. This has to be explained by the government.

I said the other day that poor guy could have been the victlm of "friendly" fire.

[englishoak]

OK, you read right to left, Chinese style, twice.

If these are riot police, and the police officer was shot from a height as reported by police officials, wouldn't a reasonable amount of suspicion that the shot came from this location be necessary in any investigation?

It wasn't filmed with a drone so how about the location from where the video was shot? or any other location?

I am saying on the evidence of this video these guys are definitely not snipers, anti-riot police throw gas canisters and run around snipers do not.

I commented on the video but now if you want to completely speculate and have the last word be my guest.

Professional snipers deliver carefully aimed shots, which was unnecessary here. A few rounds into the front of the crowd would have the desired effect. No need for high power specialist rifles and equipment, a hand gun would do.

Certainly any location with line of sight and range should be looked at, and this is the prime example. Protesters have every right of an explanation as to the presence and identity of these men (maintenance or not, ratty).

Showed the vid to a policeman ( armed unit ) stationed heathrow 12 years exp army previous. Trained in the use of both live fire ammunition, crowd control and appropriate weaponry.

Verdict: just his opinion nothing overly unusual about it, regular crowd control arms, teargas useage, probably fire crackers for noise and effect and non lethal crowd control looking type firearm, most likely rubber bullet type. very unlikely stun grenades used from what he could see and hear.

certainly not any live fire evidence he could see, smoke from weapon on the right not sniper fire almost certainly crowd control projectile using appropriate firearm.

No sniper runs about, it takes time and training to line up on moving targets its not drop and shoot if your picking your target thats for the movies.

Personally I have to say it looks like regular riot control stuff used by non fully armoured riot police to me.

Not every single incident has to be nefarious or some exciting news breaking revelation. people just arnt used to seeing things from the behind the lines angle so to speak I see only what id say were part of the riot police unit on the roof using the high ground, nothing mega about it.

this is only an opinion but i will go with the trained m8 rather than the conspiracy theorists.

Oh he did add this would not ever be allowed in the UK as rubber bullets when used from high up can carry lethal force then again he did also say if they were police they are a shambles and hes not like to be backed up by them in times of need

Edited December 28, 2013 by englishoak

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and inflammatory remarks have been removed as well as replies.

Stay on topic please.

[rogerdee123]

I looked at the video again. It's been more than a hundred years since rifles are smokeless, as it gave the shooters position. I know the Thais are a little behind but come on.

when I fired my 357 there was a 2 foot flame from the barrel (with smoke) actually it's not smoke as such it's un-burnt particles that are ejected along with the round

but your 357 flame came from a 3-4 inch barrel. I think they are talking about rifles.

[SOTIRIOS]

...same as last time.....and frame the anti-government demonstrators and leaders....

[Ricardo]

The guys in black, on the roof of the building, are clearly not maintenance-workers, they're not sleeping !

[waza]

More footage of the roof top men in black..........

http://youtu.be/wVsVIaaqaus

Edited December 28, 2013 by waza

[tonneke breda]

Looks like maintenance people to me. Too far way I don't see an guns. Only workers.

Yeah and Thai workers are going to wear black suits in the full sun??

get a life and stay out of things you do not know about, you might get hurt yourself.

[JRSoul]

OK, you read right to left, Chinese style, twice.

If these are riot police, and the police officer was shot from a height as reported by police officials, wouldn't a reasonable amount of suspicion that the shot came from this location be necessary in any investigation?

It wasn't filmed with a drone so how about the location from where the video was shot? or any other location?

I am saying on the evidence of this video these guys are definitely not snipers, anti-riot police throw gas canisters and run around snipers do not.

I commented on the video but now if you want to completely speculate and have the last word be my guest.

Professional snipers deliver carefully aimed shots, which was unnecessary here. A few rounds into the front of the crowd would have the desired effect. No need for high power specialist rifles and equipment, a hand gun would do.

Certainly any location with line of sight and range should be looked at, and this is the prime example. Protesters have every right of an explanation as to the presence and identity of these men (maintenance or not, ratty).

Showed the vid to a policeman ( armed unit ) stationed heathrow 12 years exp army previous. Trained in the use of both live fire ammunition, crowd control and appropriate weaponry.

Verdict: just his opinion nothing overly unusual about it, regular crowd control arms, teargas useage, probably fire crackers for noise and effect and non lethal crowd control looking type firearm, most likely rubber bullet type. very unlikely stun grenades used from what he could see and hear.

certainly not any live fire evidence he could see, smoke from weapon on the right not sniper fire almost certainly crowd control projectile using appropriate firearm.

No sniper runs about, it takes time and training to line up on moving targets its not drop and shoot if your picking your target thats for the movies.

Personally I have to say it looks like regular riot control stuff used by non fully armoured riot police to me.

Not every single incident has to be nefarious or some exciting news breaking revelation. people just arnt used to seeing things from the behind the lines angle so to speak I see only what id say were part of the riot police unit on the roof using the high ground, nothing mega about it.

this is only an opinion but i will go with the trained m8 rather than the conspiracy theorists.

Oh he did add this would not ever be allowed in the UK as rubber bullets when used from high up can carry lethal force then again he did also say if they were police they are a shambles and hes not like to be backed up by them in times of need

Despite the opinion of your friend (fictitious or not), I stand by the statement I made in my last post; that this is the most likely site for the source of the gunfire, it should be investigated, and those previously blamed have every right to an explanation (official, not some "mate's) as to who was there and why.

And I repeat, there was no need for aimed shots, emptying a hand gun into the melee would have the desired effect of increasing the level of perceived violence.

[newcomer71]

It wasn't filmed with a drone so how about the location from where the video was shot? or any other location?

I am saying on the evidence of this video these guys are definitely not snipers, anti-riot police throw gas canisters and run around snipers do not.

I commented on the video but now if you want to completely speculate and have the last word be my guest.

Professional snipers deliver carefully aimed shots, which was unnecessary here. A few rounds into the front of the crowd would have the desired effect. No need for high power specialist rifles and equipment, a hand gun would do.

Certainly any location with line of sight and range should be looked at, and this is the prime example. Protesters have every right of an explanation as to the presence and identity of these men (maintenance or not, ratty).

Showed the vid to a policeman ( armed unit ) stationed heathrow 12 years exp army previous. Trained in the use of both live fire ammunition, crowd control and appropriate weaponry.

Verdict: just his opinion nothing overly unusual about it, regular crowd control arms, teargas useage, probably fire crackers for noise and effect and non lethal crowd control looking type firearm, most likely rubber bullet type. very unlikely stun grenades used from what he could see and hear.

certainly not any live fire evidence he could see, smoke from weapon on the right not sniper fire almost certainly crowd control projectile using appropriate firearm.

No sniper runs about, it takes time and training to line up on moving targets its not drop and shoot if your picking your target thats for the movies.

Personally I have to say it looks like regular riot control stuff used by non fully armoured riot police to me.

Not every single incident has to be nefarious or some exciting news breaking revelation. people just arnt used to seeing things from the behind the lines angle so to speak I see only what id say were part of the riot police unit on the roof using the high ground, nothing mega about it.

this is only an opinion but i will go with the trained m8 rather than the conspiracy theorists.

Oh he did add this would not ever be allowed in the UK as rubber bullets when used from high up can carry lethal force then again he did also say if they were police they are a shambles and hes not like to be backed up by them in times of need

Despite the opinion of your friend (fictitious or not), I stand by the statement I made in my last post; that this is the most likely site for the source of the gunfire, it should be investigated, and those previously blamed have every right to an explanation (official, not some "mate's) as to who was there and why.

And I repeat, there was no need for aimed shots, emptying a hand gun into the melee would have the desired effect of increasing the level of perceived violence.

Your last sentence is really interesting. Who would desire effect of violence onto the protesters?

[wprime]

Well only the government had access to that roof top so if it is indeed the source of the elevated shootings then obviously is it the government that desires to increase the level of violence.

[JRSoul]

Despite the opinion of your friend (fictitious or not), I stand by the statement I made in my last post; that this is the most likely site for the source of the gunfire, it should be investigated, and those previously blamed have every right to an explanation (official, not some "mate's) as to who was there and why.

And I repeat, there was no need for aimed shots, emptying a hand gun into the melee would have the desired effect of increasing the level of perceived violence.

Your last sentence is really interesting. Who would desire effect of violence onto the protesters?

Who gains? I'll leave that up to you, but over the last 5+ years, almost every group taking an anti-Thaksin stance has been subject to acts of extreme violence by persons unknown. Drive-by shootings fire-bombing of homes, and explosive rounds are the norm, rather than unusual.

And there are persons who would feel much more justified in claiming the anti-thaksin protesters are anti-democratic if they could be portrayed as violent as the red protesters in 2010.

[newcomer71]

Your last sentence is really interesting. Who would desire effect of violence onto the protesters?

Who gains? I'll leave that up to you, but over the last 5+ years, almost every group taking an anti-Thaksin stance has been subject to acts of extreme violence by persons unknown. Drive-by shootings fire-bombing of homes, and explosive rounds are the norm, rather than unusual.

And there are persons who would feel much more justified in claiming the anti-thaksin protesters are anti-democratic if they could be portrayed as violent as the red protesters in 2010.

If your theory (not explicitly written but clear) is correct, how you would explain the policeman dead and more than 10 policeman wounded by gun shots?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[mumjokmok]

Indeed, increase the level of perceived controversy first. The politics in practice here amongst the supporters of the parties is a bit like Millwall v West Ham anyway. Whoever can show clearly so and so is more violent gets the upper hand for five minutes on the television sets. This government may have to tread a bit more carefully in putting this down than the previous government was in 2010, but they seem to always have the red light of the Western media shining on them, so I don't think they will be debating the MIB on the Al Jazeera machine too soon, and it might just turn out they were plumbers trying to find the mains, on the roof...

[Robby nz]

If you read what I said I say to far away to tell if they had weapons. I can tell a maintenance guy when I see one. So you relax and stop getting so worked up over something that is none of your business.

Another idiot red poster trying to make silly excuses.

It is my business, my Mrs was there and she phoned me and told me long before these photos and videos came out that people were shooting at them from the roof.

As it is obviously none of your business you are the one who should butt out.

[JRSoul]

Your last sentence is really interesting. Who would desire effect of violence onto the protesters?

Who gains? I'll leave that up to you, but over the last 5+ years, almost every group taking an anti-Thaksin stance has been subject to acts of extreme violence by persons unknown. Drive-by shootings fire-bombing of homes, and explosive rounds are the norm, rather than unusual.

And there are persons who would feel much more justified in claiming the anti-thaksin protesters are anti-democratic if they could be portrayed as violent as the red protesters in 2010.

If your theory (not explicitly written but clear) is correct, how you would explain the policeman dead and more than 10 policeman wounded by gun shots?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Does it matter (in regard to the perception of violence) who is hit by the bullets? If a handgun was used from a rooftop, the odds of hitting an intended target are small, but the chances of hitting someone in a crowd is huge. And that is all that is required to make the news.

[casualbiker]

Your last sentence is really interesting. Who would desire effect of violence onto the protesters?

Who gains? I'll leave that up to you, but over the last 5+ years, almost every group taking an anti-Thaksin stance has been subject to acts of extreme violence by persons unknown. Drive-by shootings fire-bombing of homes, and explosive rounds are the norm, rather than unusual.

And there are persons who would feel much more justified in claiming the anti-thaksin protesters are anti-democratic if they could be portrayed as violent as the red protesters in 2010.

If your theory (not explicitly written but clear) is correct, how you would explain the policeman dead and more than 10 policeman wounded by gun shots?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Can you link to where more than 10 police have been injured by gun shots? it wouldn't be Thai Rath by any chance?

I have seen threads with injuries to policemen, some stating that they were inflicted accidentally by other police. Thanks

[newcomer71]

Your last sentence is really interesting. Who would desire effect of violence onto the protesters?

Who gains? I'll leave that up to you, but over the last 5+ years, almost every group taking an anti-Thaksin stance has been subject to acts of extreme violence by persons unknown. Drive-by shootings fire-bombing of homes, and explosive rounds are the norm, rather than unusual.

And there are persons who would feel much more justified in claiming the anti-thaksin protesters are anti-democratic if they could be portrayed as violent as the red protesters in 2010.

If your theory (not explicitly written but clear) is correct, how you would explain the policeman dead and more than 10 policeman wounded by gun shots?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Can you link to where more than 10 police have been injured by gun shots? it wouldn't be Thai Rath by any chance?

I have seen threads with injuries to policemen, some stating that they were inflicted accidentally by other police. Thanks

I'm sincerely lazy to find the link again, just look on Thaivisa news link of last 2 days and you will find it. As far as I remember Thaivisa doesn't quote thai speaking newspapers, including so Thai Rath. I even didn't tell this statement is true but only fairly asking the poster how that would influence his theory.

I'll search for links saying that policeman suffered friendly fire, or friendly beating too.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited December 28, 2013 by newcomer71