Bangkok: Armed men in black seen on both sides

[rogerdee123]

It is very clear to me. The protesters were not protesters. They were there to violate the rights of others. The police have the duty to clear obstruction and maintain law and order and enforcing the rule of law but they were faced with resistance and obstruction. The fact that they were bomb thrown at them and gun fight proved the protesters were not protesting anything but trying to create a situation for seizing power from a democratically elected government.

- self deleted post -

Edited February 22, 2014 by rogerdee123

[icommunity]

From the time the M67 hit the police shield and before it was exploded, what was the time elapsed? How long does it take for M67 to explode after the pin was pulled out?

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=257902321053107&set=vb.238637956312877&type=3&theater

[Centrum]

Maybe. As I recall there was a lot of speculation that he had been killed by friendly fire. Of course, we need to remember as well that Seh Deng was shot in the head by a sniper stationed in an eighth floor window of a hospital overlooking the park, another of those "mysterious" men in black. Face it; Suthep's entire plan from day one has been to stoke violence to justify military intervention. To achieve that end he is willing to sacrifice supporters (particularly dark-skinned southerners) for the greater good. Thats just a fact.

Laughable.

If that was his intention why has it taken so long?

Why are the protesters sitting around night after night listening to speeches and musicians instead of getting killed(sacrificed) as you claim

Why aren't they out there 'stoking violence'?

As for speculation..rumour has it that Seh Daeng was assasinated at the command of a high ranking policeman, but until someone is found guilty, it all remains speculation.

Facts? You have very few.

[rogerdee123]

I think Tommy Lee Jones and Will Smith did it.

[richard_smith237]

Sounds too simple...why not arrest anyone "dressed in Black"? On either side. Or is that too easy?

It could be because the guys caught on camera, shooting, throwing grenades etc dressed in black or otherwise are Military... The Police know who they are, but won't take on the Military, the Military have too much power and too much backing...

MiB on both sides plays into the hands of the Military, who will maintain overall control. Perhaps it is the military who are placing these protagonists.

Who really stands to gain from all of this when it seems that two political parties are becoming violent?... Who will take overall control again?

A caretaker government placed by the Military ?..

[casualbiker]

From the time the M67 hit the police shield and before it was exploded, what was the time elapsed? How long does it take for M67 to explode after the pin was pulled out?

6 seconds .. if it was an RGb5 depending on fuse 5 - 12 seconds. If it was a 40mm grenade then read the wiki its variable. " This round incorporated a spin-activation safety feature which prevents the grenade from arming while still within range of the shooter; it armed itself after traveling a distance of about 30 meters."

So IF it was M79 fired and bounced of the tent. It COULD have been his kick that set it off.

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited February 22, 2014 by casualbiker

[fleeing]

Irrespective of who threw the grenade, protester, provocateur, man in black or police, it is clear that the initial violence was instigated by the police, otherwise claimed to be peaceful, and that the following shootings were also perpetrated by the very well prepared police 'men in black'.

The number of shooting casualties on both the police and protesters sides suggests that most shooting was done by the police. The video linked to shows clearly that they were prepared and ready for extreme violence, contradicting again Chalerm's claims, just like the 'men in black' on his ministry building were not police.

If I was a conspiracy type I may just entertain the possibility that Chalerm mounted this operation with the express goal of unleashing violence, with an eye on the, then impending, review of the legality of the State of Emergency. Stranger things have happened.

[ media]http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=164_1393067538[ /media ]

Edited February 22, 2014 by fleeing

[Ricardo]

It is very clear to me. The protesters were not protesters. They were there to violate the rights of others. The police have the duty to clear obstruction and maintain law and order and enforcing the rule of law but they were faced with resistance and obstruction. The fact that they were bomb thrown at them and gun fight proved the protesters were not protesting anything but trying to create a situation for seizing power from a democratically elected government.

"from a democratically elected government."

I know you probably won't answer, but to which "democratically elected government" are you referring, the one which resigned in December when an election was called or the one which has not yet been formed, because the February-2014 election has not yet been completed or declared by the E.C.?

IMO the most interesting thing in the OP is that Men-in-Black are described as being with both groups, amongst the police and amongst the protesters "

"Chon Buri resident Suraphon Wanichtat, 57, was shot in the right side.

He said he saw a group of men wearing black suits among police under the bridge near the Queen's Gallery.

"They were wearing black suits and walking with the police but they did not have police written on their suits," he said."

and also

"Police Sergeant Chaowalit Ritmongsoongnoen, whose right arm was injured by the grenade explosion, said he saw three men wearing black dresses and knitted wool hats walking among protesters and hiding under tamarind trees. They were also holding guns.

"These men in black had appeared from the Nang Lerng intersection," he said.

Chaowalit said the men in black Suraphon saw, under the bridge, were riot control police."

I especially find it very interesting, that Police Seargent Chaowalit confirms the identifies of the ones walking amongst the police, described by shooting-victim Suraphon as not having 'police' written on their costumes, as having been riot control police. So armed-police, in black costumes with no identification, mingle freely with regular police in a tense situation like this.

While many will continue to try to identify the Men-in-Black as 'third hand', or there to help the anti-government protesters, it can no longer be denied that SOMETIMES Men-in-Black are police who are there with CMPO/Chalerm's full knowledge and authorisation.

How many past-incidents (including back in 2010 ?) might be reassessed, in the knowledge of this fact, and how many previous denials of government-involvement are now thrown in-doubt ?

Edited February 22, 2014 by Ricardo

[In Town]

It is very clear to me. The protesters were not protesters. They were there to violate the rights of others. The police have the duty to clear obstruction and maintain law and order and enforcing the rule of law but they were faced with resistance and obstruction. The fact that they were bomb thrown at them and gun fight proved the protesters were not protesting anything but trying to create a situation for seizing power from a democratically elected government.

"from a democratically elected government."

I know you probably won't answer, but to which "democratically elected government" are you referring, the one which resigned in December when an election was called or the one which has not yet been formed, because the February-2014 election has not yet been completed or declared by the E.C.?

IMO the most interesting thing in the OP is that Men-in-Black are described as being with both groups, amongst the police and amongst the protesters "

"Chon Buri resident Suraphon Wanichtat, 57, was shot in the right side.

He said he saw a group of men wearing black suits among police under the bridge near the Queen's Gallery.

"They were wearing black suits and walking with the police but they did not have police written on their suits," he said."

and also

"Police Sergeant Chaowalit Ritmongsoongnoen, whose right arm was injured by the grenade explosion, said he saw three men wearing black dresses and knitted wool hats walking among protesters and hiding under tamarind trees. They were also holding guns.

"These men in black had appeared from the Nang Lerng intersection," he said.

Chaowalit said the men in black Suraphon saw, under the bridge, were riot control police."

I especially find it very interesting, that Police Seargent Chaowalit confirms the identifies of the ones walking amongst the police, described by shooting-victim Suraphon as not having 'police' written on their costumes, as having been riot control police. So armed-police, in black costumes with no identification, mingle freely with regular police in a tense situation like this.

While many will continue to try to identify the Men-in-Black as 'third hand', or there to help the anti-government protesters, it can no longer be denied that SOMETIMES Men-in-Black are police who are there with CMPO/Chalerm's full knowledge and authorisation.

How many past-incidents (including back in 2010 ?) might be reassessed, in the knowledge of this fact, and how many previous denials of government-involvement are now thrown in-doubt ?

Very true. And sometimes men in black are hipsters and beatniks.

[phuketrichard]

at 29 secs it looks like his left foot is back when it went off at 30 secs

so i does not appear ( at least to me) he actually kicked it

[casualbiker]

Sounds too simple...why not arrest anyone "dressed in Black"? On either side. Or is that too easy?

It could be because the guys caught on camera, shooting, throwing grenades etc dressed in black or otherwise are Military... The Police know who they are, but won't take on the Military, the Military have too much power and too much backing...

MiB on both sides plays into the hands of the Military, who will maintain overall control. Perhaps it is the military who are placing these protagonists.

Who really stands to gain from all of this when it seems that two political parties are becoming violent?... Who will take overall control again?

A caretaker government placed by the Military ?..

I have to ask.. WHAT guys in black shooting and throwing grenades at the police were caught on camera on Tuesday 18 FEBRUARY?

BNC,Kindly found ONE picture of a protester firing a hand gun at the police.. Do you have any others?

Only men in black that i have seen were in the police ranks!

[whybother]

at 29 secs it looks like his left foot is back when it went off at 30 secs

so i does not appear ( at least to me) he actually kicked it

He didn't kick it. It blew up a fraction of second before he got his foot there.

Also, his foot/leg didn't get blown off. What you see in the video is his riot gear.

[casualbiker]

And it looked like a Russian RGB5 grenade

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[manstr23]

To ("In Town") Just wondering how much the Man in Dubai is paying you to twist things around, especially the burning of Central World. You never heard the "Reds" calling out to burn down Bangkok. Or where you there to observe this. If I know what you look like I perhaps would have seen you.

[englishoak]

Far as the grenades types, where no clear evidence is found any paper can be simply making up the model number or having a stab same as the people here, ask the army or the police here as credible and truthful ? okaaaayy . Just can't tell as all depts say stupid things and blatantly lie all the time.

In this place where there are rules about even mentioning certain things and where people think at only over already a ridiculously high "acceptable normal" level is corruption a problem, what on earth makes you think there is anything honest here at all ?

Men in black is irrelevant . they can wear anything they like and any colour same as camos but if they are helping a particular side then bet your sweet ass its not a third mystery party to someone in that side. Its complicit and supportive.

[dighambara]

Hmm... We now know who the mysterious men in black of 2010 were. Suthep sympathisers from the military acting as agents provocateur. We know who started the fire in Central to justify the murder of innocent protestors. In 2014 we know that a "mysterious" (according to the Nation) grenade was shot at the police by the men in black among the PDRC protestors, and that one protestor was shot by his own side (which is why he had to make the point that he knew it was police because he was getting ready to turn around). We also recall when the Thai government used the only known explosive tear gas grenades to blow off the legs of PAD protestors by striking them in the pocket area of their pants (we reject the alternative explanation that these were poorly constructed homemade explosives that accidentally went off in protestors pockets as to far-fetched to be believable).

HMMM - I have used and seen used many different types of tear gas canisters or 'grenades'. Most of the old ones do not esplode, but burn to produce the gas. More modern ones use a crystaline powder in a glass vial in the 'grenade' so do not even burn - the vial breaks, powder begins to evaporate and no one can stay in the area. I attended a demonstration in a large open area, where a half teaspoon (1/8th of a full grenade) of the powder was in a shoebox opened to teach what such 'teargas' smelled like and it's effects. Even though the shoebox was open for only a few seconds, most students could not remain in their seats and did not return to the demonstration site for many minutes.

[surangw]

The old style explosive M79 grenades looked like balls .... the grenade I saw in that video before it exploded didn't look like a ball. The explosion also wasn't as big as I would have thought (for an M79). Maybe it's a new version .. I don't know ... I admit I don't keep up with armaments etc. But given all the mistakes being made by police in their statements, or the interpreters or the reporters or whoever, or all the above .... I'm still not convinced it was an M79. But in the end it doesn't really matter. The point is .. can we believe what we are being told.

probably chinese fire works modified

[3NUMBAS]

ah the mysterious men in black .surely wearing all black would give a person away if they're up to no good .

a man in white would just blend in and a man in black might as well wear a neon sign on his head .

men in black is a myth IMO .nobody even knows who they are if you speak to knowledgeable locals .

[AleG]

Hmm... We now know who the mysterious men in black of 2010 were. Suthep sympathisers from the military acting as agents provocateur. We know who started the fire in Central to justify the murder of innocent protestors. In 2014 we know that a "mysterious" (according to the Nation) grenade was shot at the police by the men in black among the PDRC protestors, and that one protestor was shot by his own side (which is why he had to make the point that he knew it was police because he was getting ready to turn around). We also recall when the Thai government used the only known explosive tear gas grenades to blow off the legs of PAD protestors by striking them in the pocket area of their pants (we reject the alternative explanation that these were poorly constructed homemade explosives that accidentally went off in protestors pockets as to far-fetched to be believable).

HMMM - I have used and seen used many different types of tear gas canisters or 'grenades'. Most of the old ones do not esplode, but burn to produce the gas. More modern ones use a crystaline powder in a glass vial in the 'grenade' so do not even burn - the vial breaks, powder begins to evaporate and no one can stay in the area. I attended a demonstration in a large open area, where a half teaspoon (1/8th of a full grenade) of the powder was in a shoebox opened to teach what such 'teargas' smelled like and it's effects. Even though the shoebox was open for only a few seconds, most students could not remain in their seats and did not return to the demonstration site for many minutes.

Most of the amputations caused by the exploding tear gas were at the shin level or lower.

In Town, your... vile theory that protesters were carrying explosives in their pockets is preposterous.

[ponchi]

i think is the lie.

we are not !! arm

Edited February 22, 2014 by ponchi

[flashysite]

Violence is expected. It happened in the past, it will happen again. They shouldn't blame anyone. If they don't want to die, stay home. But the police can't stay at home, it's not an option, it's their job.

Sent from my iPhone using ThaiVisa app

[whybother]

Violence is expected. It happened in the past, it will happen again. They shouldn't blame anyone. If they don't want to die, stay home. But the police can't stay at home, it's not an option, it's their job.

Sent from my iPhone using ThaiVisa app

Did you tell that to the red shirts in 2010?

Sent from my phone ...

[flashysite]

Violence is expected. It happened in the past, it will happen again. They shouldn't blame anyone. If they don't want to die, stay home. But the police can't stay at home, it's not an option, it's their job.

Sent from my iPhone using ThaiVisa app

Did you tell that to the red shirts in 2010?

Sent from my phone ...

They get what they deserved too, it's dangerous out there. I'd say learn your lesson, don't blame anyone.

Sent from my iPhone using ThaiVisa app