Sondhi Limthongkul is a lucky man indeed. The controversial media magnate, ally turned nemesis of Thaksin Shinawatra, and founder of the misnamed People’s Alliance for Democracy was apparently left standing after gunmen riddled his van with bullets on 17 April 2009.
At about 5.40am on that day gunmen pulled up beside Sondhi’s van on Samsen Road near the Bank of Thailand and fired for five minutes. Sondhi, his driver and assistant were wounded while a female passenger emerged unscathed, reported The Nation.
Police found 84 shell cases at the scene indicating the use of AK-47, H&K G33 and M16 rifles, plus one unexploded round from an M79 grenade launcher, added The Nation.
Traffic police cameras covering the area went offline the day before while two cameras operated by the city apparently snapped the vehicles but not it seems the attack itself.
The Bangkok Post reported similar details except that the number of spent cases found was nearly 100 while adding that some rounds struck a couple of buses causing no injuries. A photo showed about 30 rounds peppering the front of the van.
Two men stood up from the back of a black pickup truck to shoot at Sonthi’s van said a petrol station attendant reported The Nation on 22 April.
The Bank of Thailand claimed some rounds hit its main building reported The Nation on 23 April. Apparently two shell cases from an AK-47 were found, though where is unclear from the report.
On the 23 April Army Chief General Anupong Paochinda said some of the M16 cartridge cases came from stocks held by the 9th Infantry Division in Kanchanaburi, a few hours from Bangkok.
There were five-to-seven assassins in two pickup trucks said the police on 24 April, reported The Nation. Major General Khattiya Sawasdiphol, popularly known as the colourful maverick Sae Daeng, disputed that the M16 rounds came from the 9th Infantry Division.
Army spokesman Colonel Sansern Kaewkamnerd said it was too early to say the M16 rounds came from army stocks reported the Bangkok Post on 28 April.
Ten gunmen were shooting from 20 metres away from about four trucks said Sondhi, reported The Nation on 3 May.
Meanwhile Thanpuying Viriya Chavakul, lady-in-waiting to queen, denied being the figure Sondhi hinted helped finance the attack, reported the Bangkok Post on 3 May.
Accepting that these reports are accurate in fact and true in intention raises questions.
Is it credible that up to ten gunmen could fire 84 rounds from a range of 20 metres, or less, for up to five minutes yet fail to get all the rounds on to the rather large target?
Is it credible that many high-velocity assault rifle rounds may have missed the van or passed right through without injuring or killing any bystanders, bus passengers or people in nearby buildings?
For so many rounds to miss such a large target at such short range might suggest the gunmen had never fired a rifle until that morning?
Or was it intentional for so many rounds to miss the target?
Yet if it was intentional why did so many rounds hit the van with a great risk that those inside would have been seriously injured or killed?
If assassination was the aim why go to such extravagant lengths with all the risks entailed, why not a couple of guys in dark helmets pulling up on a motorbike with one guy firing a few shots from a pistol into Sondhi’s head?
Might it be that not so many rounds were fired but that the attackers dumped empty cartridge cases at the scene?
Sondhi’s luck must now be the stuff of legend, walking away from so many bullets with not much more than a scratch? Is this credible?
Was anybody in the van at the time of the shooting?
Was it an attempt at assassination or something else?
David Fullbrook is an independent researcher and writer on Asian affairs with public, corporate, and media clients. His website is available here.
17 responses so far ↓
1 anon // May 4, 2009 at 2:49 pm
The menstrual blood of virgins is powerful stuff. Helps repel bullets. Don’t disrespect Sondhi’s magic.
2 Vichai N // May 4, 2009 at 8:35 pm
David Fullbrook is in disbelief that so many rounds could have missed such a large target!
Perhaps David Fullbrook had not fully appreciated the true immense powers of the Thai amulets. Only the magic of Thai amulets to make the wearer invincible to foes and bullets can make it possible. Sondhi L, Thaksin S and many prominent Thais (with lots of enemies) could not have survived (assassination attempts) this long without them (amulets)!
3 Portman // May 4, 2009 at 9:30 pm
It is clear that Sondhi paid for the fake assassination attempt to give himself leverage against Newin, Thaksin, Abhisit, the privy council, Chamlong, Matichon and other potential rivals. The lengths he went to in order to achieve autheniticity and his attention to detail can only be admired. Hiring a marksman who was accurate enough with an M16 that he could fire a round through a heavily smoked car window from 20 metres, hit the gear lever so that the bullet fragmented and the fragments ricocheted into Sondhi’s head with only enough force to penetrate the skull but not enter the brain was nothing short of brilliant. It would have been extremely embarrassing for Sondhi, if he had been totally unscathed while his driver was left as a vegetable. Sondhi obviously felt the pressure to upstage Thaksin’s fake assaassination attempt and rose to the occasion admirably. Perhaps Thaksin was too scared or more likely too tightfisted to do a better job on his own assassination attempt. The car driving the round and round with the barrel of fertiliser in the back but no means of detonating it and the half witted accomplice who didn’t know what time of day or night it was didn’t really cut it at all. He is now claiming there have two more attempts on his life. Hopefully he can put up a better show the next time, now that Sondhi has shown the way.
4 t4e // May 4, 2009 at 9:44 pm
On TV it was impossible to guess or see even a whisper / shade s of a scar on his forehead/head. Thai doctors are truly the best in the world.
No doubt Thai has a great future in medical tourism,
Hollywood movies (Wolverine 2),and of course magic.
5 Nick Nostitz // May 5, 2009 at 1:37 am
I was at the press conference of Sondhi yesterday, less than a meter away from him, and the scar was clearly visible, also still a bit of swelling.
I have also been at the crime scene, and took photos of the car. There were shells everywhere, marks from bullets shot at the ground to shoot out the tires. There was at least one bullet hole in a bus close by. I have also asked locals who were in their shophouses in close proximity. The front seat was full of blood from the driver. I have no doubt whatsoever that this was a very real assassination attempt.
Sometimes people are very lucky. This was Sondhi’s day of luck.
6 chris baker // May 5, 2009 at 2:01 am
Sondhi was wearing a Jatukam Ramathep first edition by Luangta Mahabua.
I’m not sure if this is the one he was wearing in the Virginia video. Does anybody know?
The interesting question is: why is political assassination in Thailand so inefficient? Let’s assume this one was real, and also the bomb, the two sniper attempts, and the self-conflagrating TG plane. Why do none succeed? Because they are all fake? Because the army is incapable?
When was the last successful political assassination in Thailand?
7 polo // May 5, 2009 at 3:08 am
And here I thought that “CSI” might have had an effect on crime reporting.
“Accepting that these reports are accurate in fact and true in intention raises questions.”
You are already completely off track: the reports are not only not exactly consistent — how many shells, how many shooters — but you cite the Nation and Bangkok Post (not exactly good at details in recent years) and military officials (a consistent record only in lying and spinning).
(BTW, how did you get from, a witness sees 2 men in a truck, to “5 to 7 men” in 2 trucks, to “up to 10 gunmen”? This kind of undisciplined reporting begs New Mandala to review its standards. And you to watch more CSI.)
I agree, it’s hard to make a conclusion of whether it was fake or real — it was too dangerous to be fake, yet too much a failure to be real. But one has to start from getting basic facts (yes, difficult in this case), work with the salient information, and not get too dramatic: “high-velocity assault rifle rounds” “for up to five minutes” are not salient or factual.
So sure there are questions, but why aren’t they instead:
- Couldn’t it be that some low-level red-shirts were angry and did it themselves with no detailed plot and practice?
- Are “hitmen” usually really as cool and on target as in the movies? Especially standing in the back of a ?moving? pickup truck. (It’s hard to even drink a beer in one without spilling.)
- If we assume the shooters are military, why should we presume they would be accurate, given Thailand’s record of military performance against its neighbors?
- Does it really matter where the bullets and guns came from? The military is so riddled with corruption they could have all be sold several times over
8 tum|bler // May 5, 2009 at 4:26 am
@Portman:
Regarding the car bomb case, unfortunately the prosecutors did not see it in the same way as you do. While you dismissed it as a ‘fake’ assassination attempt, the prosecutors decided that there was sufficient evidence for the case to be forwarded to the court.
Let’s see what the court’s ruling will be.
9 paul handley // May 5, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Chris, others:
There’s been a bit of comment in these pages recently about magic and amulets and politics, especially in Sondhi’s case. While I don’t at all dismiss true belief in magic and mysticism among leaders, I would remind that these people usually have “dual-use” approaches to magic. They know very clearly the political impact on others, especially followers, of their public acts of magic.
In Sondhi’s case, there is more. In the 1990s his publications actively played up the market for amulets, and meanwhile, if my memory serves correct, he put a some of the money Manager group raised on the stockmarket into amulets, something like 10 of the most expensive and coveted amulets. Again, working from memory, these I think were actually listed as assets in Manager’s company statements.
As for Newin Chidchob, he first came on the national scene as a defender of SET manipulator Sia Song. On his speaking tour with Song he defended Song’s investment as a sort of magic acumen on the economy. Perhaps he believed that — it was not clear Newin at the time understood the basics of economy. But I’m sure Newin was benefiting financially from the partnership, as well as politically.
So I’d remind that when writing about magic or mysticism in politics, one has to be cautious on whether the actor is a real believer or using it more as political theater.
But, yeah, if I had the money I would take a punt and buy a Jatukam Ramathep medal, if the prices haven’t shot up already.
As for political assassinations, above the level of local environmental and rights activists, and local political canvassers, Chris is right: the failures stand out, especially the attempts on Phibun in the 30s and Prem in the 80s. The highest profile one that I can recall is the socialist party leader in 1976. Would you include Jit Phumisak in ?64? Then there were the labor leader ?Thanong? and a chaopho at the beginning of the NPKC’s rule in 1991. Thanong of course disappeared so it was not exactly an assassination; and the chaopoh’s dramatic murder — war weapons, pickup trucks, motorcycles — could be seen at the level of simply rival godfather murders, though I always understood the NPKC was behind it.
Of course, if you accept one standard argument, you could say Ananda was a political assassination.
10 Portman // May 5, 2009 at 5:57 pm
tumbler #8
Yes, military prosecutors filed charges against three officers who were suspects in the car bomb assassination attempt in March 2007 but they seem to have been dragging their heels a bit since then. Even though they proceeded with the case, does that mean it was real or just a bungled fake attempt, in which the tub of fertiliser and tangle of wires were intended to be found in the car without the driver? It seems more likely that, after the coup, the military would want to punish officers who staged a fake attempt paid for by Thaksin than those who staged a real one or in the latter case, perhaps they want to punish them for being unsuccessful. The easiest way to prosecute them and the way that would carry the highest penalties be to take the case at face value and prosecute them for a real assassination attempt.
11 Portman // May 5, 2009 at 6:22 pm
Chris Baker #6
Interesting point. High level assassination attempts of political figures seem to get nowhere, even with the resources and training of the military at the assassins’ disposal, while lowly political canvassers drop like nine pins at election time, felled in low budget 9mm pistol assassinations.
One of the problems is clearly that Thai Buddhist assassins quite reasonably expect to enjoy material remuneration (along with their 72 virgins) while still on this earth, which renders impractical the suicide bombs that are so effective against high value targets in Sri Lanka, India and the Middle East, where it is easy to indoctrinate fanatics to dispense with themselves along with the target. However, there is no room for complacency. Where unlimited cash and well educated, daring operatives are available, it is logical that higher technology solutions will be sought to tackle the problem. Following his call to arms it is not unlikely that Jakrophob Penkhair is now ruggedly attired in battle fatigues, while practicing to take out political targets from 1,500 metres with a Barret .50 sniper rifle through a hole drilled in the back of a Carry Boy.
12 chris baker // May 6, 2009 at 12:24 am
Paul #9
I guess we need to classify more finely. Thanong Po-An and Lawyer Somchai should be bracketed as abductions. These seem to succeed.
In the cases of Sondhi L., the car bomb, Boonsanong, and Klaeo Thanikul, the public violence is part of the message. These seem more variable.
The Klaeo case was the closest to Sondhi. The driver was hit too, and they found over a hundred M16 shells around the car. But the difference was that they blocked the car to a halt, and made very sure of the job.
I’m not sure I understand your thought about “believing in” supernaturalism or not. How would we know? How would they know? The point of our paper posted elsewhere on NM is that this supernaturalism has been closely bound up with power for a long time.
13 Sidh S // May 6, 2009 at 12:36 am
Playing an amateur arm-chair investigator and assuming the assasination attempt is genuine:
1) I read that Sondhi’s guard, following in another car, fought off the assassins?
2) The car has dark tinted windows – assassins thought Sondhi was driving (and hence the driver was seriously injured).
Of course for the believers :
3) Jatukam Ramathep first edition by Luangta Mahabua
(Admittedly I am in the ‘unsure’ group – at least “maicheuryalopluu” – “if you don’t believe, don’t make fun off it”. I hang a Buddha and a Ganesha amulet that an Aunt gave me. I don’t know how old they are or their history as I am not a collector. For years I’ve been told to get another one as 2 is isn’t a good number)
The masterminds? Manager has been implying Newin, GenAnupong, GenPravit and TPYViriya… I kind of doubt it but IF it is any of them, the police will not be able to find incriminating evidences that goes up that far.
14 maverick263 // May 6, 2009 at 2:28 am
@ chris baker:
besides the magic, you ask, “The interesting question is: why is political assassination in Thailand so inefficient?”
it’s thailand
what you call “efficient”… is it anything else but to throw a net of assumptions & rationalizations across “experience”?
i’m glad, i am, political assassination in Thailand is so… “inefficient”
15 El Salvador // May 6, 2009 at 5:30 am
The 1996 killing of MCOT’s Saengchai — would that count?
At any rate, it seems like a good time to reread Ben Anderson on Murder and Progress in Modern Siam, in his book The Spectre of Comparisons, and also here, or so I’m told:
http://www.filefactory.com/file/agf38b6/n/anderson_11_pdf
16 tum|bler // May 6, 2009 at 7:15 am
Portman #10
Thanks for offering an alternative explanation of the case.
17 Nicholas Farrelly // May 6, 2009 at 3:37 pm
In response to Polo’s comment:
BTW, how did you get from, a witness sees 2 men in a truck, to “5 to 7 men” in 2 trucks, to “up to 10 gunmen”? This kind of undisciplined reporting begs New Mandala to review its standards. And you to watch more CSI.”
David Fullbrook writes:
High-velocity assault rifles is not dramatic. The rifles reportedly used high velocity rounds as opposed to low velocity rounds fired by pistols. High velocity rounds have a high chance of passing through soft vehicles like cars, as well as trees, walls, etc. Five minutes is what the paper said. I added ‘up to’.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.