Terrorism worries in thailand

[pantarei]

“Hanlon’s Razor” provides a good basis for scepticism toward conspiracy theories: "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity''.  

Quite often it is ignorance rather than stupidity.  For example, many blunders committed by policy-makers worldwide can (in retrospect) be attributed to ignorance rather than to stupidity or malice.  

Hanlon’s razor is a corollary of Ockham’s Razor.  A brief “razor” explanation is given at:

http://phyun5.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node10.html

[wolf5370]

No I don't think SARS was 'created' and loosed on the world. However, I think it was used and blown out of proportion by several western governments that had other problems that they needed moving from the front page. This includes both Britain and the US. I remember reading a small segment from a Chinese scientist who was surpised by the publicity and said this happens every year; a flu or retrovirus mutation - usually it stays in China, but sometimes moves to HK and sometimes on. Usually it passes by unnoticed as the symptoms are not severe. Sometimes they are worse - as in SARS - but this is not the worst outbreak. It was hardly the 1911 flu pandemic nor is it the worst agent (disease) in circulation at the moment. As someone said Malaria kills far more so does AIDS and any number of other diseases - anyone remember the Ebola cases in the USA a few years back?

The conspiracy is a conspiracy of spin. It can hardly escape anyone's notice of how spin is being used of late. To launch wars against the 'axis of evil' - whether this is right or wrong is not the issue, it is all about whether we have the right to intercede. 9/11 was despicable and the calls for vegence loud, but terroism is a hard target to hit - a single terrorist group is even harder - so word the reports just so, and spin the media just so and we have the perfect compromise - we give the people an answer to their pain and anger and we get to topple 'unfriendly' governments while we're at it. Did the taking of Afganistan and the toppling of the Taliban give us the culprit, Bin Laden. No. Did the invasion of Iraq give us piece of mind by removing any WMD's. No.

In Britain there is a media frenzy at the moment over the Hutton inquiry (Where a man named over the Iraq Dossier 'inacuarcies' commited suicide). A report used for justification for invading Iraq - full of miss-quotes and guesses presented as fact - this is what took the UK to war. Pure spin. There is your conspiracy.

[Membrane]

I don't think the west put any spin at all on the SARS crisis.  The reason SARS grabbed as much attention as it did is because it was apparently a new, mysterious disease and a very deadly one.  Anytime a new and deadly disease appears (which is rare), it is certain to grab the headlines, especially if no one knows how it spread or how it started.  And even more so if it is extremely contagious, especially in this day when someone can spread it over multiple continents within just a few days (which is what happened with SARS).  All of those factors are all the elements needed for panic to occur and when panic exists, that's when you get major headline share.

And you want to talk about putting a spin on things?  Remember that a spin can be applied in either direction!  How about putting a spin on the normal reaction (panic) to a new, mysterious, deadly and highly contagious disease, saying that if there are any headlines covering the disease, that it's "the west" trying to shift attention from the Iraq war?  What if you were to put a spin saying that it was "the west" trying to bring down Thailand's economy?  What if you were to put a spin on the situation saying it was "the west" that "may have" created SARS in some test tube in some secret U.S. lab?  Hmm?  Spins can go in either direction.  And then you could even say "Go ahead!  Prove me wrong!"  But of course, you can't "prove that wrong", simply because it's impossible.

So you can spin things in either direction, and that's what a lot of people are doing here on this board.  There is so much paranoia and suspicion about "the west".  Come on guys, get a job!  Get a life!  "The west" is not to blame for every little thing that comes along.  News events out there in the real world come and go.  There is a natural ebb and flow to the attention things get.  To say that "the west" manipulated the attention SARS got is baseless and just slightly paranoic.

[Membrane]

Did the taking of Afganistan and the toppling of the Taliban give us the culprit, Bin Laden? No.

No, but it might have slowed him down a bit!    Plus, it's better to try (and even fail on some level), than to try not try at all.  Right?

Anyway, getting Bin Laden wasn't the only reason for going into Afghanistan.  The reason for going into Afghanistan was to try to find Bin Laden, topple the Taliban regime, break the terrorist training camps there, free the Afghani people, rebuild their country and leave them with a stronger, self-ruling, democratic government.  (Sound familiar?)  And all of that was accomplished, or is very near complete.  ...All except finding one man and bringing him to justice, before a world court.  And the story is not over yet.

Did the invasion of Iraq give us piece of mind by removing any WMD's. No.

Since no one knew exactly where they were (without going into the country and physically looking), no one now knows exactly where to find them.  But that doesn't mean they didn't exist.  Remember Saddam was/is a clever guy.  He played the U.N. and the world for about 12 years.  He had plenty of time to rig the game; hiding or exporting the evidence to neighboring countrys.

But again, obviously Iraq did have WMDs; there are many dead Kurds who are all the evidence we need to know that.  See this page for all the proof you need, (from the "Physicians for Human Rights" web site):

Nerve Gas used in Northern Iraq on Kurds

An excerpt:

Eyewitnesses have said that Iraqi warplanes dropped three clusters each of four bombs on the village of Birjinni on August 25, 1988. Observers recall seeing a plume of black, then yellowish smoke, followed by a not-unpleasant odor similar to fertilizer, and also a smell like rotten garlic. Shortly afterwards, villagers began to have trouble breathing, their eyes watered, their skin blistered, and many vomited--some of whom died. All of these symptoms are consistent with a poison gas attack.

"These scientific results prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Iraqi government has consistently lied to the world on denying that these attacks occurred."

[wilson steer]

Yes, I am worried about terrorism in Thailand.

Himbali was found here a few weeks ago. There are moslem extremists in the south of the country.

Targets would probably be Bangkok or Pattaya, possibly hotels, the airport or night clubs or discos. Who knows?

One thing I am certain of is that there will be a moslem terrorist strike soon in S.E. Asia and that Thailand is probably the easiest target.

[chonabot]

With regards to international terrorism it amazes me , the amount of people accusing the West of "spin" "conspiracy" etc , never seem to have a problem with the acts that have been committed , i.e "Twin towers" "Bali bombing" "Kurds gassed in Iraq" "Lockerbie bombing" .

What's next "Apec bombing in Bkk"  ???????

I hope to Christ not , but will this blame be directed to the West also?

Heres hoping not.......

[Pinkster]

I have to take point with membranes last post. In it, he/she says the reason for invading afganistan, amongst others, was to free the afgani people, rebuild the country and leave them with a stronger self ruling democratic government......

Thats your opinion, but according to the UN the taliban have simply been replaced by a number of war lords equally as brutal as there predecessors, where women have absolutley no more rights than before. The big differance is that they are backed by the US, and thus have absolute power. There is no democracy.....

As for rebuilding, the US has donated 300 million $, a lot of money to you and me, but to a rebuild a country, probably enough to get the electricity turned on.......

My point is, we all have opinions, to you yours are correct, to me mine. Mine is that invading afganistan was revenge and revenge only, for 11/9. You obviously would not agree.

Your opinion on WMD and Iraq and the evidance provided is not evidance they had WMD now (or 6 months ago)....... it was a number of years ago. Its like saying Germany still hopes to invade other nations to obtain an empire, simply because they did something similar in the past. Im sure they dont  ???

In response to the original post...... yes, i am worried about a possible terrorist attack. The only thing i can take from it is this. Usually (11/9, Bali) have come as comlete surprise to ordinary folk, APEC, and the possible terrorist threat has been well highlighted, which means the planning and preperation is too advanced for the those wishing to create a disturbance.

[Membrane]

the taliban have simply been replaced by a number of war lords equally as brutal as there predecessors, where women have absolutley no more rights than before. The big differance is that they are backed by the US, and thus have absolute power

No, sorry the U.S. definetly does not back brutal war lords in Afghanistan (any more than they did in Somalia).  What has happened is (now that the Taliban are gone) opportunistic warlords are trying to seize power in certain areas of the country, before the infrastructure of the new government has been fully set up.  But they do not have the backing of the U.S... never.

US has donated 300 million $

$300M sounds too low but I'm not sure where to go to find out the correct figure, so I'll just pass over that one.  I strongly suspect though, that the figure is much, much higher.  GW just asked for $87 BILLION to continue activities in Iraq, so $300 million just seems too low.

invading afganistan was revenge and revenge only, for 11/9. You obviously would not agree.

Revenge?  Well actually, that's probably pretty close.  Retaliation is probably a more accurate word.  Afghanistan was a hot bed of terrorists, complete with training camps, and of course OBL himself.  The point was to find those responsible and make them stop...  So why not strike there?  

Look, the U.S. was directly attacked.  And it wasn't soldiers in a battle field some where that got hit.  It was everyday working people like you and me.  Innocent people, working at their jobs.  Osama and his terrorists took credit for it and they were in Afghanistan, so Bush went after them.  So?  If that's where the responsible parties are, then strike.  

Unfortunately, this is a far different kind of war and it calls for a different set of retalitory tactics; different than what we've seen in the past. Like the Internet, Al Quaeda is a network that is spread out, with tenacles all over the world.  Even though Saddam may not have any direct links to 9-11, he has a history of supporting terrorists, threatening his neighbors, being aggressive, etc., etc.  Do I have private, inside knowledge of the intelligence reports used to make the decision?  No, of course not and neither do you, more than likely.  And I'll concede that apparently there may have been some incorrect information passed on along the way.  

But one thing is for sure, with all of Saddam's intimidation, aggressive posturing and activities (invading Kuwait, killing/raping his own people, etc.), he had the chance to let the inspectors in and do their job, and he f*cked with them every step along the way.  If he didn't have WMDs, then he should have opened the doors.  If I get stopped on the road by a police and he wants to search my car for cocaine, I'm going to let him.

Had 9-11 not happened, then maybe the urgency would not have been felt to do something about Saddam.  But that day changed everything, and not just the Americans.  I'm afraid now there's no going back for anyone, anywhere.

Now is it America's job to act as the police of the world?  No, but if they are directly attacked on U.S. soil, and if the attackers can quickly disperse and retreat inside countries that are friendly to them and show a history of being anti-American, then... unfortunately, I think we're going to see more unconventional maneuvers like the war on Iraq.

I really would rather have peace.  I hope and pray for peace.  I don't want the world to be this way.  That's one reason why I like Thailand so much, it seems so different than anywhere else.  But unfortunately, there's a lot of bad in the world.  And I can't blame the Americans for doing what they need to do; to find the ones who are responsible and make them stop.  I think if it were your country, you'd probably feel the same way.

[pnustedt]

In Britain there is a media frenzy at the moment over the Hutton inquiry (Where a man named over the Iraq Dossier 'inacuarcies' commited suicide). A report used for justification for invading Iraq - full of miss-quotes and guesses presented as fact - this is what took the UK to war. Pure spin. There is your conspiracy.

Oh, I thought the Hutton Enquiry was still sitting and hearing evidence and that it would then decide if, indeed, there is (or was) a conspiracy?

Maybe they're wasting their time as you already know the answer, or maybe you are the one creating the spin.

The SARS epidemic was not blown out of proportion by "Western Governments". The panic eminated from the regions affected where there was histeria - you should have been living in HK in a tower block where people were being whisked away to isolation wards, working with workmates who, likewise were suddenly taken away. Some to die (figures vary but above 5%). Nobody in their right mind living in HK in April would say that "Western Governments" were putting a spin on things!

Such situations are very newsworthy and newspapers sell on sensational stories. Some people get the sensational stories mixed up with facts and there is confusion and mistrust as a result.

This has nothing to do with governments spinning - more a trait of a free society. Unfortunately, some freedoms may suffer as a result.

[parryhandy]

the taliban have simply been replaced by a number of war lords equally as brutal as there predecessors, where women have absolutley no more rights than before. The big differance is that they are backed by the US, and thus have absolute power

No, sorry the U.S. definetly does not back brutal war lords in Afghanistan (any more than they did in Somalia).  What has happened is (now that the Taliban are gone) opportunistic warlords are trying to seize power in certain areas of the country, before the infrastructure of the new government has been fully set up.  But they do not have the backing of the U.S... never.

US has donated 300 million $

$300M sounds too low but I'm not sure where to go to find out the correct figure, so I'll just pass over that one.  I strongly suspect though, that the figure is much, much higher.  GW just asked for $87 BILLION to continue activities in Iraq, so $300 million just seems too low.

invading afganistan was revenge and revenge only, for 11/9. You obviously would not agree.

Revenge?  Well actually, that's probably pretty close.  Retaliation is probably a more accurate word.  Afghanistan was a hot bed of terrorists, complete with training camps, and of course OBL himself.  The point was to find those responsible and make them stop...  So why not strike there?  

Look, the U.S. was directly attacked.  And it wasn't soldiers in a battle field some where that got hit.  It was everyday working people like you and me.  Innocent people, working at their jobs.  Osama and his terrorists took credit for it and they were in Afghanistan, so Bush went after them.  So?  If that's where the responsible parties are, then strike.  

Unfortunately, this is a far different kind of war and it calls for a different set of retalitory tactics; different than what we've seen in the past. Like the Internet, Al Quaeda is a network that is spread out, with tenacles all over the world.  Even though Saddam may not have any direct links to 9-11, he has a history of supporting terrorists, threatening his neighbors, being aggressive, etc., etc.  Do I have private, inside knowledge of the intelligence reports used to make the decision?  No, of course not and neither do you, more than likely.  And I'll concede that apparently there may have been some incorrect information passed on along the way.  

But one thing is for sure, with all of Saddam's intimidation, aggressive posturing and activities (invading Kuwait, killing/raping his own people, etc.), he had the chance to let the inspectors in and do their job, and he f*cked with them every step along the way.  If he didn't have WMDs, then he should have opened the doors.  If I get stopped on the road by a police and he wants to search my car for cocaine, I'm going to let him.

Had 9-11 not happened, then maybe the urgency would not have been felt to do something about Saddam.  But that day changed everything, and not just the Americans.  I'm afraid now there's no going back for anyone, anywhere.

Now is it America's job to act as the police of the world?  No, but if they are directly attacked on U.S. soil, and if the attackers can quickly disperse and retreat inside countries that are friendly to them and show a history of being anti-American, then... unfortunately, I think we're going to see more unconventional maneuvers like the war on Iraq.

I really would rather have peace.  I hope and pray for peace.  I don't want the world to be this way.  That's one reason why I like Thailand so much, it seems so different than anywhere else.  But unfortunately, there's a lot of bad in the world.  And I can't blame the Americans for doing what they need to do; to find the ones who are responsible and make them stop.  I think if it were your country, you'd probably feel the same way.

america rightly or wrongly has just invaded iraq without support from the UN. it is no different from iraq invading kuwait i.e. an act of illegal agression.

why did the US not allow the inspectors to finish their job ? where are the WMDS ? and would any country allow inspectors to just waltz around going and looking where they want. would america ?

how many people are raped and killed in USA every year by other americans ?

which country in the world has killed more people in history using WMDS. america has .

opportunistic warlords and generals are the natural leaders and politicians of the future if left and not interfered with . look at americas history .

what have terrorist attacks got to with invading a country if anything an unwanted occupier will increase said risks.

the country that threw up the most links to 9/11 was saudia arabia why not start their ?

if the policeman that stops you in your car is not an american policeman youd tell him to go to #### as long as hes not got a gun.

ive said before im english so find myself not against what has happened but it is just about money and power and some very powerful and rich people fighting over strategic and valuable resources. not about democracy or some moral crusade.but at the end of the day im gald im english rather than a national of most countries in the world.

[chonabot]

England/Uk and America invaded Iraq Matey.

Maybe you should change your nationality to French.

Try starting sentences with a capital , it will make your badly written post a little easier on the eye.

Are you comparing USA's rape and murder statistics with the genocide that occurred in Iraq/Afghanistan?

I'm sure you've got a valid point somewhere , try again...

[massein]

ok americans or the bad guys! they caused all the world problems.

[parryhandy]

England/Uk and America invaded Iraq Matey.

Maybe you should change your nationality to French.

Try starting sentences with a capital , it will make your badly written post a little easier on the eye.

Are you comparing USA's rape and murder statistics with the genocide that occurred in Iraq/Afghanistan?

I'm sure you've got a valid point somewhere , try again...

alls im saying is many people  know deep down that the truth is a lot more complicated that what we get in the dumbed down mainstream press.

i am sick of reading about it as some king of freedom fighting , liberating invasion when it aint. did you not read my post i said i was not against it so why should i change my nationality.im proud of being english but am sick of being patronised by weasel politicians who think that by speaking slowly with stage managed pauses makes their comments beleivable.

the future for iraq will go the way of most puppet governments . there will be a bit of money for the new "elected" leaders the country will have immense debt for years to come but life on the ground for most of the people will not change that much at all.

the genocide in iraq and afghanistan is no different to the genocide of the native american indians years ago.

do you feel the world is a safer place now ?

[chonabot]

Capitals......make it easier to read  

[parryhandy]

Capitals......make it easier to read  

OK just for you ill try to remember to use them next time.

[Axel]

Capitals or not, I believe parryhandy got it right.

No anti-Americanisms but lets get this Bush in line.

I liked his face when Kofi spoke up two days ago. The world would be better off without guys like Bush trying to be super-heroes and risking the lives of soldiers in issues where he has nothing to do. Where is G.W. standing now? Asking the UN to help, after ignored them before. The next step will be to ask for repayment of money, the very US-tax-dollars he waisted in Iraq. World police? Any police force is appointed and controlled by a superior authority. I would hail Bush if he would have been appointed by the UN but under the present situation let him clear up his own mess.

[tutsiwarrior]

The discussion on this thread has been excellent...at the least exposing the fact that expatriates can step back and evaluate without the bullshit and opprobrium that results from office water cooler chit chat. My own observation is broad and probably not helpful...that if Israel was forced back to pre-1967 borders and dis-armed with a UN force to ensure their safety and that if Ariel Sharon was put on trial as the war criminal he is our troubles would soon be over. Of course...the Shin Bet and the Mossad would displace Islamic terrorism...trained and armed by the CIA. They would have their own terrorist agenda. WMD?...don't even mention it.

[Axel]

My own observation is broad and probably not helpful...that if Israel was forced back to pre-1967 borders and dis-armed with a UN force to ensure their safety and that if Ariel Sharon was put on trial as the war criminal he is our troubles would soon be over.

Wasn't it Sharon, who wanted to take a contract (sorry I do not remember the politically correct word) out on Arafat?

Fat chance, G.W. will listen to you although your are absolutely right. He might lose even more votes in the next election.

[wolf5370]

In Britain there is a media frenzy at the moment over the Hutton inquiry (Where a man named over the Iraq Dossier 'inaccuracies' committed suicide). A report used for justification for invading Iraq - full of miss-quotes and guesses presented as fact - this is what took the UK to war. Pure spin. There is your conspiracy.

Oh, I thought the Hutton Enquiry was still sitting and hearing evidence and that it would then decide if, indeed, there is (or was) a conspiracy?

pnustedt - do not see the relationship between your comment and mine? Yes, at the time of writing the Hutton inquiry was still sitting, but as I said "there IS a media frenzy" not "There WAS a media frenzy". The inquiry is over the death of Dr Kelly, not the document. We already DO KNOW that the document is inaccurate - yes, the evidence has been heard, and no I didn't spin it, its public domain. So, the first half of your post is irrelevant.

The second half…this is subjective. If you think it was normal that it managed to be top news for so long at a time when other news closer to home (Iraq, Economy, etc) then fine. It is just amazing that other outbreaks hardly make the news at all. When it broke it was in Asia only. Then Canada. Yet, it was front page the world over. Not so long ago the UK saw some deaths from rabbies caught in Scotland from Bats, this was the first time in 100 years or so. It was news for a day in the UK, then nada. Just take a look at the CDC web site to see how many diseases are or have done the rounds in the USA in the last few years. If it hits the papers at all is one thing, but if it does it does not get the continual press coverage as did SARS.

Membrane, there may have been many reasons and/or objectives involved in the decisions to go to war. They may have been right, they may have been wrong. The outcome may be good or bad. The fact is that the leaders of the UK and the USA went to their respective seats of government and used half truths and twisted, reworded and misquotes testimony from experts in order to get the sanction to go to war. They took it to Europe and the UN and tried the same. This is simply wrong; it should not be allowed to happen and it is an underhanded way to circumnavigate due process. GW and Blair caused a rift between the members of the UN and their countries and possibly caused their countries to break international laws (invading another country) without the legitimate consent of the people or their representatives because they gained sanctioning in a disreputable way. The British (including me) and the American’s should be furious about this. Not for going to war. Not with our boys in uniform. Furious with those that we put in office that tricked us and saw fit to trick our representatives.

Chonabot, I think you’re being intentionally inflammatory, but I’ll bite. I’m not blaming the West of conspiracy – I was actually trying to negate this from the posts by Kapow Guy by explaining that, in my view, it was used to hide some uncomfortable stories at home, but was not an intentionally released disease from Area 51 or whatever! If you really don’t think politicians use spin, then sorry but you’re in cloud cookooland. Tony Blair pays a fortune per year in wages for his spin doctors (PR) out of the State’s coffers: See Daily Telegraph Report: “Scrapping spin and jobs would save £4bn” By Benedict Brogan, Political Correspondent (Filed: 23/09/2003) . Spin does not account for all of this, but it costs more than the cabinet does just for Tony’s personal PR Machine.

We ALL have “problems” with the atrocities that terrorists commit, but there is still a difference between justice for this and outright vengeance on another country simply because we can’t catch the terrorist, or as a convenient scapegoat. Attacking Afghanistan did not give us BL – it toppled the Taliban (who we armed and held as allies just a few years before, overlooking the same atrocities). How many 9/11 terrorists came from Afghanistan? How many from Saudi? Where is BL from? Where does al Qaeda get it money from? Where did we attack? Why didn’t we attack them instead of helping them when they were just as bad to their people, but were fighting the Russians?

Saddam was NOT an immediate or imminent threat to us. Who in that region does have WMD? Who in that region can use those WMD in a short amount of time? Who in that region has the technology to launch those WMDs? Who in that region is continually in conflict for continually expanding it borders and encroaching on land deemed by agreement for another ‘nations’ (if the dispossessed can be called a nation) people? Who in that region do we give an awful lot of money too each year? Who did we attack?

Guys, we have our own brains, our own minds, use them rather than believing all the drivel that comes out of the machine (spin) even when it is blatantly obvious that it is hogwash.  

It is amazing to me that some of us here are happy to slap the Thai government when they want to decriminalise prostitution because “it is not for the right reasons” (i.e. to raise revenue) even though the outcome is good; but at the same time think its OK to illegally invade a country when the reasons given are found to be lies as long as something good came out of it. Or is it, "its OK when we do it, but not when others do"?

[Pinkster]

Well put.

[pnustedt]

do not see the relationship between your comment and mine?

Wolf - I think that I see your point.

I think you are calling the "media frenzy" spin. I don't. My interpretation of "spin" that led to some of the conspiracy theories that were being posted here (but I admit not yours) is that it is being co-ordinated by governments or authorities. I believe that most of these conspiracy theories do not have any substance.

I have not seen evidence at the Hutton inquiry to suggest that the Government did spin "the document". The British Prime Minister categorically stated at the inquiry that he would have had to resign if his office had exaggerated it. However, I do agree that there is a media frenzy.

Maybe I was too close to the SARS outbreak to be objective. However, it appeared at the time to be extremely contageous and could have affected 75% of the worlds' population very quickly with a mortality rate of 5-15%. The spread from HK to Canada took only hours. I am convinced that the worries are genuine and not the result of spin by governments or other authorities - but, yes there is a media frenzy whenever there is a potential victim. In fact, China is being openly citicised for covering up the problem. Perhaps the media frenzy is something we have to expect in a "free" society.

Manythings look different in hindsight. But if you are saying that there is hype being created by some media I would agree, I would not agree that there is a systematic spin being created by governments or authorities for some other motive.

I too am very disturbed that American and British troops are illegally occupying a foreign country, but I think that it has not YET been substantiated that the motives for doing so are lies.

[pnustedt]

I posted a reply here but it was inaccessible

[Dexlowe]

The British screwed up this, the French screwed up that, the Allies dumped on everyone, and Stalin cooked up a stew of irrational discontent -- and the Americans are taking advantage of every little loophole they can find. Whoever did what -- sorry, but I don't really care. All that is history. We take the lessons from the past, we accept them as they are and then we move on. It's the people who can't move on who worry me. A simplistic viewpoint? Yes. Absolutely, but for someone sitting on the sidelines with little power to change anything, what other point of view can you take? But for all the excellent discussion that we have seen on this thread, about the only thing I agree with is the the power of the spin doctors. How to neutralise them? There are enough intelligent commentators around. The question is, are we intelligent enough to listen to them.

[Membrane]

Yes, good post Dexlowe.  I agree with you; I think we're on the same page.

What's done in the past, is in the past.  That includes the Americans dealings with the native American Indians, slavery, etc.  Guaranteed.. the Americans living today had NOTHING to do with any of that!  And you may hate Bush or love him, whatever, there are still many good people living in that land.  They are not all greedy fat capitilist pigs.  (Well, capitilist maybe)..

Now maybe we can get on with something else??  

membrane

[Spellbound]

APEC

Hand-held missile fear sparks hunt

SAMs said to have been smuggled in

Wassayos Ngamkham Yuwadee Tunyasiri

Fears are growing that six portable missiles may have been smuggled into Thailand for use in terror attacks during the Apec summit.

The missiles are reported to be similar to one fired at a chartered Israeli commercial jet loaded with holiday makers as it left Mombasa airport in Africa last year. It missed and the plane continued on to Tel Aviv.

A highly-placed Crime Suppression Division police source said urgent orders had been issued to trace the missiles.

The detectives' report on the missing missiles is sketchy, giving no details on their origin, when they were smuggled into Thailand, by whom or how. But authorities were taking the issue seriously, the source said.

Officers from the Special Branch police had been called in to help.

Adding to the fears about the missiles is a recent report that Don Muang international airport is considered one of the most vulnerable in Asia.

The Singapore report, quoting aviation security experts, said aircraft flying in and out of Bangkok might be vulnerable to missile attacks, given the airport's proximity to highways, residences and commercial complexes.

Deputy Prime Minister Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, in charge of national security, has rejected the Singapore report, saying all necessary precautions had been taken and no detail overlooked.

Airport security had been tight for years, he said.

The elevated Don Muang Tollway, which runs parallel to Bangkok International Airport, would be subject to tight security, and all vehicles would be searched for weapons, especially missiles, at entry tollgates.

Air force chief ACM Kongsak Wantana, in charge of security at the airport and adjacent areas, said the inconvenience to motorists would be a small price to pay for security.

Gen Chavalit said the government would ensure security during the Oct 17-21 Asia-Pacific Cooperation (Apec) forum meetings. ``We're not standing with our hands in our pockets,'' he said.

Every-day crime was bound to occur, but should not be met with over-reaction.

The country had always advocated peaceful conflict resolution.

He said the government had spent a large amount on improving security _ not only for Apec, but for Thailand in general.

Security was not being left to shop-floor personnel but involved direct, hands-on supervision by high-ranking officials.

Gen Chavalit also said the government had not received requests from Apec leaders for personal security teams to carry firearms in Thailand.

Australia is reported to have sought permission for staff to carry firearms to protect Prime Minister John Howard and his delegation while at Apec.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/01Oct2003_news06.html

[Kapow Guy]

Okay for all you doubting thomases go read this page:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4582.htm

Lots of loopholes in the investigation and build up to Iraq. So if you're gullible and beleive everything that is spoonfed to you without any critical thinking on your behalf then that's you're choice.

[Membrane]

Lots of loopholes in the investigation and build up to Iraq. So if you're gullible and beleive everything that is spoonfed to you without any critical thinking on your behalf then that's you're choice.

Right... uh huh.  Take a look at the home page for this site and tell me if you think this is biased against Americans or not.    (The answer is: "YES", in case you are still wondering).

And I can give you web sites that PROVE the earth is flat, that we never went to the moon, that there is a face on Mars (no doubt built by extraterrestrials!), how to live to 150, pictures of Big Foot and werewolves, UFO Abduction, astrology, numerology, etc., etc., etc...

So if you're gullible and beleive everything that is spoonfed to you without any critical thinking on your behalf then that's you're choice.

sigh...

[Membrane]

HERE IT IS!  THE TRUTH CAN FINALLY BE TOLD....

The Flat-out Truth: Earth Orbits? Moon Landings?  A Fraud! Says This Prophet

This web site PROVES that the earth is flat!  And that "the main purpose of the space program is to prop up a dying myth--the myth that the earth is a globe."  The earth is FLAT!  Now we all know the TRUTH!!  Spead the word!

But... if you're gullible and beleive everything that is spoonfed to you without any critical thinking on your behalf then that's you're choice.   ???

[Kapow Guy]

What a lame reply. How can you compare the two websites? The one about the flat earth is just about a guy who is stating what he beleives with no fact to back it up.

The one I gave is providing facts, figures and dates to back up the different loopholes. Go back and read it again. Slowly if you have to.

I don't take the article at face value either but I'm smart enough to think about what the media and US Govt have been saying and what the known facts are pointing to. I think but seems like you don't. You just believe what is on TV.

It took over 30 minutes after the first plane hit WTC until the other plane hit the Pentagon. Why wasn't fighter jets scrambled to protect the skies over Washington? WHY?

That's just one point to think about.

[wolf5370]

...yeah, and besides the earth is flat, isn't it?