BirdsandBooze Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 ^ You're not familiar with the actual meaning of Jihad. To a Moslem it means 'struggle', nothing more, nothing less, no matter whether the objective is political or religious. The objective of the IRA was political and they didn't restrict their operations to Northern Ireland, and this is true of many other terrorist groups seeking partition. There is no reason why the Islamic terrorists in the south won't change tactics and expand their operations further afield, whether or not they are involved in this particular incident.You are still just speculating like Fat Haggis,whats the point ? I'm sure the Thai authorities who after all this time are well versed in the various "possibilities" know what the truth is. You and Fat Haggis are like two people out in a storm and enjoying it,"Oh isn't this weather awful". "Yes and its bound to get worse soon". "An earthquake maybe". Oh yes that would be terrible".It's ALL speculation and whether the truth will out is another matter. The Thai authorities are no different from the developed countries when it comes to telling the truth, or rather not telling it. Only the naive don't question. Personally, I think the Jihadists here in Thailand are easier for security forces to deal with than a so called 'Peoples Liberation Red Army' would be. If devices start appearing that contain more sophisticated fusing than described in these Bangkok 'bombs' I would look elsewhere rather than to Jatuporn and his followers for a lead. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Haggis Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Even the attacks on the PDRC are no more than Speculation as whom is behind it, present me the next time with a hard fact that it was the "Reds" next time there's an attack, as far as I'm aware ":unknown assailants/attackers" doesn't equate to any one side.. Same goes for the attacks on the "Reds" .. isn't "suspected to be" not the same as "speculate" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesDean3 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 The thought that under all the tight security supposedly around these areas, that someone can casually drive in a care packed with bombs. This car was allowed in by the police, I don't care what anyone else says on the subject. This was police aided terrorism. How about those 176 army checkpoints manned by 51 companies of soldiers and extra patrols near PDRC sites as promised by Prayuth. Army aided terrorism you think? If this were an indication it could have been worse without the Army around guarding these places, now that the "dogs of war" of the Red Shirts have been unleashed. As you must remember it was Yingluck who had the temerity to ask the Army to remove these security since she says it "dampens" the feelings of Tourist !!! Your leader is concerned about the feelings of Tourist and not the Lives of her own countrymen !!! Until not one, I mean not one of these scum have been apprehended by the Police. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Haggis Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 No it's an indication that the Army checkpoints didn't pick up, as in notice, the contents of this vehicle considering there's supposed to be 170+ VCP's in and around Bangkok.. If I remember too the Army said they would not remove these checkpoints either so you're little rant is wasted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now