Jump to content

Explosion Reported at Hua Lamphong Station


webfact

Recommended Posts

Heading south..do a job n hurry back up north....well,that confirms my thai friends conspiracy theory about certain official group fanning the fire in the south in order to increase the clandestine sales of arms to Southern rebels

Nope.

Read the story.

Its frustrating, but some people have the attention span of a fruit fly and reading more than a headline is an onerous task..

The story in Khaosod English clearly stated that the bottle/container had been abandoned by a third party. These guys just happened to be smoking a cigarette in the vicinity and when fire met powder or fumes there was a small explosion.

Why drag fruit flies into this when everybody knows it had to be the evil doing of Thaksin.

Ask any Anti-Thaksinista and that will confirm it.

Specially is they answer the question before taking their OCD meds. cheesy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Explosion at Hua Lampong station injures two

Hua-Lampong-wpcf_728x410.png

BANGKOK: -- A bomb went off in front of Hua Lampong railway station at 1.00 pm today injuring two train passengers.

The bomb exploded at the entrance to the station near KFC shop.

EOD police are now sealing off the station to inspect the area.

Initial report quoted witnesses as saying that the bomb was contained in a box and one of the injured was said to throw a cigarette butt into the box, igniting the explosion.

Two injured were admitted to the Klang Hospital.

However railway police commander said it was not a bomb but a bottle of inflammable substance in a bottle that exploded.

The cigarette butt which one passenger discarded off in the box triggered it to explode.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/content/162911

thaipbs_logo.jpg

-- Thai PBS 2016-05-11

"Inflammable substance" could have been water. FLAMMABLE substance eg gasoline, alcohol, will burn.

Proper grammar or use of English language has never been the forte of Americans, Canadians or UK subjects.

To them a gruesome photo is called GRAPHIC. One of many examples.

In Pygmalion (or My Fair Lady movie for those who cannot stand reading an entire masterpiece) George Bernard Shaw said it best:

English language... in American they have not used it for years....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Inflammable substance" could have been water. FLAMMABLE substance eg gasoline, alcohol, will burn.

No. They are synonyms meaning the exact same thing not antonyms of each other.

inflammable

adjective 1. capable of being set on fire; combustible; flammable.

Flammable vs. inflammable

There is no difference in meaning between flammable and inflammable. Both describe things that are capable of burning or easy to ignite, but in all modern varieties of English, flammable is preferred.

http://grammarist.com/usage/flammable-inflammable/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how any liquid could explode with such veracity, it would need to be in a sealed pressurised container first before ignition and even then would be unlikely to expand with such energy and cause the injuries shown to those two people, to me this story doesn't make sense or seem remotely possible as described

That's true of a liquid, the vapour of a liquid is another story.

it is only the vapour that ignites, liquids need to be stored under pressure to turn to vapour, it is quite complicated and involves temperature as well, not getting into that - go look it up, a good place to start would be something we are all familiar - lighter gas which is a liquid stored under pressure until it hits atmosphere, the temp and pressure are linked, regardless I still don't see as stated above how this could happen the way it is described

Really don't think I need to "look it up"...give me 250ml of a volatile highly inflammable liquid, diethyl ether for example, pour it into a dish and set light to it and it will burn away. Put the same amount into a 500 ml glass bottle and put a cigarette end into it and watch the result....personally I wouldn't.

better update your chemistry. the term inflammable was dropped last century.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Inflammable substance" could have been water. FLAMMABLE substance eg gasoline, alcohol, will burn.

No. They are synonyms meaning the exact same thing not antonyms of each other.

inflammable

adjective 1. capable of being set on fire; combustible; flammable.

Flammable vs. inflammable

There is no difference in meaning between flammable and inflammable. Both describe things that are capable of burning or easy to ignite, but in all modern varieties of English, flammable is preferred.

http://grammarist.com/usage/flammable-inflammable/

The pedant is still at it, makes him happy I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will cause some havoc when we get our ied back down south. The mosque was very helpful with the plans. Where is the ashtray. Oh.....allah akbah?

Hmm, just about the most ignorant post so far on this thread.

Still not surprised, when hate meets meets knee jerk thinking the result is usually ignorance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paint thinner is no explosive, a glue with an accellerant (no clue how to spell that) such as what is used for welding polyvinylychloride pipes is.

I've used that PVC glue and Primer putting together a sprinkler system. Get a whiff of that will make you dizzy.

I'm betting that something like that was in the bottle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.









×
×
  • Create New...
""