https://www.bangkokpost.com/news/securi ... ala-market

#ROP

This really confuses the Eu. had a row with one about how Buddhist were not a terrorist threat to Europe and he pointed to Thai insurgents as being an example, till I told him they were muslins not Buddhists

charlie

This bombing, most likely a false flag, is actually of little importance.

The bombings in Bangkok that will happening later this year will be major news.

sigmoid wrote: ↑Tue Jan 23, 2018 10:36 am This bombing, most likely a false flag, is actually of little importance.

The bombings in Bangkok that will happening later this year will be major news.

What's your proof of a false flag operation?
You say it's of little importance, but 2017 had the lowest death count in more than a decade, and this attack can mark a change from that direction, with more focus on civilian targets again.

What's your proof of a false flag operation?
You say it's of little importance, but 2017 had the lowest death count in more than a decade, and this attack can mark a change from that direction, with more focus on civilian targets again.

Good questions, but "most likely" means "highly possible" rather than "proven", so there's no proof, just speculation.

Anyway, the statement was based on what you point out yourself, the fact that the target is a civilian one when insurgents should be attacking government buildings and officials, as well as this sudden change in tactics. Why now, when the central government is attempting to maintain its tenuous grip on power as it's becoming less and less popular and is planning on delaying elections again?

The main point though is that as things heat up in Bangkok and the election is delayed again, by the end of this year, this story may hardly be remembered.

Of course, it would be interesting to hear your take or others' opinions on the matter.

bombing a pork stall......killing ordinary people......why don't they target Government officials etc.....?....coz they like killing infidels that's why.....of course,it's nothing to do with The Religion of Peace.......perish the thought.

The area was formerly the Kingdom of Patani, historically not part of the Kingdom of Siam, that became a conquered land.

from wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pattani_Kingdom):

Patani was easily defeated by Siam in 1785 and resumed its tributary status. However, a series of attempted rebellions prompted Bangkok to divide Patani into seven smaller puppet kingdoms in the early 1800s during the reign of King Rama II. Britain recognised the Thai ownership of Patani by treaty in 1909. Yala and Narathiwat remain separate provinces to this day.

This recent insurgency began when Thaksin supported the invasion and bombing of Iraq by the US-led coalition after 9-11. Later, there were protests and the army killed a large number of protesters: http://thailand.ahrchk.net/takbai/

Yup, old story, conquerors go in and steal stuff, then whine that locals don't roll over and say thank you.

If you visit the area, you can see straight away that the demographic/culture is so obviously non-Thai/Buddhist

They could just give it back, but Thais are not great at admitting anything or losing face. I don't think the area is of such economic importance that it would really affect the Thai economy much if they gave it back.

Should get the UN involved to publicise the causes of the conflict more widely.

One Thai guy told me the Muslims invited the Thai govt to take the area over, LOL