Another terror article involving LOS

[Brink15]

Actually, I wasn't looking for an answer to my post.

 

My post was simply an answer to your rather expected reactionary response to the great conspiracy of the world press.

 

You don't need to answer my post as I, and most of the other members, already know of your point of view. The above article quoted specific statements from specific sources yet you choose to state this is "according to some "confidential intelligence document" obtained by CNN some guys with "suspected" links to terrornetworks met in thailand."

 

So obviously you feel you are privy to better intel. If so quote name and verse. If you can not you are simply mouthing your opinion, and we all know what opinions are like.

 

[Guest]

This is not the first report on suspected terrorists operating out of Thailand, and CNN is not the only news agency making these reports. Turn the clock back to 13 September 2001, a scant two days after 9/11, and you will find a report from the BBC where the Thai police admit they were looking for 15 suspects. BBC report This was before the Bali bombing when the primary concern was not simply protecting Thailand's tourism industry. From the BBC: "Members of various Islamic militant groups are known to have frequented Thailand in the past." Sound familiar?

 

If you want something more recent, consider this from the 14 November 2002 edition of the Far Eastern Economic Review:

But Thailand certainly has a reputation for being accessible to terrorists with its tourist-friendly, easy immigration systems. Earlier this year, the Thai Foreign Ministry blacklisted Iranian national and suspected terrorist Jawad Meekosemi and four unnamed associates. Soon after, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation helped Thai investigators bust a Bangkok-area fake travel-document ring serving Al Qaeda operatives. And in recent days, the U.S. and Britain handed the Thai police a list of suspected terrorists believed to be lingering about in Bangkok's gritty and growing Middle Eastern district. So far, Thai police have chosen to watch rather than question the suspects.

---

News reports about intelligence activities are necessarily somewhat vague; it would be naïve to expect otherwise. Does it make sense that terrorists would switch from hard targets such as U.S. Embassies to entertainment venues where security is difficult to provide? Does Thailand have such soft targets? Ultimately, each of us must make judgments about these sorts of matters, and to make those judgments you need to consider, among other things, whether the report or position seems reasonable and consider the source or, in this case, plethora of sources.

 

This is not unlike the judgments we make here about posters on this board. Are their comments rash and rambling? Does a member have a history of stubbornly and irrationally rejecting anything that does not fit within his belief system? Or are his comments well reasoned, balanced and supported by sources generally accepted as credible, such as major news agencies?

 

A message board like this provides a marketplace for ideas. Every member must decide what they "buy" and "don't buy"; I think this a good thing because free and open markets provide the best results; they are certainly better than the alternative.

 

What has the market decided? It is probably impossible to tell by simply reading this board, but in the real world marketplace of travel destinations, where tourists vote with their wallets, I believe we can already see the answer.

 

[Guest]

in proper journalism you don't quote from a paper you acquired without showing that paper. just because it says: this is an "confidential intelligence paper" doesn't mean it gives you a free pass to quote without proof.

[Brink15]

Ummm,

 

So, in that line of thought, if Woodward and Bernstein quoted deep throat with out actually having written documentation from him, their entire investigation is a fallacy, is that correct?

 

You seem to be a master of dismissing other people's research, care to share your sources oh omnipotent one?

 

[Guest]

about three or four years ago there was a big story about cambodia. the BBC correspondent sitting in for the reuters guy who was on holiday came out with the story that a taiwanese company dumped chemical waste at siam riap and that a huge exodus of the population of that town was happening. every agency picked up that news, and it was world news.

well, until the DPA guy actually started checking the facts. he called up his contacts in siam riap, who have not heard of any exodus. he went to the road linking phnom penh with siam riap and found no columns of refugees, same at the train station, same at the bus station. basically the chemical waste happened, but not the exodus.

but by then it was too late, and instead of admitting the fuck up, it was simply not reported anymore.

 

respected newsmedia are just made from people, and you have the same mixture there as in any other business, ranging from honest idealists to completely rurthless bastards without the slightest bit of remorse who walk over dead bodies, if necessary invent interviews just to be able to get on in the industry.

 

nothing holy about it, simple business. and as prone to corruption and lobbyism as any other industry.

 

[Guest]

Should we then simply dismiss all reports from news agencies because mistakes are occasionally made? I don't recall the Cambodia story (and I suspect I would have if it truly was a major news item), but in your version of the event the story was quickly dropped when it turned out to be false. In the case of Thailand there are reports from different news agencies about different terrorist activities over a period of more than a year. Are all of these stories false? Is there a conspiracy to defame Thailand and destroy its tourism industry? Now that would make a good news story.

 

Of course the press makes mistakes, and this includes the serious press such as the BBC, Wall Street Journal, Reuters, Associated Press, Far Eastern Economic Review, Agence France-Presse and, yes, CNN. But when there is story after story from different agencies quoting different sources over a period of more than a year, all revealing a similar basic problem, are we to simply just dismiss it all? And if we do, doesn't that say more about our own inflexibility then the credibility of the underlying story. Just a thought... ::

[Guest]

>>>Is there a conspiracy to defame Thailand and destroy its tourism industry? Now that would make a good news story.<<<

 

no conspiracy, just a ratrace to sell stories to the market. marketeconomy - demand and supply. and at the moment the only thing which sells is "terrorism". connect anything to terrorism, and you will sell. exaggerate it a bit, it will sell even better. so the media outlet will sell, and the advertisers will keep on advertising, which means the salaries of the staff will be paid, and the position will be safe.

 

truth and reality might not necessarily sell, and it might piss off the advertisers. so play safe, go with the market, keep on making money.

 

destroying the tourism industry? you do expect a bit too much social consciousness from people who are in the highly volatile industry of "journalism". an industry which is right now in the biggest crises ever, where the main concern of most professionals is that they still have a job in a years time.

 

not dismissing it all, but taking it with a grain of salt. my point is, that i do need a bit more hard evidence so that i should be scared that there might be a terrorist attack coming here. the "intelligence" that islamic extremists have gathered here and used bangkok as an essential part of their underground railway is nothing new. they did that since years, and it was well known that this is/was going on. it still does not show any higher risk here than there was years ago.

[Lord Toad]

Some of the story makes sense. Thailand is an easy place to come and go from. It may make sense for a terrorist network to operate from Thailand and keep a safe base. That means it would not conduct operations here.............until it decides it does not need this safe haven....maybe!

 

To say no international terrorist has ever set foot in Thailand is rubbish....at best no body knows.

How real is the threat?

Well looking at the pattern so far it would seem very real and Phuket need not be the target. No real preference except for the Muslims in that region who may or may not help. Bangkok/Pattaya would be much easier to escape from

 

As regards the press a good newspaper should have at least 2 verifiable sources. To a large extent it is down to the editor to decide if the source is good, or not. Reading most of the various stories the old adage of no smoke without fire springs to mind!

 

IMO ther are/have been international terrorists in Thialand. And if the current trend of attacking tourists targets goes on than I think Thailand will be attacked. But so could the greek islands, Costa del Sol and Carribean! Or Paris, London or Vegas.

 

Up to you!

[Guest]

Its far more constructive IMHO, in this, a Thailand related message Board, to discuss thethe ways in which the sometime tourist (or expat) can ensure that he is not a victim of terrorist attack. Simply tossing out a glib "its all a joke" or contending that the problem does not exist is the moral equivalent of believing that you cant catch AIDs via unprotected sex.

 

Now check it out, Im way up here in Alaska, probably the safest place on earth from terrorist attack outside Mecca (all we have is the pipeline way out in nowhere and trust me, aint no one getting a shot at that, and if some terrorist tried opening up here in Anchorage, hed probably get shot down by civilians before the cops got there!) so why do I think this subject is so important..????

 

Simple enough, I got friends on this Board, and friends outside this Board who live and travel and have relatives and work there...and its not just the Westerners but the Thais who will die during an attack..witness all the Kenyans who died at the hotel..

 

So better ways to thwart terrosim should be discussed instead of ragging on CNN...many of you Brits have lived under the bomb form the IRA, chime in with some terror prevention tips....

 

Just dont compound the problem by dismissing it...

 

[Guest]

And if the current trend of attacking tourists targets goes on >>>...than I think Thailand will be attacked. But so could the greek islands, Costa del Sol and Carribean! Or Paris, London or Vegas.<<<

 

...and in europe the support network is much larger then here in thailand.