At first glance it seems that grenades would indicate someone from the military, probably acting out of rage and alone, since the muslims dont have or use grenades. However, the protesting muslim women and children who are supporters of the terrorists and who turn up anytime a terrorist is caught or arrested, blockading the roads demanding their release, are the sames ones protesting the bombing of the mosque. They are well organized and designed for international press sympathy from likes of islamic bbc, etc., So this might mean the terrorists really were behind the mosque bombing and tried to blame it on the military. Funny, the women never turn out when buddhists are killed. Anyway, its all murky, nobody knows what is real down there and what is smoke and mirrors. All we really know is that the weapons are always found stored inside or next to the mosques and the "spiritual leaders" of the community always seem to know what is going on. With muslims heading the military and goverment it is surely not going to get better. The cleansing of thai and chinese will just continue until sharia is fully implemented and they will move north to Songkla and Satun. According to plan.

Posted by: laosuwan at March 18, 2007 7:58 AM

They don't want to be Thai. It's the same story everywhere. They want to impose a tyranny on themselves. One wishes they would go all the way, declare their islamic states and then begin a world war against them like the one against fascism. Then things will be black and white.

Posted by: rocky at March 18, 2007 9:09 AM

Had plenty of experince with this in both in Iraq and Afganistan. Everytime their coreligionist would kill and injure the them they would seek compensation or blame the U.S Army. Morters would be shot into villages people killed and it was blamed on the US. I think if the Army did actually attack the school the it would have finished the job. I can't imagine that they only killed three students and retreated. Ofcourse attacking civilians ins't the Thai armies tactic anyway. It all stinks of Muslims and tactics of the cresent moon. The whole thing seems to be a huge PR stunt. The Muslims keep crying about the terrorist who were all finished off in that mosque a few years back and the ones the sufforcated in the trailer. Notice how thurough they were then. Of course they were responding to an attack and those that died weren't exactly inocent. Where is the outrage for all the Muslim violence aimed at Buddhist? If these jokers push north into Trang and places farther north they will be ran into the sea.

Posted by: American_soldier at March 18, 2007 9:10 AM

Typical Muslim tactics!!!

Posted by: DavidE at March 18, 2007 10:06 AM

This Islamic "stuff" is like watching some weird Mad Max movie. The normal soul would never allow their children's bodies to be disgraced and used like this.
Consider it. The Muslim parents were passing their children around in a crowd of malevolent chanters with no respect at all for dead. Who in their right mind would allow such a thing.
So the funeral is throwing rocks at police, setting fires to school buildings, a riot and wonderful hymns of allah and death to all.

This is a perfect question for Islam, "What kind of people are you that have not one shred of humanity in a time like this?"

For the real God's sake, how can they not understand this basic.

Posted by: Lame Cherry at March 18, 2007 12:30 PM

When there is no Golden Rule, it is hard to cultivate compassion and one can become less than human.

When there is dual ethical system where humanity is divided into those you care for and those you hate,
then one becomes less than human.

When hate of the Other is taught from the earliest age, then evil will reign and corrupt even the most basic of all instincts,the nuturing and protection of the child.

Posted by: the poetess at March 18, 2007 12:56 PM

American Soldier-

Given your experience overseas....is our attempt to reform the muslim world worth it?

If not, what would you suggest as an alternative policy?

Posted by: treehugger at March 18, 2007 3:09 PM

This is a perfect question for Islam, "What kind of people are you that have not one shred of humanity in a time like this?"

thats the problem in my view , we're not talking to or about human beings in the first place, just damn animals!!!!!!

Posted by: OLD SARGE at March 18, 2007 3:53 PM

treehugger

Muslims got a hard core myrtar complex. They all are good at playing the victim. The hajib clad crying women always appear on que. The timeless act is well rehearsed. Like green helemet guy and his stellar performance. The victim feeling also gives them a justification for their violence. They are always the helpless passive victims. Oppressed by the lager then life zionist/westren/thai/secular, et al, conspiracy. They therefore feel that they bear no responsibility for their acts of violence. They always seem to have sypathetic ears from Islamist media and their leftst sypathizers. Hence the popularity of Edward Said, Robert Fisk, and Noam Chomsky. These morans give justification to victim drama. Its always the fault of colonialism, imperialism, or what ever. Islam is at fault.

The way to combat this is to hold them and Islam responsible for all their acts of violence. Islam also needs to be destroyed. Our efforts to reform Islam fall short, because first most people don't relize what Islam really teaches. You can't fix something if you can't say its broken, and Islam is broken beyond repair. We have to destroy Islam and offer an alternative vision for these people. Its hard because for some of these simple minded people they see their very salvation and eternal soul at stake.

I have no answers to what to do. I just know Islam can't coexist with any competing visions. It must dominate with its dogmatic certanties. I think most should be able to appriciate seclar human rights and democracy. The muslim world would change drastically if muslims could understand the importance of freedom. Being the master of your destiny in the existential sense. The problems is we can't even pass this to Muslims living in the west. It seems they would rather have sharia there too. Being an agnostic/Buddhist I have no alternative salvational scheme to give the Muslim world. Every person must work out their own salvation and find meaning in life. I just know from fighting them that you can kill em all one day and there will be just as many back to fight in their place the next day. You have to show them that their utopian Islamic paradise doesn't exist on earth or anywhere. We might just have to isolate the Muslim world from the rest of us.

Posted by: American_soldier at March 18, 2007 4:45 PM

Remember the fire at a girls' school in Saudi Arabia?

Remember Beslan?

One group, one religion, has shown itself ready and willing to put religion ahead of the welfare of children, and attacked students in schools.

It wasn't Buddhists.

Posted by: special_guest at March 18, 2007 4:51 PM

1) Buddhists don't kill schoolchildren as a tactic of war.

2) Mohammedans kill children as a tactic of war constantly.

3) Mohammedans pose as victims constantly and do whatever they think necessary to present a believable victim appearance, including killing their own, destroying their own property and advertising friendly fire casualties on their own side as enemy attacks.

5) It was pretty well documented in many places, that the Danish cartoon explosion was cooked up by some mohammedan preachers, who even added phony cartoons for extra outrage, all to whip up a rioting. And it worked just fine.

4) I fear for Thailand. From where will the laid back Buddhist Thais draw the grit to fight back?

There was a fairly fierce Thai military some centuries back. But now? I just don't know.

Posted by: joeblough at March 18, 2007 7:23 PM

Ooops. Got my numbering wrong.

Posted by: joeblough at March 18, 2007 7:23 PM

joeblough

Yes, the Thai military was able to stand up to the communist threat decades ago.

But I fear that they are not up to the mark when it comes to dealing with the Islamic threat.

Posted by: rocky at March 18, 2007 10:27 PM

rocky

Thanks for that. If they had some stuff as recently as the commie days, maybe there's still something there that can be revived.

For all my gloominess about incipient dhimmitude in America, I have a gut level trust in American grit.

As averse as Americans are to enter a fight, or a war, once finally truly aroused, America is invincibly fierce -- as Germany and Japan discovered, much to their surprise and disappointment.

I can believe that defeat is possible, but possible like getting hit by lightning is possible. I can't really make myself believe that American defeat is likely.

Especially not with people like RS as our Paul Reveres.

But Thailand? I keep thinking of the mullahs and their thugs pillaging those temples -- and those dancers ...

Posted by: joeblough at March 19, 2007 2:48 AM

The first and the worst victims of Islam are muslims ( especially women )

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at March 19, 2007 1:51 PM

American Soldier-

Thanks so much for your response.

I've gotten the same impression from reading news and from background information on Islam and Islamic countries, however, it really helps to talk to those who have dealt with the problem firsthand.

Posted by: treehugger at March 19, 2007 2:50 PM

Here is an article that appeared in our stupid local media today entitled Human rights group urges action on Thailand's disappeared

>>>

Thailand's failure to stop forced disappearances in the restive south and take action against the perpetrators is fuelling a growing insurgency there, a top rights watchdog said Tuesday.

Human Rights Watch accused Thai security forces of using enforced disappearances as a tool to intimidate the majority Muslim population in the south, where 2,000 people have died in three years of separatist unrest.

"The Thai security forces are using 'disappearances' as a way to weaken the militants and instill fear in the Malay Muslim community," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch.

"Thailand's government needs to make a clear and public statement of policy against 'disappearances' and take action against those responsible for this crime," he added.

The statement came as the New York-based watchdog released a report detailing 22 unresolved disappearances in the south, where separatist unrest has escalated despite a raft of government-led peace-building measures.

Many of the cases involved suspected separatists having run-ins with the police or army, and then disappearing and never being heard of again.

The lack of investigation into such cases eroded local people's faith in the justice system, the group said.

Human Rights Watch said that the majority of the disappearances detailed in the report took place under the government of Thaksin Shinawatra, who was ousted in a military coup last September.

The regime that replaced him, led by retired general Surayud Chulanont, vowed to reverse his heavy-handed tactics in the south, but Human Rights Watch said that many of the people involved in the abuses remained on duty.

"General Surayud vowed to introduce a more human rights-friendly and sophisticated approach than the heavy-handed one used by Thaksin," the group said in a statement.

"But General Surayud's government has done little to translate these promises into action... Resentment against human rights abuses by the Thai authorities is among the factors fueling an increasingly brutal insurgency."

The report comes at a time of increasing tension in the region bordering Malaysia, with protests flaring after the massacre of nine Buddhists on a bus last week and the shooting of two Muslim school children on Saturday.

A string of coordinated bomb blasts across the provinces of Yala, Pattani and Narathiwat last month killed nine and injured 44, while killings have also become more gruesome, with two beheadings in March.

>>>

What’s wrong with this article above?

Without providing any evidence Human Rights Watch asserts that 22 forced disappearances have occurred in Thailand and that Thailand’s military is guilty. The report also infers the cause of the daily terrorism occurring in the south is resentment over these alleged 22 forced disappearances.

The report says these 22 forced disappearances were committed in order to intimidate “Muslims” but does not state why Thailand would want to do this when Muslims living elsewhere in Thailand never describe themselves as feeling intimidated, but rather fully Thai.

If, as the report also says, terrorists feel intimidated as a result of 22 forced disappearances why are they so boldly escalating their daily killing? Surely someone who is intimidated does not become emboldened. In fact, if anyone feels threatened it must be Buddhists, ethnic Thai and Chinese who are targeted each day simply because of the color of their skin or their religion.

Does anyone really believe that it is 22 alleged forced disappearances but not 2000 murders that might cause a population to feel intimidated? The general impression I get reading any Human Right’s Watch report is that they try to portray Islamic terrorists and their supporters as victims while ignoring the real victims. This report, as with most Human Rights Watch reports dealing with countries like Thailand that are friendly toward the United States and global trade, has a distinctly political agenda that aligns itself with violent Islam’s hatred of the West and free trade. That the press considers Human Rights Watch reports as something with any internal validity at all is a sad commentary on the state of journalism in the world today.

I wish to ask you, how is it that an entire world can be under attack from Islam and only about 4,000 people in that same whole world can even see who is attacking them?

Posted by: laosuwan at March 20, 2007 1:51 AM

laosuwan raises, indirectly, a question that I've not seen answered, at least not in any particularly convincing way.

Barring a mohammedan reform that discredits the jihaddi outlook, and which very well might not happen in our life-times, what would a military victory over a situation like Thailand require?

A true military victory requires that you deprive the enemy of their will to fight. This may or may not require depriving them of their ability to fight. In fact, it may or may not depend on even killing them, depending on their outlook.

But how does one accomplish this with the jihaddis and the angry mobs that shelter and nurture them?

Normally one strikes at the hopes of the enemy. When there is no hope, the fighting ends. That indeed was the message of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, i.e. you have no hope, but in a graceful and unconditional surrender, as we have the power of total annihilation, without injury to ourselves.

But if the jihaddis are truly and entirely nihilist, to the point where they have no hopes in the normal sense, other perhaps then the destruction of that which they hate, how do you render them hopeless?

Surely that is what the jihaddis mean to tell us by their suicide-murders -- you have no hope of defeating us in war, as we want nothing but death, whether yours or ours doesn't matter, all we want is as much death as we can arrange for.

Surely there is a way to get a wedge into this and break it, but what?

It is easy to fall back to the idea of truly massive, shocking numbers of deaths. I.e. killing many hundreds of thousands, or even millions, for which we certainly have the technical capability. But would even that work against nihilists?

And, considering the awful effect it would have on the morale of the free world, and the normal aversion that most normal people have to such methods, one has to ask, is there not another method available? Is terror the only workable answer to terror?

I fear the worst. Nihilists, especially committed nihilists, have at least in part obliterated their sense of self. So they will not be thinking of their own welfare in the same way as we. But coming, as the mohammedans do, from a throroughly other-oriented culture, perhaps one can frighten them by threatening their shrines and family.

I'm tempted to think that if the Thais rose up as a man, and descended on their oppressors with whatever implements they had to hand, they might just succeed in killing so many and so horrifically as to reduce the jihaddis to fear and disgrace.

But then one remembers that the Hindus tried exactly that, just a couple of generations back, without much effect.

It's clear to me that I don't have the answer to this. But I sure wish that somebody else had some plausible ideas.

Posted by: joeblough at March 20, 2007 4:32 AM

Dear joeblough:

I have long grappled with the same questions that you raise. In the past, a significant and overwhelming military defeat against Muslims would cause them to become inward and pacified as long as a generation. Now, in the age of the internet and affordable transport, any military retaliation, indeed, defense, serves as a beacon that beckons swarms of them to come in aid of their “brothers” seeking death while killing. Is there an answer to this madness? Certainly, acknowledging the truth and refusing to accept that Islam is a religion in the conventional sense of the word would be a small beginning but only a few thinkers who are vilified as right wing islamaphobes are even thinking about this small baby step. The posts on this site are filled with rants in near biblical terminology calling for the extermination of Islam or even Muslims, but this is unrealistic and morally indefensible. A feasible solution seems to lie only in disconnecting Islam from the framework of religion. Islam is basically a set of codes for regulating life and warfare in ancient marauder society. That it uses the power of religion to regulate and motivate the soldiers in this standing army seems obvious enough. Disconnect the legitimacy of religion from their code and you have found a way to break the hegemony of the faith. How to do that? I have no idea, that is for theologians and politicians to do, but we can at least start by refusing to accept that Islam is a religion and confronting those who claim that it is.

Posted by: laosuwan at March 20, 2007 5:24 AM