Thanks for this, but we are currently discussing this in the Chinese economic thread.
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
Thanks for this, but we are currently discussing this in the Chinese economic thread.
A soldier has killed 20 people and injured many more in a gun rampage in the Thai city of Nakhon Ratchasima.
Jakraphanth Thomma, a junior officer, killed his commanding officer before stealing weapons from a military camp, a defence spokesman told BBC Thai.
The suspect then drove to the city centre and entered a shopping complex, where he is believed to be holed up.
The suspect, whose motives remain unclear, posted images of his attack on social media sites.
How did the attack unfold?
It began in Nakhon Ratchasima, also known as Korat, in the late afternoon at the Suatham Phithak military camp, where the commanding officer, named by the Bangkok Post as Col Anantharot Krasae, was killed.
The Post said a 63-year-old woman and another soldier were also killed there.
The suspect seized arms and ammunition from the camp before taking a Humvee-type vehicle.
He then opened fire at a number of sites before arriving at the Terminal 21 shopping centre.
Local media footage appears to show the suspect getting out of his vehicle and firing shots as people flee.
CCTV footage shows him inside the shopping centre with a raised rifle.
Other footage showed a fire outside the building, with some reports saying it was caused by a gas canister that exploded when it was hit with a bullet. One of the suspect's social media posts features an image of himself with the fire in the background.
"The gunman used a machine gun and shot innocent victims resulting in many injured and dead," government spokesman Krissana Pattanacharoen told Agence France-Presse.
Defence ministry spokesman Lt Gen Kongcheep Tantravanich said 20 people had been killed.
More information in the link above
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
Jaysus what the heck is up with SEA nations and soldiers running amok.
I don't want to be paranoid but this could be pretext to "offensively attack" China in a cyberattack to bring down China infrastructure right after or even before China fully recovers from the biovirus
Recall US government now says it reserves the right to "hack back" and all it has to do is falsely accuse China of hacking then that lets it "preemptively" do cyber attacks on China to try to bring entire China country down on its knees, especially if China is still in the midst of recovering from a biological virus attack
Trade war, tech supply chain war, biowarfare, cyberwar, then finally finishing it off in the South China Sea.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
Who cares about pretext or moral justification? You think the US hasn't been hacking/trying to hack everybody ally and adversary up to now? Haha Bring China's infrastructure down to its knees? What are you imagining? You are giving the US far too much credit. This is the country that went nation vs. company with Huawei and lost. Hack China? Chinese cybertech will put them in the Matrix and they won't even know it LOL
Seriously, this is an all out fight to the top. They hack, we hack. Everything they do, we do back. Everything they don't do, if we think of it, we do too. They sail ships in circles in the South China Sea, we build concrete islands and we arm them. No reasoning other than to be number one is needed.
PS. What the hell is a biovirus? How is it different from a regular virus? You just can't stop with that biowarfare crap no matter who says what, can you? What is this, your first post back from the ban for unsubstantiated rumors?
Last edited:
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
I don't care what team you're on. When you're wrong, you're wrong. What the hell is Cryptome? That sounds like a conspiracy site. Substantiated means by an accredited scientific journal analyzed by experts, not anything you can find on the internet. I can post links from people who say the earth is flat but it doesn't make it substantiated. If you think you got some new data to show, post the direct link to the coronavirus thread and let everyone analyze it, I mean the real source, not a wiki page of what the source is supposed to be.
When it comes to epistemology, you need to start at the null which is the most conventional explanation.
What you imagine all could be true, but we don't know and cannot assume it to be true until more tests are needed. If you choose one extraordinary explanation, you have to also consider the others. It’s like believing one god means you have to believe in other similar ones
Leave it at the “null hypothesis” or “i don’t know” when you don’t have evidence to support your hypothesis.
Please to read up on Occam’s razor @adiru
I take any DOJ indictment against China with a grain of salt. DoJ is not credible anymore after all the wild accusations they have done to Indict Huawei and arrest of Ms. Meng, They have also become very partisan when dealing with domestic affairs and are no longer credible.