Is Iran Next?

Here's what the US president said in his speech last night:

Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of extremist challenges. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We'll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.

We're also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence-sharing and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies. We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border. And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region.

One blogger who enthusiastically supported the invasion of Iraq reflects "What was the real message of this speech? I'm trying to figure that out. But I'm beginning to feel more dread in my stomach about what this president is prepared to do."

Junta Issues Direct Threat to the Thai Media

For the first time since the coup d'etat, a Thai general has pubically issued a censorship order to the Thai media (from the Straights Times):

I want to ask every television channel and every radio station not to broadcast messages or statements of the former prime minister and leaders of the past ruling party," General Winai Phattiyakul told a gathering of 100 media representatives.

"If they don't listen, you can kick them out of your station or if you can't use your judgement, I will use mine to help you run your station," Winai said.

It was the first time the generals have issued a censorship order since they ousted Thaksin in a bloodless Sept. 19 coup, accusing him of rampant corruption, charges he denies.

Have the junta's true colours begun show? That general sounds like a thug. As this Jotman interview reminds us, Thaksin's over-arching control over the Thai media outlets was not merely one of the main the justifications cited for the coup d'etat, it was also the biggest reason why some Bangkok residents supported it.

War with Iran? US Forces Raid on Iranian Consulate May be Part of Something Bigger

US forces have conducted a raid on an Iranian consulate in Northern Iraq. This move actually led to a standoff between US forces and their Kurdish allies. Josh at TPM blog suspects that this could be part something much bigger.

I'm getting some hints that this raid on the Iranian consulate in northern Iraq may be part of something much bigger. Is there a classified presidential directive to the CIA and DOD to take down Syrian and Iranian operations inside Iraq, even so far as operations into Iranian and Syrian territory? And is the aim here to provoke a conflict with one or the other of these states? To provoke an attack from Iran perhaps? The plan from the neocons was always to build the chaos outwards. Never too late, I guess. Watch this. Something's up.

Creepy. Clemons at Washington Note comments:

Some are suggesting that the Consulate raid may have been designed to try and prompt a military response from Iran -- to generate a casus belli for further American action.

If this is the case, the debate about adding four brigades to Iraq is pathetic. The situation will get even hotter than it now is, worsening the American position and exposing the fact that to fight Iran both within the borders of Iraq and into Iranian territory, there are not enough troops in the theatre.

Bush may really have pushed the escalation pedal more than any of us realize.

Unleashing extraordinary powers of suppression

A Russian Jotman reader has this response to recent events in Bangkok:

I don't know much about the Thai affairs, but what is happening might very well make parallels with what happened in Russia in the recent years. First, country's security services engineer acts of terror (or use the genuine ones for their own purposes) and then use the extraordinary powers to suppress whatever they feel needs to be suppressed.

The Thai generals would appear to be acting out the same plot. According to today's Bangkok Post "Military coup leader Sonthi Boonyaratkalin Monday ordered security forces to keep a close watch on so-called "old-power" figures in all provinces, in case they might reveal plans to pulls the strings for another bombing campaign." In the same article General Sonthi, head of Thailand's Council for National Security, outlines his strategy to utilize scare police resource in the hunt for the bombers:

"Every single person and group, no matter whether they are former MPs or those likely to have the power to incite violence, are being closely observed to see if something more will happen," Gen Sonthi said. (hat-tip Patiwat/Bangkok Pundit - my italics)

Of course, those who have the "the power" to do really bad things (like terrorism) do not neccessarily have the *motive* or *temperament* to do them. It's as if George W. Bush blamed the Democrats for carrying out the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Perhaps Bush could have pointed to some hightly-placed Democrats in the CIA who had the "power" to carry out the attacks. But the motive? The temperament?

If worth their salt, surely hypothesized "evil machiavellian plotters" in the Thaksin camp would forsee that bombs going off in Bankok could amount to a heaven-sent gift to the regime; an excuse for the military rulers to clamp-down against its opponents. Terrorism in Moscow helped Putin to consolodate his own power. The attacks of 9/11 vastly improved the political fortunes for the US president (for the next six years anyway). Why would Thailand prove the exception?

As to the question of temperament, I would refer you to my post One Coup Does Not a Terrorist Make.

Finally, Sonthi's statement belongs to an expanding volume of zingers by Thai generals. I'd also include the following quote attributed to the Thai Prime Minister. Quick to rule out the Southern Insurgents, what was his rationale? He said the Southern Insurgents "would not be able to find their way around Bangkok." (being bumpkins from the South!)

The line that ruined "Blood Diamond" for me

It certainly didn't improve my experience of Blood Diamond that the man seated next to me stunk and sniffled throughout the movie, or that nearby a woman kept lighting up her mobile phone to check for SMS. Yes, a better film would surely have helped keep my mind off the theatre environs. But in the end, it wasn't certain objectionable theatre patrons, but one line in the script that ruined the movie for me. I was so deplored by the line that I Googled for it and discovered that the line had been quoted by dozens of reviewers: mostly approvingly (it's the one line that half-heartily attempts to make an interesting point amidst the cliche-ridden drivel of a film).

Connelly, who plays an attractive reporter -- a self-described veteran journalist tested in Bosnia and Afghanistan -- comes across as a naive bleeding-heart quack. The line that so irked me is quoted by this reviewer:

She’s always making holier-than-thou pronouncements. Of the indifference of Americans to African violence she says, “They might catch some of this on CNN—right between sports and weather.” (my emphasis)

That's the line. When I first heard it, I imagined how wonderfully it must been worded before studio executives got to it, demanding it be modified to suit the interests of their corporate over-lords. For with the smallest of tweaks, the line is transformed from a timid holier-than-thou banality to a powerful socially relevant zinger. To give you an example of what I'm talking about, I will replace the phrase "sports and weather" with an actual pairing of headlines taken from CNN's website today:

“They might catch some of this on CNN—right between Wagging Tales: what children read to dogs and 'Miracle' $6 bra stops bullet.”

There's a surplus of headlines at CNN with which to make the point. Drawing from other top headlines at CNN today, Connelly might have said:

“They might catch some of this on CNN—right between New Years baby gets her prize and Croc hunter Steve Irwin's final show finished.

Fully half of the top stories presently posted on CNN's homepage either concern the activities of a celebrity or are of the dogs-and-babies variety. "Sports and weather" are mainly not what crowd out stories about the plight of Africa on CNN or any other US news network. Many viewers recognize this; foreign correspondents who risk life and limb to cover such stories feel it in the gut; any employable scriptwriter likely knows it too. "Sports and weather" are beside the point. To test a hunch, when the theatre emptied I stayed behind to watch the credits. Just as I had presumed on hearing that line the credits showed that "Blood Diamond" was produced by Warner Brothers which also owns CNN. It is easy to guess how a good line went bad.

Incidentally, when I Googled for reviews of Blood Diamond I found that one review had identified the problem spot-on. Vadim Rizov, writing in The Reeler, concluded:

Connelly's reporter tries to bring it closer to home: "You might catch a minute of this on CNN," she says, approaching a desperately overpopulated refugee camp, "between sports and weather." Interesting, then, that the movie is produced by the same empire that owns CNN: divide and conquer in action, by selling piety to one audience and superficial news coverage to another. Consumers should probably worry more about media accountability than whether their latest tennis bracelet is conflict-free.

It's been years since Hollywood made a movie set in the developing world the caliber of The Killing Fields or The Year of Living Dangerously. If American writers and directors are no longer free to tell stories about our world that are relevant, then the dangers posed by the US media conglomerates are graver than we have known. In this age of "big media," corporate censorship is every bit as pernicious as the government variety.

As I wrote before on Jotman.com, I believe a great threat confronting America -- and the world -- is the US news media (see Bush is a symptom, not the disease). Let's hope that the Democratic Party leadership of the new US Congress is clear-headed enough to confront this problem. Most other urgent matters -- including Iraq -- pale in comparison.

One final suggestion (for fixing that irksome line of dialogue):

What really crowds out African civil wars and other "hard news" stories on CNN? To a far greater extent than either "sports" or "weather" coverage, it is the preoccupation of CNN with celebrity happenings that most imperils its coverage of major foreign developments. Therefore, I would have had Connelly say:

“They might catch some of this on CNN—right between the interview with Leonardo Dicaprio and a report on Jennifer Connelly's battle to stop smoking.

Sometimes the more ironic phrase is the more truthful.

Reflections on the Bangkok Bombings

One would imagine that to have experienced life in New York City, Madrid, London, or Bali in the immediate aftermath of such a day, is to have some idea of what Bangkok residents are going through. But in the case of Bangkok's 9/11, the political spin began even before all the bombs had gone off. Only the Spanish experienced such craven spin-doctoring in the immediate wake of a deadly attack. On January 1, Thai blogger Chut reflected:

I do not know if there would be a world fit for non-partisans now. At least I felt as if we are called to take a side or more among many sides. After 9/11 the rhetoric of “if you are not with us, you are against us” had echoed more than once. People borrow ideas.

Blogger Matt at Lost Boy has identified another element -- one that seems to set the Bangkok bombings apart from those other attacks. Matt writes:

After the bombings on New Year’s Eve, which we are still in the dark about, Bangkok has now descended into chaos, with bombs threats and suspicious packages sending waves of alarm across the public sector...

Paranoia is becoming the norm and little has been done to quell people’s fright. What’s most scary is that public uncertainty is being exploited by disgusting, ruthless individuals. Three bomb hoaxes were made against schools in Bangkok today.... Bomb-like objects are popping up everywhere.... It’s unclear whether or not any of the hoaxes today are related. If they are not then we are in the middle of something that seems to be escalating out of control.

The threat of chaos is what sets the Bangkok attacks apart. From news reports like this one in the Bangkok Post, one may detect a growing lack of confidence in the police:

Police have come under a barrage of criticism for alleged inefficiency and failure to ensure public safety after eight bombs hit Bangkok and Nonthaburi province on New Year's Eve.

Central Institute of Forensic Science acting director Porntip Rojanasunan lashed out at police for barring her team from collecting evidence from a bombing site in Pratunam late on Sunday night, although she had been ordered to do so by Council for National Security chairman Sonthi Boonyaratkalin.

"Our team could not get to the crime scene," she said.

If this forensic scientist had been able to "to get to the crime scene," do you suppose it possible that she might have discovered evidence incompatible with the government's pet theory -- that Thaksin supporters carried out the bombings? This need not be a matter of speculation. How many bomb site investigations were foiled by supposed police "incompetence?" The government's attitude may well be: "better the public despise the police for incompetence, than hate us for our wicked lies." The strong possibility that bombing investigations are being obstructed by the regime opens-up another can of worms. Will the police leadership continue to play this demeaning role compliantly? And for how long? Buying them off could prove costly.

At the same time, seemingly oblivious to it all, tourists have continued to go about their holiday-making almost as if nothing had happened. Newley Purnell writes today:

I can say this: My family and I traveled throughout various parts of Bangkok yesterday — from the Oriental hotel on the banks of the Chao Phraya to Emporium mall on Sukhumvit Rd. — and there was no shortage of tourists anywhere. Even the open-air Suan Lum night bazaar, which we visited two nights ago, was crowded, despite the fact that a bomb was reported to have been discovered there on new year’s eve and subsequently disposed of.

One city, different worlds.

Thai-Style "Propaganda Headlines"

In the run-up to the November US elections, I posted on a media manipulation technique perfected by the Bush Administration. I called it the art of the "Propoganda Headline." This is how I described the phenomena:

Media corporations like CNN will repeat any strongly worded White House statement as a headline news item. So if the White House spin is fiction, the headline will be fiction. Because it's the headline that the public will remember, in this way a lie becomes an accepted "truthiness." Call this the "Propaganda Headline Syndrome."

In an international public relations coup, Thailand's government has managed to spin the bombings in such a way as to generate "Propaganda Headlines" at many foreign media outlets. Andrew Walker at New Mandala writes:

Thailand’s military regime has wasted no time at all in blaming Thaksin supporters for the Bangkok bombings. And their rather bizarre message is having an effect in the international media. The Sydney Morning Herald’s international news leads with “Thaksin supporters linked to bombs;” the New York Times carries Supporters of Thai Ex-Premier Blamed for Blasts; the BBC has Thai PM blames rivals for blast... And even my Yahoo morning welcome message carried “Ousted Thai PM backers eyed in bombings."

I was somewhat taken aback by the New York Times headline when I first saw it. If even an overwhelmed Thai regime can attain such proficiency in playing the Propoganda Headline game, why does the world press allow itself to be played so blatantly?

As I showed in the earlier posting, there are creative means by which good editors avert the moral hazard of the Propoganda Headline.

Does a map of Bangkok bomb sites hold clues as to who is responsible?

Who is responsible for the bombings in Bangkok? Perhaps the strongest arguments favoring a "rogue element" hypothesis is Crispin's point (excerpt posted here) that not all of the targts were utilised to cause maximum casualties. A further point made by Bangkok Pundit has been on my mind lately: "The same is true for the southern border provinces where the terrorists are terrorising people by showing them the ability to attack anywhere with coordinate bombs at anytime." Is this not a defining characteristic of attacks carried out in the South of Thailand?

Singapore's Staights Times published a very good map yesterday showing the bomb sites in Bangkok, differentiating the two waves of bombings and showing the locations of undetonated explosive devices.







What strikes me when I look at this map is how many times in daily Bangkok life a person might pass by any number of the bomb sites. It would be hard to go about one's life in Bangkok -- certainly as a typical foreigner -- without from time to time one passing by one or several of the targeted locations. In my own case, one bomb (#3 on the map) went off two blocks from my old apartment building, another undetonated device was found a block from my old guest house on Khao San (#9), and another device was found at a shopping complex I frequented (#8). The intent of the bombers may very well have been to send the message that nowhere in Bangkok will anyone -- whether local or foreigner -- feel safe. "We can get you anywhere" could well be what the terrorists intended to signal with this attack. This also seems to be the signature message of the Islamic terrorists of Southern Thailand, and Baghdad too, for that matter.

An interactive satelite map indicating bomb sites can be found here.

Rumors there will be a Second Coup d'Etat in Thailand

The Thai-language newspaper Manager is apparently carrying a report that rumors are presently cirulating in the Thai capital that there will be another coup d'etat in Bangkok tonight. Earlier, The Nation had repored "Army Commander-in-Chief Gen Sonthi Boonyaratglin Monday ruled out the second coup, saying none in the army would stage it." Writing in the Asia Times, Shawn Crispin provided an interpretation of events that is most helpful if one is to make sense of this kind of rumor:

Significantly, the bombings come against the backdrop of rising tensions between military officials attached to the CNS, led by coup leader General Sonthi Boonyaratklin, and the interim civilian-led administration it later appointed, led by Surayud, a former army commander and close advisor to His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej. While Sonthi has dictated personnel decisions, the methodical Surayud has maintained a firm grip on policy and processes. Behind the scenes, Surayud has come under growing fire from certain coup makers for not moving fast enough in prosecuting Thaksin on corruption charges, one of the military junta's four stated motivations for launching the coup, seizing power and suspending the progressive 1997 constitution.

The disgruntled coup makers have been particularly critical of appointed Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Pridiyathorn Devakula, who served as central bank governor under Thaksin's government and has complicated a probe into a dodgy Bangkok land deal by the ousted premier's wife, Pojamarn Shinawatra, which his central bank legally endorsed.

So far Surayud has allowed investigations into Thaksin's and his political associates' alleged wrongdoings to take a slow but arguably sound legal course, apparently towards the broader reform aim of restoring judicial integrity and independence after years of political meddling under Thaksin. Yet the slow pace and so far inconclusive results of the various corruption investigations have been widely criticized in the Thai media, with some commentators starting to dare whether the coup that popularly ousted Thaksin was ever justified....

Whoever was responsible, the bombings will no doubt provide powerful new ammunition to CNS elements already skeptical of Surayud's stewardship and will no doubt give rise to new complaints that the former army commander has not done enough to guard against a possible rearguard action among Thaksin's alienated supporters inside the military. Significantly, CNS leader Sonthi was traveling in Saudi Arabia on New Year's Eve and cut his trip short to tend to the damage.

Despite its heavy-handed administration, the CNS still fears the prospect of Thaksin's many rural supporters converging on Bangkok under a pro-democracy banner and mounting large-scale protests against the coup leaders, which, by their own laws, they would be legally required to crack down on.

The New Year's Eve bombings will also provide strong new justification for the establishment of the CNS's 14,000-strong "Special Operations Force", a new secretive security force comprised of army and police officials aimed nominally at maintaining peace, law and order across the country, but which critics fear will be mobilized to ferret out and crush political dissent against military rule. Notably, the 556 million baht (US$15.3 million) earmarked last week by the cabinet for the controversial new security force came under strong media criticism just days before the bombings.

Crispin concludes: "What is clear from the outset is that elements inside the Thai military itself had as much - if not more – political motivation than other potential actors for launching the crude and deadly attacks." (hat-tip Bangkok Pundit)

Other Breaking News from Bangkok from late this afternoon:

The Nation recently reported that "A bomb-like object was detected inside the Major Cineplex Building, Rajayothin branch at 5:30 pm. Bomb disposal police were checking the object."

There was much speculation in Bangkok that renegade police officers might be behind the bombings. Further bomb attacks are feared likely.

Happy New Year!

With the events unfolding so quickly in Bangkok, I forgot to wish everyone a Happy New Year. Here is short clip of New Year's fireworks in Singapore:

The Day After

Lost Boy describes the scene in Bangkok on the day after the bombings:

The city was deserted today. All the malls had very loose bag searches being “enforced”. Khaosan Road had a similar system in place with a very strong military and police presence.

One Coup Does Not a Terrorist Make

The recent terrorist bombings of the Thai capital were reprehensible, sickening. The same language might well be used to describe the speed at which the Thai government has moved to pin blame for the attacks on supporters of the ousted Prime Minister. From today's New York Times:

Supporters of the government that was ousted in a coup three months ago were responsible for explosions across Bangkok during New Year's Eve celebrations, Gen. Surayud Chulanont, the interim prime minister, said today....

"From the evidence we have gathered, there is a slim chance that it is related to the southern insurgency," General Surayud told reporters. "It is likely related to people who lost their political benefits."

No sooner did the attacks take place than indications were that the government would attempt to pin balme for them on Thaksin supporters (see early commentary by 2Bangkok.com).

To my mind, for a government to use the pretext of such dastardly attacks to score points against a political rival is to in some measure become a co-conspirator in violence, if only after the fact. As I wrote yesterday, this is basically what voters in Spain decided when their government tried to pin the Madrid bombings on ETA on the eve of a national election.

I believe it highly unlikely that the deliberate targeting of civilians and tourists in Bangkok on New Years Eve was anything other than an extension of the ongoing attacks by Southern insurgents into Thai capital. This was what many Bangkok residents feared would occur eventually. As Bonafide wrote yesterday at Metroblogging Bangkok:

In all honesty, I'm not at all shocked... My bets are on the Southern insurgency trying to get their point. Blowing up monks, teachers, children in the 3 provinces hasn't gotten their point across. So, its only natural that the sick bastards move their chaos into the heart of Thailand...

Which reminds when I was having dinner with a few highly ranked police officers 5 months ago, I told them that it was only a matter of time before the bombings took place here in Bangkok. They agreed.

On Jan 1, Bangkok Pundit posted an extraordinary excerpt from a report on ScanAsia website that mentions that police believed they had foiled a planned attack by Southern insurgents on Bangkok a few weeks ago. When I checked out ScanAsia, the article had already been removed:

Police and military intelligence sources said that they had learned during the past month that a plan to bring bombs to explode in Bangkok was in the making when they had checked a home in Banang Satar district in Yala in the south of Thailand. They believed it was part of a plan to place bombs in Bangkok during New Year. A map of Bangkok had been found with many places marked, including Victory Monument, Klong Toey Rama IV, Ramkhamhaeng University, Siam Paragon, Zea Rangsit, Seacon Square and Don Muang Airport being marked.

Also, Bangkok Pundit has since posted excerpts from a Thai-language newspapers Thai Rath and Matichon that suggest similarities between the types of explosives used in the Bangkok bombings and those used in the South of Thailand.

Mainly, I find it extremely implausible that supporters of a political organization that has operated successfully within a democratic political system for many years would, within three months of their ouster, turn to acts of terrorism to achieve political goals. Civil society is a habit, and I do not believe that those who have acquired the habit can easily break free of it. And why would Thaksin supporters think it even helpful to resort to terrorism at a time when the regime that ousted Thaksin has been screwing up so badly? And if terrorism is an act of the desperate, who is truly more desperate at this point -- Thaksin supporters or the junta-backed regime? In recent weeks -- with their gross mismanagement of the financial markets, and little to show by way of progress on constitutional reform, insufficient evidence to prosecute Thaksin on corruption charges, and the deposed PM visiting neighboring countries (like a hawk circling its prey) -- many commentators have sensed a whiff of desperation in the air. And it's not Thaksin who seems to be desperate.

Even though the junta/Thai regime have proven themselves willing to break with the democratic habit, I believe them every bit as unlikely as Thaksin supporters to have had any role in the terrorist attacks (Even the misnomer that is "Thai-style democracy" allows no scope for terrorism).

Baring any compelling evidence to the contrary, Southern insurgents almost certainly bear responsibility for the attacks. Tutored by the global jihadi network, employing techniques honed in Iraq and Afghanistan, funded by Muslim extremists from oil-rich states, such individuals have demonstratively acquired the habit of terrorist violence. Who but such sorry and twisted minds would view Bangkok residents and Western tourists as legitimate targets in their struggle? I am inclined to view such depravity beyond the imagination of either the present Thai regime or supporters of the ousted Prime Minister.

One caveat: some conspiracy theories accord elements within the Thai security forces blame for orchestrating terrorist attacks in the South. I must admit that were there found to be truth to these allegations, the case that "rogue elements" within the CNS/military or "rogue" Thaksin supporters could be behind the attacks becomes much more compelling. (Bangkok Pundit has more to say about the "rogue element" hypothesis.) Rogue security forces aside, I find it implausible that the political situation of post-coup Thailand in Decmeber 2006 created a sufficient incentive to motivate any group within Thai civil society to suddenly decide to "take up" terrorism.

Update on Second-Wave Bomb Attacks in Bangkok

Bangkok Pundit reports that a bomb may not actually have gone off in Buddy's bar on Khao Sarn Road, but that a package discovered had forced the evacuation of the area (based on reports from ITV and the Nation). Bangkok Pundit has this update on another bomb:

1:20 am ITV reports on a possible bomb found before it exploded at Suan Lum Night Bazaar - this is on Wireless Road next to the Japanese Embassy and close to the US Embassy. Embassy Central really. It is a market which sells many kinds of products to Thais and foreigners. Very limited reports so far and no confirmation.

3 More Bombs in Downtown Bangkok After Midnight

According to 2Bangkok.com, the Nation newspaper is reporting that more bombs went off in the heart of Bangkok after midnight on Jan 1. One bomb went off ina popular bar in Khao Sarn Road, and another at the pedestrian flyover at Central World shopping complex.

Three more bombs exploded in the heart of Bangkok once the new
year started, severely injuring many foreign tourists.The two bombs exploded
nearly at the same time seconds after the new year started and another bomb exploded about half an hour after midnight.The first bomb exploded at a public telephone booth at the pedestrian flyover linking Central World and Kesorn Plaza. Several foreigners were injured and rushed to hospitals.The second bomb exploded at the Best Sea Foods restaurant on the Saen Saeb Canal near the Pratunam Pier. Two foreigners and a Thai were injured. One of the foreigner had one leg amputated by the blast. The third bomb exploded at the Buddy Bar
on Khao Sarn Road

New Years Eve Bomb Attacks in Bangkok

A series of bombs went off on New Years eve in Bangkok.

Presently, wire services report six bomb attacks leaving 3 dead and over 20 injured. These attacks were at police stations, a bus stop, and also Victory Monument area in downtown Bangkok.

Blogger Lost Boy lives in the vicinity of Victory Monument is live blogging that attack:

At 6.45 p.m. today, less than 300 meters from my apartment at Victory Monumentin Bangkok, a bomb exploded killing one and injuring four. The incident occurred at the bus station next to Center One mall. I arrived around 7.30 p.m. and the scene was a mixture of shock and curiosity...

Newley.com has news and some background info, and summarizes Bangkok Pundit's hypothesis as to who might be responsible.

2Bangkok.com reports that 3 more bombs have gone off in major centres of the city.

CNN quotes the Thai PM:

The bombings exploded almost simultaneously. It must have been planned," Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont told reporters...

But (Thai National police chief Gen Ajirawit Suphanaphesat) said the insurgents were probably not behind Sunday's attacks, AP reported.

Why did he say that? How is it that Gen Ajirawit knows so much as to say such a thing at this early hour? Such speculation strikes me as vaguely reminiscent of the aftermath of the Madrid Bombings when the Spanish PM tried was too quick to blame those attacks on the wrong group.

I am presently in Singapore where I learned about the attack from Singapore television at about 1:00am (12:00am Bangkok).