Asiantravel

I must agree with smedly.

Okay I haven't been there recently but when I rented there before it was crap. No tiles on the alleyways only worn out left out patches, almost noise every weekday from contractors renovating a unit.

Location is ok but in the end I was feed up with the always very dirty/congested south patt road.

I wonder how it looks inside now, must be one of patts. oldest condo buildings by now.

One problem which you may have, is getting accepted at guesthouses in Yangon.some guesthouses WILL NOT accept you with an overstayed visa as a result of pressure (and possibly ludicrous fines) from the government.

Pathetic, disgraceful, disgusting.....but what we all knew would happen.

It amazes me that people are willing to condemn without thinking or knowing.

He is not yet convicted or proven innocent of criminal charges.

He has just made a settlement on a civil case.

It is not like he has bought a judgement if anything he has tried to make amends to what I am sure is the worst event in his short life.

He must live with it his whole life. I hear that the family will live their life with the terrible loss.

I am sure there is not one among us who has not make a mistake that did not endanger the life of others at some point. Thankfully most often it does not happen to end so badly so just maybe we should not condemn and feel so much hatred because he happens to be much richer than us and a member of the LSC. .

I just had a root canal procedure

which I was very pleased with and I would definitely recommend my dentist.

His name is Dr Suwat Weereerat

https://plus.google....out?gl=th&hl=en

but there is a picture on the wall in the surgery showing what is involved

when you have an implant done and it said quite clearly underneath the picture

Wouldn't it be considerably cheaper to construct an above

ground train system like the Bangkok skytrain?

There was a plan to re-use some of the components from that urban monument called the Hopewell project in BKK, but it was opposed by city hall on the grounds it did not fit with Lanna culture. Their alternative was much more appropriate:

Construction will start as soon as Fred and Barney can afford the Tea Money!

and how does this " fit with Lanna culture "..............?

Now that is a very sensible thing. I wonder if Thails have ever heard about the idea of Carpooling.. The public transportatin in my view is excellent. The bus system very good, and there no place you cannot travel to. The subway and the skytrain are superb. It would however be good if the skytrain would operate on a 24 hour basis

You must live downtown. Where I am, the nearest actual bus stop (as opposed to a songtaew) is over a mile away. - And I live in a Bangkok district.

And anyway, when there's a traffic jam, being on a bus is pointless.

They need to do what they've been talking about for at least a decade, probably longer.

Build more skytrain and subway lines.

not if they buses like this !

personally i like the idea of this public transport system......

and therein lies the problem it all comes down to nothing but subjective judgements in one case while on the other

it is enforced by the Law. Like I said sheer hypocrisy

Youtube probably should not have blocked the video anywhere, but the world is not black and white. They preserved free speech for those who are used to it and compromised for those who are not. Sometimes the world works out like that.

considering Salman Rushdie has to stay in hiding for 10 years,I hope the filmmaker sincerely considers

his piece of art work in the name of free speech was worth it weighed against the disruption that will occur

to his life and that of his family?

More people should be asking why does You Tube only choose to act expeditiously regarding the removal of videos in some cases but not in "Innocence of Muslims"?

Most people understkand that the "Innocence of Muslims" does not call for violence and does not violate Youtube's rules. That is why it is not being removed.

Google appeared to undermine its own argument by announcing that it had blocked access to the video in some countries.

At this point, even those who are not constitutional lawyers begin to smell a rat. Here we have a commercial company effectively making editorial judgments. If Google were a publisher, like, say, the New York Times, then the question of whether it should or should not publish the video could be trashed out via an established channel – the courts

http://www.guardian....p?newsfeed=true

and therein lies the problem it all comes down to nothing but subjective judgements in one case while on the other

it is enforced by the Law. Like I said sheer hypocrisy

i dont understand how that 15 min clip continues to be there .....

Terms of Service for You Tube

Don't Cross the Line !!!!!

We encourage free speech and defend everyone's right to express unpopular points of view. But we don't permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity).

http://www.youtube.c...nity_guidelines

I will tell you why its there, because it doesnt contravene any policy.

Please tell me what part of the video is factually incorrect? Why doesnt someone like Letterman get the grand mufti of America or wherever on his show and ask the question to him directly. What is so offensive to Muslims about this film and what is factually incorrect about it?

Muslim extremists get offended at the slightest thing. If they were secure about their beliefs, they could just chuckle and shrug it off. By going ballistic, they're showing how insecure they are in their belief nexus.

I once played guitar with a rapper (decades before rap officially existed). He made up songs on the fly, and offended everyone. Spic, jew, lezbie, hic, towel-head, redneck, butt-fckr, wop, nigger, .....you name it, he rapped about it. I would closely watch the audience, and one group after another got offended. After they realized everyone was getting hit upon, they would then see the silliness of getting offended, and then settle back and enjoy the crazy performers. It wasn't entertaining for everyone, but then again neither is Frank Sinatra. It taught me the freedom in not being able to be offended - which I strive for. Very few people have attained a level of not being able to be offended. But imagine the freedom gained, by letting go of the mental burdon.

and surely that is whole point of this debate. Under Islamic rule this thread would never ever have started let alone allowed the discussion to continue as it has. According to the poll results so far roughly 80% of posters would be condemed (probably to death) for voting the wrong way.

Exactly. Banning Hate speech is not the same thing as offending someone's religous agenda.

I can't see that it violates Youtube's guidelines. It does not attack or demean a group, although they certainly might find it offensive.

As to Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, he is the leader of Hezbollah and considered a terrorist. Most people are not going to consider his proposals worth paying attention to.

You're wrong there!

When The United Nations meets next week this proposal for an international law is on the agenda and I think you will find many countries will support Sheik Hassan Nasrallah

You mean all the countries like Iran and Syria that have such wonderful records when it comes to justice, freedom and human rights. It does fit right in with the things that they usually support like Hezbollah and Hamas.

as rgs2001uk said a few posts back " Well that is a matter of opinion "

I will tell you why its there, because it doesnt contravene any policy.

Please tell me what part of the video is factually incorrect?

Why doesnt someone like Letterman get the grand mufti of America or wherever on his show and ask the question to him directly. What is so offensive to Muslims about this film and what is factually incorrect about it?

Because it clearly “ demeans a group based on religion “.

Well that a matter of opinion, you choose to say its demeaning, I can find nothing demeaning about it.

Since when has the truth to be silenced for fear of offending or demeaning a paricular religion or group?

Please tell me what is factually incorrect about this video?

I could equally say that about the ' other group ' but if I do I can get suspended on this forum or even worse end up in jail if I was in Europe

I can't see that it violates Youtube's guidelines. It does not attack or demean a group, although they certainly might find it offensive.

As to Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, he is the leader of Hezbollah and considered a terrorist. Most people are not going to consider his proposals worth paying attention to.

You're wrong there!

When The United Nations meets next week this proposal for an international law is on the agenda and I think you will find many countries will support Sheik Hassan Nasrallah

Hezbollah is regarded as a legitimate resistance movement and political party throughout much of the Arab and Muslim worlds,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Nasrallah

i dont understand how that 15 min clip continues to be there .....

Terms of Service for You Tube

Don't Cross the Line !!!!!

We encourage free speech and defend everyone's right to express unpopular points of view. But we don't permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity).

http://www.youtube.c...nity_guidelines

I will tell you why its there, because it doesnt contravene any policy.

Please tell me what part of the video is factually incorrect?

Why doesnt someone like Letterman get the grand mufti of America or wherever on his show and ask the question to him directly. What is so offensive to Muslims about this film and what is factually incorrect about it?

I can't see that it violates Youtube's guidelines. It does not attack or demean a group, although they certainly might find it offensive.

As to Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, he is the leader of Hezbollah and considered a terrorist. Most people are not going to consider his proposals worth paying attention to.

not to post material considered as hatred towards the Jewish people ?

What is the difference ?

i dont understand how that 15 min clip continues to be there .....

Terms of Service for You Tube

Don't Cross the Line !!!!!

We encourage free speech and defend everyone's right to express unpopular points of view. But we don't permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity).

http://www.youtube.com/t/community_guidelines

There is plenty of stuff on Youtube denying the murder of 6 million Jews. The Innocence of Muslims may be offensive to Muslims, but it is not any more offensive than denying the Holocaust ever happened.

Maybe the most practical solution is as Sheik Hassan Nasrallah proposes ……..

" an international law that would ban insults of Islam and other religions, citing similar laws that exist to prevent anti-Semitism. "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2204445/Hezbollah-leader-calls-protests-says-people-support-offensive-Mohammed-film-punished.html

There is tons of stuff mocking Christianity on Youtube and no one is rioting about that.

Please flag these videos that incite racial and ethnic hatred towards the Jewish people, a violation of YouTube's Terms of Service.

31 years old and living in Pattaya,he has retired early,unless he is doing something illegal here. the police need to check guys under 40 who live here,they are the undesireables in the main,selling drugs etc

You know there are a lot of younger guys who do very well working online, don't you? I know a handful of very wealthy guys living in Thailand who are under 35. Not everyone has to live off a pension to be here. Age is of no importance when it comes to people who earn their money illegally. Older guys do it just as much as younger ones.

I have often asked the younger farangs, what do you do in Thailand? When I`ve met them and engaged in conversation when out and about. The standard answer is; a little bit of this and a little bit of that.

The majority (most but there are a few exceptions) I would guess are managing to stay in Thailand by bending the laws and hoping no one will notice or care about they`re activities here.

You mean like those older guys who do visa runs or loan the money for their retirement visa ? Supplementing their income by illegally teaching and stuff ?

But you don't tend to see many of those older guys tossing furniture over the balcony and generally wrecking the joint?

The U.S. Has Bought $70,000 in TV Ads in Pakistan Denouncing Anti-Islam Film

...................It looks like it was an unfortunate waste of tax payers money because the people didn't buy it.