Ferangled

Well done you have provided information on a number of cases where people deliberately ingested DEET and suffered none of the symptoms we saw in this actual incident. Way to prove your point!

You are totally lost as always. You said "the more I read up on DEET the less likely it seems that DEET would be the cause of death in these cases." to which I posted the above information directly showing that it can, and in fact has caused deaths previously. You did actually read the post, right? You obviously have no medical training or you wouldn't have used the word "symptoms" because a symptom is something experienced by the patient, not observed. The only people that know what the symptoms were are dead so we will never know what they experienced. Signs, however, we do have. Signs are something observed in the patient. If you had followed the story before posting about it you would have seen that several signs do fit DEET ingestion, even in small amounts; vomiting, bloody diarrhea, rash, uticaria (raised red welts), blue lips and fingernails and, of course, death. With those signs, it is almost certain that they also experienced some of the symptoms mentioned in previous documented cases where accurate illness histories were able to be obtained: hypotension, bradycardia, confusion, ataxia, hypertonicity, drowsiness, abdominal pain, coma, and nausea.

I repeat my original statement, on balance, the more I read up on DEET the less likely it seems that DEET would be the cause of death in these cases. I am sorry you find it so hard to accept the fact that others have differing views to your own but I'm afraid that's life, deal with it, perhaps you are the one that should do a little more research...

I have absolutely no problem with people having "other views." In fact I find it quite amusing that some people can hold on to a "veiw" even when faced with insurmountable evidence to the contrary, just as you have.

DEET was historically believed to work by blocking insect olfactory receptors for 1-octen-3-ol, a volatile substance that is contained in human sweat and breath. The prevailing theory was that DEET effectively "blinds" the insect's senses so that the biting/feeding instinct is not triggered by humans or other animals which produce these chemicals. DEET does not appear to affect the insect's ability to smell carbon dioxide, as had been suspected earlier.^[5][6]

However, more recent evidence shows that DEET serves as a true repellent in that mosquitoes intensely dislike the smell of the chemical repellent.^[7] A type of olfactory receptor neuron in special antennal sensilla of mosquitoes that is activated by DEET as well as other known insect repellents such as eucalyptol, linalool, and thujone has been identified. Moreover, in a behavioral test DEET had a strong repellent activity in the absence of body odor attractants such as 1-octen-3-ol, lactic acid, or carbon dioxide. Female and male mosquitoes showed the same response.^[8][9]

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

I guess you posted this to try to prove that DEET is not also an insecticide? And even after saying that is was just symantics and a face saving exercise?

From your own Wiki link:

"It was originally tested as a pesticide on farm fields,"

"DEET has been found to inhibit the activity of a central nervous system enzyme, acetylcholinesterase, in both insects and mammals.^[20] This enzyme is involved in the hydrolysis of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine, thus playing a role in the function of the neurons which control muscles. Because of this property, many insecticides are used to block acetylcholinesterase, which leads to an excessive accumulation of acetylcholine at the synaptic cleft, causing neuromuscular paralysis and death by asphyxiation"

If incecticide/not insectidice issue is so unimportant, then why do people feel the need to go to the trouble of posting thier opinion that it isn't an insecticide?

More about face saving please. I liked that bit.

My addled and argumentative friend, just drop it, for the sake of your own sanity! I suggest rather than arguing over the appropriate use of words you should take a break, get out for some fresh air and gain a sense of perspective on life.

You say potatoes I say potatoes as they say, get over it. DEET is an insect repellent and my conclusions as to the likelihood of it being the sole cause of these tragic deaths remain unchanged by your overly dramatic rantings.

I apologise if I have offended you by not conforming to your views but suggest you really need to stop raging at anyone and everyone that doesn't agree with you.

It does not say that the money is exhausted, it says that it has been distributed to the various State Agencies. Whether or not these Agenices have yet spent all their allocated funds is yet to be seen. It appears that there is still work in progress and funds yet to be spent as some State Agencies are behind on the flood prevention works.

TV's own caption.

Will argue that point I think.

Thailand's Bt120 Billion Anti-Flood Budget Exhausted.

Yes!

What faultless logic!

When...."Tallest Thai In The World"... ...actually means average sized Thai bloke making plans to climb Mt Everest, I wouldn't be too sure!

"Our War" is available on BBC IPlayer until 28 Sept for those that are interested. The series is filmed by the blokes themselves & for once hasn't been censored by MOD or hyped up by the likes of Ross Kemp or Andy McNob.

Edit; Ross Camp or Andy McNob!

Are you guys seriously in a heated discussion if the word insecticide could be loosely used to describe DEET? Wow! Or is it more to do with saving face?

Don't think anybody seriously uses DEET to kill insects, but it's reknown as one of the best insect repellants. Insect repellants are classified as pesticides, too. Even bloody citronella gets called a (bio)pesticide. OK, let's find out the LD50 of citronella for moskitos and get ready for a proper handbag fight!

What was the topic all about again?

Aye, I should have left well alone! I joined this exchange halfway through and didn't realise the lengths some will go to in "saving face"... my actual point was I don't believe that DEET is solely responsible for these deaths, the repellent/ insecticide debate was circumstantial yer honour, I thought it was fairly common knowledge what it was used for.

Any relation to Vidal? About time I got a haircut...

"successful career in technology..."

is not equal to sound human reasoning.

Instead of ridiculing a sensible well thought out post you might want to reread the EarthAlien post.

You need not fear losing your job because the tech industries will continue to grow weather the kids get a pad or not.

Sorry Hellodolly, my response does read back quite scathing but reading through the original post again I'm afraid my opinion hasn't changed.

You are quite correct in your closing statement, the tech industry will continue to grow regardless of the advancements or lack of in Thai schools. Of course if we deprive the majority of Thai students from keeping up with modern technology trends (because the distinct minority require basic infrastructure improvement before they can take advantage of them), the void between the actual abilities of Thai school leavers and the necessary skills required in the work place will simply grow.

Let me try to address the points clearly for you to respond as to what you don't agree with when I say this is somewhat lacking as a critical assessment:

• Teachers that are complete PC/Internet mumpties!
  

Clearly this is a sweeping statement and if that is the case, providing them tablet PCs will only increase their familiarity with the internet and PCs. Personally I prefer not to generalise the entire teaching fraternity of Thailand as "mumpties" and as a starting point in any sort of analysis it's distinctly lacking merit.

• Students that need training on such tools and have pointed out that the tabs are meant for work and not playing games on.
  

All students need training. That is the very definition of being a student. Sorry the last part lost me, it just doesn't make sense.

• Parents that cannot participate in homework that the student may need help with because all tabs are kept at school.
  

Just a wild assumption. Homework doesn't have to be exclusively done on tablets indeed that would seem rather crazy. There are numerous uses for the tablets as learning aids, they aren't intended to replace all conventional methods over night. Surely we are all familiar with "computer rooms" at schools, and the fact that these weren't available for students to take home with them.

• Schools that don't have the electrical resources to recharge batteries
  

This is a distinct minority of schools and upgrading existing circuits to cater for more sockets is no major issue. The current draw of one of these devices on charge is minute.

• Schools that don't even have any electrical power at all
  

Again, a distinct minority of schools, why hold back the majority of students' advancement while necessary infrastructure upgrades are carried out for the minority?

For me it's quite telling that Buchholz immediately praised it as an "excellent summary" because in essence it supports his view - anything and everything this Government does is worthy of condemnation, facts and reality be damned. It is quite categorically not an excellent summary for the very reasons I have outlined above; in my honest opinion it's a few sweeping statements with a distinct lack of reasoning.

How long should we be expected to wait before evaluating any aspect of implementation? Wait until it's completed?

Yes that would seem sensible wouldn't it! Would you evaluate a runner's performance in a 1500m race after only 50m had been covered...

btw, I'm fine with another look at the implementation a year from now and 2 years in for the scheme. I hope the numbers aren't similar to this Year 1 end date for implementation.

Great, looking forward to a welcome respite from your overly negative and repetitive posts on this subject and a more balanced evaluation in a years time when we've all had a chance to see how the scheme has actually progressed

Long lame argument over semantics. DEET will kill an insect if you get enough of it on them. However this is a very ineffective method of pest control, probably any household cleaner would have the same effect but it is not referred to as an insecticide. DEET is used and sold as a repellent.

The real argument should be about whether or not DEET could be considered as the toxin causing death with these girls. Their symptoms seem to be different in some ways to the proven deaths from DEET. I think it is unlikely they died from DEET, but it is possible that there were other agents involved which caused a deadly combination.

Anyhow, with no info from the Canadian labs, you will not solve this here.

The issue I really have with this is that we are left with "DEET" as the convenient culprit, leaving no definitive cause or solution. These are not the only tourists to meet their demise on Phi Phi in suspicious circumstances and in every case there has been no definitive cause found.

If there's one positive that can be taken from this case surely it is to identify the cause and prevent the same happening to future travellers, unfortunately the likelihood of that happening remains distant.

Given that this tread is over a year old, does anyone know if he made it? I mean did he reach the summit of Everest or did his egg white diet fuel a growth spurt that saw him reach the dizzying heights of the "Tallest Thai in the World"...?

"(think patricide, fratricide etc, these are not descriptions of chemicals designed to kill fathers or brothers but the act of killing ones father or brother)" Hilarious mate! Thanks.

The definition of insect repellent (chosen by you to describe DEET) vs the definition of the word insecticide (which clearly it is as established as by the multitude of links provided in this thread) is quite amusing. Everyone already knows what "repellent" means and everyone knows what "-cide" means. The issue isn't what the words mean, it's which one DEET is. DEET is an insecticide (insect killing) and pesticide (pest killing) that is used in low quantities as a mosquito repellent. To cure you of your hilarious little language hiccup there, an insecticidal is "of or relating to an insecticide." The as you correctly point out the word "-cide" has nothing to do with chemicals so your comment "these are not descriptions of chemicals designed to kill fathers or brothers" makes no sense here whatsoever.

How people are still thinking that DEET is not an insecticide is quite amusing. Try reading the threads and links again, then if you still aren't convinced please share your reasons and supporting information as to why, When you post baseless things like "DEET by it's very nature does not kill insects but acts as a strong repellent." you just sound silly.

On balance, the more I read up on DEET the less likely it seems that DEET would be the cause of death in these cases.

Then I suggest you do somemore reading. I think some of these may have been posted here already.

"There is little information available about oral absorption. Severe symptoms have appeared within 30 minutes of ingestion, which implies rapid GI absorption. Ingestions of DEET have been associated with nausea, vomiting, hypotension, encephalopathy, seizure, coma, and ataxia. Ingestion of 50 mL of 100% DEET by a 33 year-old woman resulted in hyptotension, coma, seizures and death. Ingestion of 25 mL of 50% DEET by a one-year-old child resulted in coma and seizures"

http://uuhsc.utah.ed...ox/Vol7_No2.pdf

"DEET is primarily toxic to the CNS, although the mechanism

of action is unknown. Severe toxicity has resulted in children after having

ingested 25mL of a 50% DEET solution, and in adults after having ingesting

50mL of 100% DEET solution.

Clincial Symptoms:

Clinical effects include:

CV- Hypotension and rarely bradycardia;

CNS – Confusion, ataxia, hypertonicity, drowsiness and seizures;

GI – Abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting;

Dermatologic – Rash and contact uticaria (aka hives: raised, often itchy, red welts on the surface of the skin.)"

- http://www.mnpoison....ellent 3-06.pdf

"Intentional Ingestion of DEET

Rarely, people have ingested DEET intentionally to commit suicide, or because of psychological problems (Tenenbein 1987; Fraser et al. 1995). The effects resulting from intentional ingestion are variable, due to the different scenarios in which they occurred. Of the six reported cases of deliberate DEET ingestion, three led to death. In these cases, the amount ingested was 15-50 mL of 47.5% to 95% DEET in bottles. In two cases, bottles of DEET were drunk along with unspecified amounts of alcohol. Health effects included coma, unresponsiveness to pain and other stimuli, and death. In another case, a woman with a history of unipolar-depressive illness ingested a number of pills along with 50 mL of 95% DEET. She arrived at the hospital comatose and pulseless. She had a generalized seizure and died from a generalized bowel infarction (Tenenbein 1987). In another case, a woman with a history of psychological disorders ingested 15-25 mL of 95% DEET. She had a right and left atrial enlargement and diffuse ST-T abnormalities, but returned to normal within 24 hours with no further cardiac abnormalities."

- http://www.atsdr.cdc...th-effects.html

Well done you have provided information on a number of cases where people deliberately ingested DEET and suffered none of the symptoms we saw in this actual incident. Way to prove your point! I repeat my original statement, on balance, the more I read up on DEET the less likely it seems that DEET would be the cause of death in these cases. I am sorry you find it so hard to accept the fact that others have differing views to your own but I'm afraid that's life, deal with it, perhaps you are the one that should do a little more research...

However much you care to spin it Deet is an insect repellent not an insecticide. It has been used in pesticides but it itself is a repellent by it's very nature:

DEET was historically believed to work by blocking insect olfactory receptors for 1-octen-3-ol, a volatile substance that is contained in human sweat and breath. The prevailing theory was that DEET effectively "blinds" the insect's senses so that the biting/feeding instinct is not triggered by humans or other animals which produce these chemicals. DEET does not appear to affect the insect's ability to smell carbon dioxide, as had been suspected earlier.^[5][6]

However, more recent evidence shows that DEET serves as a true repellent in that mosquitoes intensely dislike the smell of the chemical repellent.^[7] A type of olfactory receptor neuron in special antennal sensilla of mosquitoes that is activated by DEET as well as other known insect repellents such as eucalyptol, linalool, and thujone has been identified. Moreover, in a behavioral test DEET had a strong repellent activity in the absence of body odor attractants such as 1-octen-3-ol, lactic acid, or carbon dioxide. Female and male mosquitoes showed the same response.^[8][9]

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

<snip>

It seems a bit irrational to blame all the current issues with the education system on the current Government or this tablet scheme. Equally irrational to deprive the majority because the minority have been marginalised by previous administrations. Yes these schools need to be brought into the 21st century and let's hope that happens.

The point that many seem to be missing here is it's far too early to assess the benefits and drawbacks of tablets within the school system or the implementation of this scheme. The usual suspects are so quick to jump in and spatter any thread with negativity, writing off any and everything before anyone has time to judge for themselves. Shame.

Except that it is the current government that is implementing a OTPC policy when in many areas there isn't the infrastructure to support it. Cart before horse stuff.

Many areas actually meaning few, remote areas actually meaning the distinct minority while infrastructure being mains power to charge the batteries... so we're back to depriving the majority population because of the minority?

Would it not be better to gradually implement the scheme while undertaking the necessary infrastructure improvements to the remote areas without power? The scheme by it's very nature is driving these improvements and advancement into the modern world, bringing power and internet access to areas that never had it.

Will it happen over night? No, clearly these changes take time to implement and only time will tell how positive or negative this scheme proves.

Personally I've mostly seen this type of solution upcountry

Well I guess there's no accounting for human stupidity.

The real issue here being that differing plug/ socket sizes & types, inferior quality mains extensions/ blocks, general lack of adequate earthing, commonly mismatched cable/ breaker sizes and human stupidity make for quite a lethal combination.

It really does come down to basic common sense; an hour or so's work, a few hundred baht on a breaker, outlet socket and cable or an inferior extension socket/ block and potential fire hazard... the choice, as they say, is yours

So, there are no "poverty stricken rural areas" south of Bangkok?

Have I ever said there weren't?! Far less than in the traditionally rural North of the country however...

And it is quite disappointing that the Democrats didn't solve the world's problems in the 2 years they were in power.

Yes, it would be a bit much to expect from a single administration to acomplish in a short space of time wouldn't it?!

Of course, the fact that one of the previous Education ministers (oh, who was that? ... that's right!! ... Thaksin!) didn't solve some of these issues in the 5 years while he was in power can be ignored too.

Yes overall the performance in this regard has been pretty shocking by all previous administrations, that was really the point, rather than dragging this into yet another Red/ Yellow, Thaksin/ Abhisit slanging match. I should have moved the s and said "previous administrations' total side lining of the poverty stricken rural areas".

It seems a bit irrational to blame all the current issues with the education system on the current Government or this tablet scheme. Equally irrational to deprive the majority because the minority have been marginalised by previous administrations. Yes these schools need to be brought into the 21st century and let's hope that happens.

The point that many seem to be missing here is it's far too early to assess the benefits and drawbacks of tablets within the school system or the implementation of this scheme. The usual suspects are so quick to jump in and spatter any thread with negativity, writing off any and everything before anyone has time to judge for themselves. Shame.

A good example of

entirely fabricated speculative BS with no grounding in reality!

is

previous administration's total side lining of the poverty stricken rural areas!!!

As evidenced by the overwhelming voting support they garnered in these areas and the complete electrical infrastructure they passed on to the current administration...

begin removed ...

I needed an extra few sockets in my office, a trip to Keehin and an hour later I had 10 working sockets in place of two... hardly rocket science and with the tiny load these tablets draw charging it's hardly a major issue.

Yes Buchholz I'd have to agree an excellent summary on par with your own in depth analysis of the subject, burn the witch that suggested this scheme! I expect the flooding will be a side effect of tablet manufacture next!

When's the 'office burning' party?

http://en.wikipedia..../Extension_cord

That would be an extension lead and not an electrical socket... like I say it's really not rocket science but I guess for the technologically challenged among us, it's not so easy to understand.

Correctly rated breaker wired with appropriately sized cable to sockets. In event of overload the breaker will trip (by it's very nature it is designed to protect the cable and prevent fire). I personally like to use RCDs for added protection but as most of your homes and offices have no earth wire and if they do they won't be connected to a suitable earth anyway, I wouldn't concern yourself too much... unless that is a picture of an extension lead in your home which would signify a distinctly dangerous electrical installation.

Personally I like to ensure the safety of my colleagues and family by learning about such things and checking them myself.

Are USA forces involved in more friendly fire incidents than others? Yes. Is the number of incidents (not casualties, mind, that another issue) involving USA troops significantly higher when factoring total number of troops and volume of operations? I doubt it.

Yes it is, where information has been leaked and we get a glimpse of the actual figures. 25% of troops KIA as a result of friendly fire? 80% of armoured units destroyed as a result of friendly fire? Please name one other country that even approaches those statistics for any conflict.

As for pinning the issue on USA army recruitment policy - unless I'm vastly mistaken, most professional armies (somewhat different for countries where compulsory service is the law) draw the masses of their ground units from populations with lower socio-economic profile. Lacking complete data, it is of course impossible to say if those directly involved fall into this category.

I am drawing on direct experience of US recruiting tactics as opposed to UK ones and, if you read my posts in their entirety, I am not "pinning the issue" solely on recruitment policy. The issue clearly runs much deeper than that.

Not exactly sure why you assume that procedures, technology and training weren't checked and improved since the Gulf war, or why you keep referring to those incidents rather than more recent ones. Are you suggesting the same figures are applicable for Afghanistan?

Because the source I have quoted gives an insight into the real figures for friendly fire incidents not those fabricated for media consumption so it makes for a good case study. If you have a credible source that has been leaked for Afghanistan please, offer it up for analysis.

Friendly fire incidents are a problem and no one denied this. It is doubtful that they can be all prevented - but attributing them to perceived national character, assumptions regarding quality of soldiers involved and taking them wholemeal rather than considering relevant conditions, isn't the way to go.

The fact is that friendly fire incidents in both WW1 & WW2 were common place but still didn't approach the statistical frequency that we saw in Desert Storm. Given the massive advancements in technology you would expect a massive reduction, as we have seen in other forces the world over, however it seems the reverse is happening with the US military. Clearly there is an issue and turning a blind eye, controlling the media releases or denial will not improve the situation.

The real issue, as I see it, is that such incidents tend to be brushed under the table, no-one ever found accountable even if there is direct evidence of misconduct. You can't learn from your mistakes if you can't first admit that you made them.

Thats all we need,.. patronising Politically Correct comments from UNESCO that will only encourage more stupid Dep Ed policies.

Haven't they bothered to perform a fuller investigation to reveal what a monumental disaster the 1-tab-per-kid has been and is inevitably going to end up like once they realize what an untenable program it really is?

• Teachers that are complete PC/Internet mumpties!
  
• Students that need training on such tools and have pointed out that the tabs are meant for work and not playing games on.
  
• Parents that cannot participate in homework that the student may need help with because all tabs are kept at school.
  
• Schools that don't have the electrical resources to recharge batteries
  
• Schools that don't even have any electrical power at all
  

Someone should tap the UNESCO rep on the shoulder and tell him/her that it was purely a vote buying populist program that was not researched at all and that praise is the last thing they should be offering!

Excellent summary.

.

Yes quite, the in depth analysis and detailed report is truly exceptional!

I particularly like the points that all teachers are pc/ internet mumpties (some sort of maternal numpty perhaps?) and that students need training (err really?) but apparently have pointed out that the tablets are for work and not games?! I won't pretend I followed the meaning of that one, just like the poster won't pretend that these points aren't entirely fabricated speculative BS with no grounding in reality!

Parents unable to participate in homework because the students can't bring the tablets home?! What? I thought your position was that these tablets were useless, now their unable to perform homework without them?! What a turn around! Can't recall ever being allowed to take a desktop home from school either but it didn't stop me doing homework or introducing me to the dawn of the PC age, a stepping stone to a highly successful career in technology...

As far as electricity in schools, while I am sure there are some that don't, as there are in most developing countries, I am yet to see one personally. Of course if they haven't got electricity or the ability to purchase mains extension leads/ increase the number of sockets, that's entirely a failing of this tablet scheme and not previous administration's total side lining of the poverty stricken rural areas!!!

I needed an extra few sockets in my office, a trip to Keehin and an hour later I had 10 working sockets in place of two... hardly rocket science and with the tiny load these tablets draw charging it's hardly a major issue.

Yes Buchholz I'd have to agree an excellent summary on par with your own in depth analysis of the subject, burn the witch that suggested this scheme! I expect the flooding will be a side effect of tablet manufacture next!

What's wrong with books?

Can't surf with it.

While we enter into the completely absurd a few serious survival points for the doomsday brigade among our ranks when considering the advantages of books & tablets:

A book can be used as fuel for a fire, which one could use to keep oneself warm or cook food/ sterilise water for drinking with.

A tablet could be used in a variety of ways to start a fire - the battery could be removed and the terminals used to create a spark and ignite tinder.... the screen could be used to focus the sunlight and reflect onto tinder to ignite it... similarly it could be used as a mirror to aid shaving; enabling the tablet user to remain smart in a survival situation while the book reader would become a bearded mess!

All very important considerations when balancing the pros and cons of the tablet vs books debate...

Absurd.

Not interested in logistics?

Without proper implementation, the concept is a meaningless waste.

.

Who can argue with such a refreshingly balanced and unbiased assessment of the scheme?

It's quite clear through this member's posting history that there is no personal or political agenda that would cause him to be overly critical or impartial in his summary.... or is there?!

When did insecticide come into this story? There was no mention of insecticide before, only DEET a insect repellant.

I will assume another poor reporting job.

Deet kills insects, so that would make it an insecticide.

Holly sh!t! there are more of you.

So sorry but deet is a insect repellant, not a bug killer. Before you look stupid like NomadJoe please do some reading. Oh to late.

Lol. Yeah I'm the one that looks stupid.

Look mate, just because it's a repellent doesn't mean it isn't also an insecticide. The two are not mutually exclusive. I used to be a sales rep for mosquito repellent among other things. But don't take my word for it, read the several links I provided. You provided a single quote from a website of a product advocacy group which works for mosquito repellent manufactures. Please tell me that isn't your sole source of your (mis)information?

DEET is used as an insect repellent, not an insecticide. The words hold a clue to their meaning - insect repellent, repels, insecticide - kills, or indeed the very action of killing an insect is, by definition, insecticide (think patricide, fratricide etc, these are not descriptions of chemicals designed to kill fathers or brothers but the act of killing ones father or brother), cide coming from the latin word cidum (killing).

DEET by it's very nature does not kill insects but acts as a strong repellent. That said it has been mixed with other chemicals and used in pesticides, but DEET itself is a repellent.

On balance, the more I read up on DEET the less likely it seems that DEET would be the cause of death in these cases.

Post and replies with an un-called for personal attack on another member's wife have been removed from view.

Next post like this will earn that member a holiday from Thai Visa.

You forgot one !

"Posted Today, 07:37

Hope that this scum losses his appeal and end s up in jail with some other inmates finishing him off.....this guy was once selling girls including underaged girls from neighbouring countries and yet Thais voted him in. I also hope that someday somebody would send his kids to work in a brothel. Simply filth along with the media and people who support him. ""

Is Chuwit a TV member? Where was the reference to his wife?

To be fair I think many people have similar sentiments to those responsible for the exploitation of women and (allegedly) minors...

NB. With regard to minors one should say "allegedly". Despite it being fairly common knowledge that many of his "massage parlours" employed under age girls to cater for certain clients tastes, I believe the only time it was actually brought to court he managed to beat the rap by claiming the girls forged their own fake ID. The girls claimed they were actually docked wages by their employer to forge them IDs as a condition of taking the job but hey, who to believe a pimp worth billions or a few child prostitutes being exploited by an adult...

Chuwit became an MP after the crime was committed but before he was convicted, a smart move on his part I reckon.

Chuwit did it because the sick system in Thailand do not help people in this situation !

You had not been so long i think, most of us have heard about people who own some land, suddenly they see some who had moved in and camped on their land, but here in Thailand you can not just kick them out, they will claim that their family had lived there for so and so many years, even all know they moved in last month, but the court system works so slow, that it will easy take 10 years before you have a court who say you can move them, then if you do it to hard your are blamed for that too !

So would you like some use your property without your aproval ???

No of course not, so therefore can we support Chuwit in what he did (no one was heart, only structures was smashed, inventory was mostly saved and people was allowed to pick it up later) !

I would use another methode, spraying pig manure all over my land at night !!! (but not so easy in Soi 10 Sukhumvit ) !

Yes, poor Chuwit with rent paying "squatters" on his land, land paid for and bought off the backs of illegal prostitution. What a stand up guy! With an estimated annual revenue of 1 billion baht from his illegal enterprises he really is a model politician. We should all feel sympathy for this guy, he worked so hard to build his criminal empire and turn his image as a Pimp to one of crime fighting vigilante politician. What a role model to the Thai youth.

I see these dangerous pinch points at many malls, not to mention the ignored fire safety hazards, etc..

Where was the building inspector, job supervisor when this escalator was installed, approved & paid for I wonder?

Thailand has building inspectors?

Apparently it has ass-clowns too.

Yes indeed, commonly known as politicians. Thailand also has building health & safety inspectors, who are generally either paid off or bullied to not interfere with construction and potentially cause delays/ costs while attempting to ensure a safe working environment.

Many of these inspectors are Farang, who are employed to satisfy the "appearance of safety concern" but pointedly ignored and marginalised because evidently the stupid Kwai have no idea that the lives of immigrant Burmese workers are not worth saving.

Scaffold checks? Hard hat & boots? Hi Vis? Risk assessments? Pah, mai pen rai... Much better to lose a few workers as collateral damage (most are illegal and can easily be wiped from the books so as not to appear on any statistics) to ensure that the project finishes on time and bonuses are paid to the Thai management.

Yes, I am talking from experience in the construction industry here though thankfully only as an impartial witness to other Farang bashing their heads against the walls in these unenviable positions.

Another convicted criminal MP... how many more can Thailand add to it's ranks? Does anyone have any statistics for the % of Thai MPs that are convicted criminals?

Thailand's legal and political systems are international jokes.

Chuwit was granted bail pending a review by the Supreme Court. As an MP carrying out his duty during a parliamentary session, he was not required to post any collateral.

So having been found guilty and sentenced to 5 years jail he walks scot free until such a time as he can leverage the verdict in his favour once more, sending a clear message to the Thai populace that the elite are beyond justice and crime is only punishable if you are not wealthy or powerful.

To those that sympathise with Chuwit over this issue perhaps you have been in Thailand too long, your moral compasses seem to have drifted off course. Quite understandable really, we tend to adjust to fit our environment I guess...