Ferangled

It's clear that you both hope that she doesn't resolve the issue and a crying shame that political point scoring is more important to many than actually resolving the plight of these people.

Implicit in that statement about hoping that she doesn't resolve the issue (wrong as far as a representation of my views is concerned), is the fact that it is indeed in her power to resolve the issue. If she doesn't, she will be criticised for it, and with justification, just as Abhisit was, and just as the other PMs that came before him were. Trying to in some way muzzle criticism by labelling those who do as callous political point scorers who don't care for the plight of these people, is nothing but a sad attempt to shield the PM and the government from blame... and not only is it sad, it's extremely hypocritical when the people attempting this muzzling are the same people who were most vocal against Abhisit with regards this issue.

Total BS. Yingluck actually still has a chance to intact change on this issue positively (unlikely though given past history) but you have already decided she won't and are criticising her for handling the situation as badly as her predecessor! We can definitively comment on previous PM's handling of the issue as their tenure is actually over... we already know exactly how they handled the issue! A minor distinction for some I know...

I have stated quite clearly that I think the treatment of these people by various Governments, up to this point the current included, has been terrible. That doesn't change the fact that, IMHO, Abhisit is clearly the one who handled the issue in the most callous, xenophobic and insensitive manner; He is the only PM that I am aware of that actually made towing people to sea and leaving them for dead policy!

There's no defending any inaction on the part of the current Government and I certainly haven't tried to but inaction does not equate to deliberate and calculated orders to contravene human rights. My personal opinion is that all have failed on this issue but if pressed, as I have been by your comments, Abhisit stands out for his particularly terrible handling of the situation.

The lady doth protest too much, methinks...

However you guys try to spin it Abhisit's name is intrinsically linked to inhumane treatment of the Rohingya and he is remembered for his deliberate and callous words on the issue during his short tenure as PM. As I clearly state I believe that the handling of the issue has been terrible under successive Governments but I understand why it's AV's name that springs to the fore over the issue; because he handled the reported incidents under his watch particularly dreadfully. To bounce from that to issuing live fire orders against his own people one has to question his morality and personal take on what constitutes the violation of human rights...

Will Yingluck do the same? Let's wait and see shall we, not a promising start but her comments fall short of Abhisit's own cold hearted, squirming tosh. The fact is she is still PM and actually has a chance to change public perception of how badly Thailand are handling this and other human rights issues and hopefully shift the current perception of Thais as deeply racist and xenophobic people. It's clear that you both hope that she doesn't resolve the issue and a crying shame that political point scoring is more important to many than actually resolving the plight of these people.

Perhaps if previous Governments had actually been brought to task for their criminal handling of the Rohingya Yingluck's Government might actually feel some real pressure to resolve the issue? As it is history shows us that the Thai people really couldn't care less about them and the Government will lose no support by towing boatloads of them to their death...

Perhaps if the people of Thailand spent less time worrying about foreigners using Buddhist images in advertising and more about the gross perversions of the Buddhist faith within Thailand, the people as a whole would actually start to grow and feel some affinity for their fellow human beings, not simply dismiss them as illegal Muslim immigrants with no rights.

Please continue to spin away...

Rather than trying to politicise the issue let's face it; the treatment of the Rohingya by the Thais has been terrible under various Thai Governments.

I believe that the reason Abhisit came under international scrutiny over this issue is that he actually made towing them to their death official policy, previously and indeed now although an accepted military or police response to the situation, it wasn't actually endorsed by the Government.

Not really. It just became topical news at the time under Abhisit.... not unlike now under Yingluck who is coming under very similar international scrutiny.

Any action of the military and police response is accountable through whichever government was in charge at the time, be it Samak, Abhisit, or Yingluck.

Anything beyond that is an attempt to politicize the issue as your first paragraph agreeably describes...., before your second paragraph runs contrary to just that, political spinning it.

.

You're probably right, it was more likely down to his poor handling of the issue, inability to even acknowledge the incidents reported by the foreign press at the time and his callous, misguided comments about their plight and the reports of their treatment at the hands of the Thai military... AV certainly has a bizarre take on what constitutes violating "human rights"...

"Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva insisted Tuesday that Thailand had respected the rights of boat people from Burma, saying reports that the migrants were mistreated and abandoned at sea were “exaggerated”.

Mr Abhisit also said that foreign tourists who reportedly witnessed the incidents may have misunderstood what the Thai army and navy were trying to do with the immigrants.

Survivors and a human rights group have accused the Thai military of detaining and beating up to 1,000 members of the Rohingya minority from Burma late last year, before towing them out to sea with little food and water.

“The government will take action against illegal immigrants. If too many of them come, it will affect the country’s security. However, the actions will not violate human rights,” Abhisit told reporters.

He said the issue of human trafficking networks should be addressed with neighbouring countries, and blamed the migrants for getting into distress on purpose as a tactic to get into third countries.

“Sometimes they sail on boats without engines or sink their ships so that authorities help them to get onshore,” Abhisit said.

“Sometimes the information is exaggerated. Reports said (military actions) were witnessed by tourists — it may be a misunderstanding by tourists.”

Witnesses have reportedly said that some of the detainees were beaten within metres of foreign tourists on a remote Thai island off the coast, while photos have shown scores of migrants tied up on a beach"

http://asiancorrespo...-the-rohingyas/

I maintain my original statement is correct; "the treatment of the Rohingya by the Thais has been terrible under various Thai Governments"...

Rather than trying to politicise the issue let's face it; the treatment of the Rohingya by the Thais has been terrible under various Thai Governments.

I believe that the reason Abhisit came under international scrutiny over this issue is that he actually made towing them to their death official policy, previously and indeed now although an accepted military or police response to the situation, it wasn't actually endorsed by the Government.

It does puzzle me, why muslim refugees tend to seek refuge in non muslim countries.

Since when is Thailand a non Muslim country?! You need to get out more, I live near more Muslims than Buddhists on Phuket and strangely our village is bereft of the scams, muggings and murders that seem to effect every other area of Phuket. There's a very large Muslim population in the south actually and it's the 2nd largest religion in Thailand as a whole.

Yes Buddhism is by far the main religion here but given the treatment of these refugees I suggest we can only very loosely term Thailand as a Buddhist nation because quite clearly they pay only lip service to the faith.

The country they fled from is the same is it not? So instead of criticising Thailand shouldn't the criticism be directed at Myanmar.

Is Thailand treating them any better?

It does puzzle me, why muslim refugees tend to seek refuge in non muslim countries.

Since when is Thailand a non Muslim country?! You need to get out more, I live near more Muslims than Buddhists on Phuket and strangely our village is bereft of the scams, muggings and murders that seem to effect every other area of Phuket. There's a very large Muslim population in the south actually and it's the 2nd largest religion in Thailand as a whole.

Yes Buddhism is by far the main religion here but given the treatment of these refugees I suggest we can only very loosely term Thailand as a Buddhist nation because quite clearly they pay only lip service to the faith.

The Rohingyas are Refugees. They are a persecuted minority. They are considered to be the most persecuted group on earth.

Then go to an Islamic coiuntry...many countries in the middle east are awash with oil money.They would have no problem caring for them and there is plenty of work available. Simple eh?

you made an important point. The wealthy Islamic countries could actually do much more in humanitarian support to their fellow muslim brother and sisters worldwide. I am missing the support of countries like Saudi Arabia or Kuweit. The run organizations like the red halfmoon (red cross in the west) and are members in the UN. Surprisingly, the seem to be the most selfish, ego-oriented nations. It's a shame on all Arabs they have the oil and have the money and they don't give a d..n about a muslim in Burma. You should really point the finger at them at the UNO assembly.

Given the treatment at the hands of the majority Buddhist populations here and in Burma it seems they'd probably be better off taking their chances and heading West.. What route would you guys suggest they take? Remind me exactly which religions are intolerant of others?

The Rohingyas are Refugees. They are a persecuted minority. They are considered to be the most persecuted group on earth.

How are we defining oppressed. I don't think that denying them citizenship and land ownership is the same level of oppression the nazis showed to the Jews. In china hey had a one child per couple rule. I guess that is oppression of a basic human right, then they should have been allowed to come to the USA or uk. How about the status of women in India? Here subject to being raped while going on a bus. All Indian women should be allowed to immigrate to Australia. How about the Egyptian who is facing a prison sentence for converting from Islam. She is oppressed to. My thoughts are that there is a lot of oppression in this world and different levels of oppression. Despite their lack of status in Myanmar they're not being systematically killed like the Jews in World War II.

Scholars on the subject of genocide disagree with your unfounded opinion about the rohingya.

http://akrockefeller...ingya-genocide/

Since the middle of last year some real scary ethnic cleansing has been taking place. Unfortunately media cannot get into the area to report. Satellite images taken from several rohingya villages give a shocking birds eye view of what it it must be like on the ground.

http://www.hrw.org/n...ttacks-rohingya

I think this is the problem for many these days; we are so used to being force fed news and left in no doubt whatsoever what the media want us to believe that unless we have full colour video, graphic images of devastation on TV and perhaps a few Hollywood blockbusters on the subject it simply doesn't exist in the eyes of the masses. That and the regional powers that be have an interest in keeping it out of the media as it doesn't exactly reflect well on them.

Got to love a bit of compassion for your fellow man, we'll have to wait until some Hollywood starlet lands a role in the upcoming blockbuster "The Rohingya Diaries"... Rohingya orphans will be all the rage among the stars and there'll be a sudden influx of foreign aid... I wish, perhaps if they could actually lay claim to the land, the smell of natural reserves would do wonders in attracting sympathy from abroad as it has previously in the middle east.

Its a shame that Thailand is so self centered.

As a farang, I know what it feels like not being wanted in Thailand.

I hope the boat people find a better place to stay

Why thailand should host them? There is nothing common between them. In fact, these rohingyans follow a religion that orders to kill all non-muslims, no questions asked.

They belong to Bangladesh, where they come from. They should have fleed to Bangladesh, but they don't want to go back.

Exactly! What a refreshing humanitarian take on the situation. Meanwhile whenever Thailand suffers any political or natural disaster be sure to keep your hands outstretched to the EU, US and China...

Thailand only wants wealthy foreigners on it's soil or slave labour to order, smuggled in via the recognised Thai channels where the Thais can reap their fees every step of the way and then deny them any basic human rights while they work here for peanuts. Even the wealthy foreigners are denied any rights to live in the country long term and are only tolerated because of the many and varied opportunities to tax them and ensure that their funds keep flowing into and not out of Thailand.

Rohingya? Pffft, these people are fleeing persecution, have no money, no opportunity for the Thais to earn (unless of course they follow the established route of selling them into slavery to their neighbours).

The absurdly xenophobic and distinctly un-Buddhist ways of the Thai people rear their ugly head again... meanwhile shock horror, an Australian pet store has used the word Buddha in their advertising/ branding, now that's something worth getting worked up about, Rohingya who?

So what you are saying is that you would be willing to take them into your own house right?

Quite clearly that was not what I was saying but personally if I was ever put into a situation where my deliberate inaction would cause the death of others I would take action. If that meant housing some "illegal" Rohingya then fine, what a small price to pay. They'd have to work out with the family of Burmese and our Isaan workers who sleeps where though as we're already pretty pushed for space.

Perhaps some of the wealthy 100+ rai of land owning Thai family next door would be willing to help out... doubtful given that they have a strong aversion to all that aren't 100% Thai (whatever that is meant to mean... I guess 50% Chinese/ 50% Malay) and are as tight as a ducks @rse but they are good practising Thai Buddhists the lot of them... in between the adultery, boozing, child molestation, scams and self adulation that is...

Your post does raise some interesting food for thought given that only Thais are allowed to own land in Thailand... Just imagine if foreigners were allowed to buy up chunks of Thai land legally and foreign companies were treated equally to Thais by law, I'm pretty sure that a refugee camp would be erected in no time and jobs created for them by foreign developers sensing an opportunity to capitalise on some hard working cheap labour, currently a myth in Thailand unless you employ either Burmese or one of the last few Isaan families that remember how to do a full days work.

Deleted due to context of post disappearing and a general sense of humour failure...

It's not complicated at all. Just arrest all the illegal workers and businesses. Problem solved.

Why not arrest the Thais who own the businesses which hire illegal workers?

Finally the critical point here. Protection for workers both foreign and Thai. This is a common theme throughout Thai legislation, those with power and money are above the law. Surely the onus should be on the THAI EMPLOYER to provide the necessary legal documentation to ensure that their employees are working legally? Thai companies are left to operate with impunity and while this thread concentrates on the Russian workers, the same laws enable Thais to exploit Burmese labour in construction, European/ US labour in education and so on. It's an absolute disgrace and the issue of foreigners working illegally in Thailand would disappear if Thai companies were actually held accountable over this issue.

Off topic but it's exactly the same when it comes to Government officials here engaging in corruption; they hold no liability for their mistakes and the law of the land protects and nurtures their corrupt antics. A corrupt land official decides to deliberately issue a chanote title for national park land in collusion with powerful local families planning to sell the land to foreign developers. The same corrupt land official can then simply admit his "mistake" once they've pocketed their ill gotten gains and the law absolves him of any wrong doing. The land is taken from the foreign developer, who loses all funds invested, the land official rescinds the chanote and is free to repeat and rinse ad nauseum while remaining untouchable by law.

Thailand is sending a very clear message to foreigners - your money is welcome but you are not. It makes me sad to say it but it's about time we voted with our wallets and our feet; only when Thailand suffers a major downturn because of lost tourism/ foreign income will they be forced to update their arcane and xenophobic laws.

Best to get cracking in those thousands of threads with one source rather than keep trying to expound on this one selected thread that just so happens to disparage red shirt thugs....you know, double standards and all that.

Sorry Buchholz but talking of cracking are you smoking it? You display a similar logic to that I'd expect from someone with an addiction to hard drugs and only a flirting grip on reality. If this is a cry for help please PM me.

Somehow because others have pointed out the rather blatantly obvious holes in this equally blatantly biased story, that has somehow escaped the attention of every other media outlet and indeed it seems even the police, (incidentally, yes I tried that number you posted and couldn't get any details as to this case whatsoever), you now feel that they are honour bound to trawl through every single thread on Thai visa to check for similar gaping holes?! Are you ok?

The source is crap er, unreliable to say the least, there does not appear to be any coverage in the Thai press or media, there seems to have been no follow up or arrests etc etc..........

Citing the source ( or The Nation ) as gospel only seems to happen here, rarely if ever in the real world.

So you're advocating the forum to scrap the entire pattaya news forum because all the sources used there are crap?

Are you also advocating that we should also summarily dismiss the thousands of threads in Thailand news forum that similarly have a sole source and/or lack a follow-up article?

Or are just focusing on this lone thread because it involves Red Shirt thugs?

.

No I think quite obviously he and many others are suggesting that when an incident is covered by only a single newspaper with a very dubious reputation, hasn't been picked up by any other media outlets and none of the "facts" of the incident have been investigated, confirmed or corroborated one should take it with a pinch of salt.

Of course I can see the deliberate slant you are adding to this thread and taken on face value, as you claim to do with the news, one must assume that you go through life believing all manner of unsubstantiated nonsense... strange because I'm sure I've read quite a large number of posts where you refute the content of the OP articles... perhaps only you are permitted to question the validity of sources, that would seem to fit with the selective reasoning you are displaying here.

So you are another advocate of removing the entire pattaya news forum as well as dismissing any Thailand news forum thread that doesn't contain multiple sources.

You have your work cut out then as there's several thousand threads you need to post similar concerns about their shortcoming of those threads originating from a sole source news article.

.

You must work hard at being this perverse and it certainly appears that you have devoted many hours to perfecting this pursuit... as you well know the vast majority of news worthy incidents are reported by more than single source, regardless of what source ThaiVisa quotes, one has the ability to check how other media outlets have reported the events and gauge any bias between the different articles in the style of reporting. When only a single newspaper runs the story, there's no mention of the alleged incident in any other media outlet (newspapers, internet feeds, radio stations or TV) and there's been no arrest, no investigation and no conviction one would have to be pretty "trusting" or "blinkered" to accept their story as gospel truth.

I'm an advocate of not taking a single statement as gospel truth, I'm an advocate of examining multiple sources to gauge the "truth" behind the news, I'm an advocate of the premise of "innocent until proven guilty", I'm an advocate of fair trial and fair defence... it appears you are an advocate of applying your own statements to others and an advocate of blindly following unsubstantiated stories and taking them as fact...

The source is crap er, unreliable to say the least, there does not appear to be any coverage in the Thai press or media, there seems to have been no follow up or arrests etc etc..........

Citing the source ( or The Nation ) as gospel only seems to happen here, rarely if ever in the real world.

So you're advocating the forum to scrap the entire pattaya news forum because all the sources used there are crap?

Are you also advocating that we should also summarily dismiss the thousands of threads in Thailand news forum that similarly have a sole source and/or lack a follow-up article?

Or are just focusing on this lone thread because it involves Red Shirt thugs?

.

No I think quite obviously he and many others are suggesting that when an incident is covered by only a single newspaper with a very dubious reputation, hasn't been picked up by any other media outlets and none of the "facts" of the incident have been investigated, confirmed or corroborated one should take it with a pinch of salt.

Of course I can see the deliberate slant you are adding to this thread and taken on face value, as you claim to do with the news, one must assume that you go through life believing all manner of unsubstantiated nonsense... strange because I'm sure I've read quite a large number of posts where you refute the content of the OP articles... perhaps only you are permitted to question the validity of sources, that would seem to fit with the selective reasoning you are displaying here.

Next PTP will be offering encroachers party list MP positions, if they don't already have them.

I guess that would be one way to bring about reconciliation, recruit the Democrats!

But....but.......but the democrats again.

Stop flogging it and get back on it Pimay, it's where you seem most comfortable...

Next PTP will be offering encroachers party list MP positions, if they don't already have them.

I guess that would be one way to bring about reconciliation, recruit the Democrats!

The only thing you injected was fiction and hypocritically so given your other statements

Yes I am certainly not above hypocrisy, I am human and it does seem to be part and parcel of our quirky ways... don't worry I'll take your word for it, no need to cite specifics just make a few wild allegations!!! Was that irony? If so please tell me it was deliberate!

You have really never heard of landlords in Thailand grossly overcharging the unit prices of electricity onto tenants? Fiction? No, it's common practice but I recall as a boy I thought closing my eyes made me invisible, clearly you are suffering from similar lapses of logic as an adult... understandable. I once met a man who believed when he closed his eyes the rest of the world ceased to exist, nothing surprise me any more!

Your attempts to insult me rather than coherently argue your corner leads me to believe that you are incapable of doing so.

Your attempts to inject your own fiction into the news story leads me to believe that your are not at one with the truth.

The very fact that you sit on here all day going round and round in ever decreasing circles posting the same one-eyed garbage day in, day out leads me to believe that if you are gainfully employed you are either not worth the wage or are employed by a concerned party

Insult you? My you are a sensitive soul! If it is genuine then my apologies I realise that my childhood experience must be offensive to some! That said feigning offence has become a rather en vogue way of avoiding debate or answering questions raised... In addition to taking offence had you formed an answer to the actual question raised?

those that can't see the obvious agenda in this piece need some lessons in rational thought.

The thugs stated that they are red shirt guards in order to appear powerful and intimidate the landlord and his wife into giving them what they want. This is part of the actions and events that took place, and the journalist was stating such facts. Do you have a problem with journalists stating facts?

How do you twist someone reporting that someone stated that those accused stated that they were red shirt guards and the subsequent assumption that this was said in order to appear powerful and intimidate someone else into a fact?!

It appears to be a fact that the landlord's wife stated such, that is the extent of the "facts" presented. Rational thought, take it as you will but don't blame me for your own irrationality!

One can reasonably draw from this that this assault was violent, reportedly unprovoked and the men responsible should be prosecuted accordingly for their reprehensible actions. Of course reasonably they should also have a chance to voice their own "facts" both as to the incident itself and whether or not they are actually red shirt guards and whether or not they were actually using their status to deliberately intimidate people... hey, failing that just some corroboration of the "facts" of the case before we start forming lynch mobs!

If all of these "facts" are actually established by all means then condemn all those involved and use this as a yard stick to judge every member of the group. I still wouldn't class that as rational behaviour as the actions of a few unhinged individuals don't necessarily reflect the entire group. That said I recognise a growing trend in violence in general in Thailand and am sad to say I'm not overly surprised to see bad apples from many groups in society rising to the fore and making news recently.

Personally I don't use each incident as grounds to right off an entire group of people but I can see why others do. My Grandfather hated all arabs and blacks, I guess that was his prerogative, he had a few bad personal experiences and used them as a yard stick to judge entire races by. We'd call him a racist these days. If people can apply that misguided "logic" so easily to entire races it's understandable that some do so to condemn an entire political group off the back of a single uncorroborated statement presented with a certain slant.

Why do you expect anyone to condemn anything that has not actually been proved? No one has been charged yet let alone convicted of anything! Desperate defending of groups that don't expel violent members????!!!! What are you banging on about?! You are simply making things up! There is nothing for anyone to expel anyone for yet. If they are convicted that is a very different story, they haven't even been charged as it is. All these excuses why they don't/ won't? What excuses? What are you talking about man? Are you high on something?

"you can't offer any reasonable explanation for why in the multitude of previous cases involving red shirts acting illegally or violently, not one single person has ever been expelled from that group"

I haven't attempted to offer any explanation at all as this has nothing to do with this topic and I have no idea what "multitude of previous cases" you are talking about. I'm sure if I mention any specifically it will be deemed off topic so what is there to defend?! You have put this forward but you can't even verify whether anyone has ever been expelled or not, you haven't cited any specific incidents, what are you going on about? What am I supposed to defend and why should I?! I have no idea why you feel the onus is on me to defend the reds over anything, I'm simply pointing out the obvious bias in this piece, you know, the article in this topic...

You seem to have launched down some ridiculous hypothetical path and become angry that I won't play your hypothetical games with you, or not to your liking anyway, it's really quite bizarre! I am commenting on this topic, you know the one where we have a bunch of allegations, a very biased "red shirt" focused article, one side of the story, no arrests, no charges, no convictions... which topic are you on exactly, it appears to be one where you are permitted to reference any incident you like but go apoplectic with rage if I even mention the colour yellow?! Whatever you are on, it's been a long week and I could do with some of it...

The discussion had expanded somewhat, although still on topic, into the perceived unfairness of making sweeping generalisations about an entire group based on the actions of a few members. I agreed with this unfairness, but made the general point about the importance of groups in denouncing and condemning the actions of members, when it is proven that certain members have committed illegal or violent acts, and made the point that if the denouncement and condemnation was not forthcoming, as we have seen on many previous occasions with the red shirt movement, well then the group has no right to complain or sniffle about the damage to its image.

What followed from you was a series of excuses, justifications and daft analogies.

You have no idea why the onus is on you to defend the red shirts.. well there is indeed no onus, just a very predictable and rather tedious expectation from anyone who reads your posts.

I don't agree with your personal rants but do get your point in terms of accountability and agree with you to a certain extent. Similarly I agree with the previous point you made that in many respects the red and yellows are guilty of the same flaws.

What makes accountability issue difficult to apply however is that political supporters are not necessarily governed or controlled by their chosen party. Anyone can don a red shirt or yellow shirt and join protests, act like an idiot if they choose and generally cause trouble. Any party would do well to distance themselves from such supporters but drawing a line between them is not so clear cut.

In this particular case we are talking ifs and buts, there is no definitive proof and we will have to wait and see how the incident pans out before condemning the actions or inactions of any... as to past incidents I believe each and every one would have to be taken on it's own merit and now is probably not the appropriate place for this discussion.

I know you don't like me making analogies but consider the Armies involvement in 2010. Now I'm convinced that certain soldiers were acting irresponsibly and firing randomly into crowds. This is a belief back up by video evidence and witness statements. I don't believe all soldiers are violent thugs and actually think most simply found themselves in an impossible situation stuck between a rock and a hard place so to speak but I do believe there were violent, aggressive members within their ranks. Why have you not applied the same logic on relevant threads about the military? We could say similar about the Thai police surely?

I'm afraid we're firmly back to my original objection which is you can't condemn or judge an entire group over the alleged actions of some alleged members. It is simply ridiculous and those members that do so show themselves up to be overly fervent in their support or condemnation of particular groups. Similarly those that can't see the obvious agenda in this piece need some lessons in rational thought.

The only thing you injected was fiction and hypocritically so given your other statements

Yes I am certainly not above hypocrisy, I am human and it does seem to be part and parcel of our quirky ways... don't worry I'll take your word for it, no need to cite specifics just make a few wild allegations!!! Was that irony? If so please tell me it was deliberate!

You have really never heard of landlords in Thailand grossly overcharging the unit prices of electricity onto tenants? Fiction? No, it's common practice but I recall as a boy I thought closing my eyes made me invisible, clearly you are suffering from similar lapses of logic as an adult... understandable. I once met a man who believed when he closed his eyes the rest of the world ceased to exist, nothing surprise me any more!