Yunla

"I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent."

Ghandhi

It is a good quote, but I wonder how to apply it to this particular situation.

Example, you have four kids and wife asleep, the home invader is high as a kite on drugs and is also, for the sake of argument, a violent person who likes to injure or kill people during burglaries.

Should we quote Gandhi at him, and plead with him to just steal the DVD player and the jewellery, and not hurt our family.

How much good work will your happy and well-educated children do, when they are adults. Maybe they will be doctors, firemen. Maybe discover a cure for a disease that previously killed millions. Your children can bring so much "permanent good" [to paraphrase the Gandhi quote] to the world in the future. Is it not more important to protect them by any means?

I am an anti-war campaigner, and believe in peaceful everythings, lol. But I believe in protecting homes, and also I believe in armies defending the home nation. This is not the same as an army waging wars abroad, the same way as defending your family at home is not the same as attacking people in the street.

Oh jeez. This couple didn't seek to be public figures. That was forced on them by this situation.

I completely agree.

However my point was that they are now public figures, and if they did lose this case, they have a platform and they could use for a very good cause by promoting adoption.

I was quite clear about this in my post. I never implied they had been seeking celebrity status, only that they now have a platform by accident.

Posts remove to reply: Hello Sirineou

Humans have variously had these experiences throughout history- mystical, pre-dream/post-awake, body alseep/mind awake states, hypnagogic, transcendental. What shared state we access I do not know but the commonality is indisputable; its the entire premise of some very brilliant minds, such as Jung for one. What then happens over the ages is various efforts to explain or rationalize the experiences are filtered through local conventions, archetypes, myths, elder's narrative, creation cosmology, etc. These then become the exegesis of the experiences= religions, mysticism.The explanations (religions) that apply themselves to the practical as well, with social laws and conventions, written testimony, injunctions, a "code," survive the ages. If the narrative applied to these mystical/peak experiences answer the core questions of local peoples, the religion survives. If the religion that overlays the core experiences is open to syncretism and can adapt and change, the religion can proselytize and grow. The religion may finally become a fantastical overlay but the core experiences that humans have that gave rise to religions most certainly exist; they are common experiences and a growing body of research confirms these states.

If we accept that the core experiences that found religion and shamanism, etc, are hallucinations, schizophrenia, or delusional, we must then come up with descriptions for these pathological states from the DSM-V or in the case of delusional, agreement on baseline reality. Religions are formed from natural but uncommon states/peak-experiences of consciousness; consciousness is not on or off, it most definitely is a continuum, as any anesthesiologist can attest. The experiences.... whatever they are... are simply other states of consciousness with universally common themes- such as Jungian archetypes, for instance. Religion is the afterbirth that is applied to these ineffable states, filtered through sensory (read 5 senses) explanations. Considering the nature of the OP, IMO, it was over the top to badger those who believe, especially with such a feeble cudgel.

Good to see you again arzunadawn

This is all well and good. No dispute that humans experience these states through out history, and in the absence of better explanations attribute it to the metaphysical

But reality exists independent of as, and is unaffected by our perception of it.

So if I understand the definition of a hallucination correctly, if one sees something that does not exist in reality one is hallucinating, and if some one expect his hallucinations to affect reality is delusional

What causes these hallucinations, can have many causes, but IMO it does not make them any less of a hallucination.

If one is experiencing something that does not exist one is hallucinating, what else can it be.

Notice, I am asking an open question. A lawyer who only wants to win, would never ask a question to which he does not know the answer,

I dont just want to win, I am really interested to know.

Also see if you have not already done so, how stimulating specific areas of the brain induces religious experiences, Google the subject, IMO very interesting.

I too am fascinated by hallucinations of all types. I have also studied shamanism, which can be equated to a toolkit used by master engineers, to tinker with consciousness and expose the wiring under the board of reality. I have nothing but the utmost respect for shamans, and vision-seekers of any religious faith. I also know people who suffer hallucinations related to clinical brain-disorders, and also extreme trauma-survivors who build an actual wall of hallucinations to block out the real visions of what actually happened. There are many forms of hallucinations. I will happily listen to them all, and I would never judge a person for having hallucinations of any type, as it is part of their life-journey and is therefor entirely real for that person.

However. When I and others have experienced visions, we are reporting a full-body experience, not only visual. More importantly, we are experiencing overwhelming sensations of love and joy. These things do not come from visual hallucinations, as might be seen after a blow to the head. If they do, it is a minor penumbral side-effect, like "that's nice" or "wow cool."

The feelings in my visions are of a homecoming. I am being welcomed home. Love surrounds me, it knocks me off my feet. I feel pulses of energy entering my abdomen at the umbilicus. Words I hear during visions are like actual physical vibrations in my abdomen, so even though they are words and have the vibration sound effect, they are felt and not heard. It is completely overwhelming, as is the sense of love which is so enormous, like the whole Universe giving me a big "welcome home" hug. I am utterly convinced that these effects are not hallucinations, they are the voice of God, welcoming another of his children home after wandering alone and lost in the underworld for so long.

I agree with the point made on page one, about how adoption is better. I know for a fact that millions of children would love to be adopted under the basic criteria of a loving secure home. This is a dream come true for most of these kids, and this can be provided by gay or straight couples.

This legal case seems very complicated now. I feel very sorry for the kid to be caught in the middle of all this.

If this couple do lose the case and the kid, I hope that they will adopt a child and make a big social media point about how great adoption is, both for the lucky parents and the lucky adopted child. That would be like turning a lost legal case, into something very positive.

Sanders has labelled himself that way, socialist, so that's the deal breaker aside from the other stuff.

Of course all candidates support some socialist style programs, even the republicans.

That's not the point.

The U.S. is still not Europe. Like it or not.

America hopefully will never be like the failed states of Europe. See the muppets running the show in the EU. That's why I hope the American people make Donald trump the next president.

America as a capitalist country with all of it horrible "corporations" brought you the computer you are using and the internet it's interfacing with. It brought you most of the other software on it in addition to the operating system.

All of this within your lifetime. Before that and perhaps within your lifetime was the TV and so many other things. Now everyone has all of this but protests that they are "poorer".

We have so much more technology and convenience than our grandparents had. How can anyone say we are poorer? How did they really live? Did I mention medical breakthroughs brought to us by big corporations including Big Pharma? We live a lot longer now too. How can we say this isn't some benefit from "big business"?

A big corporation named IBM which pioneered and owns much of the infrastructure that provides bandwidth for the internet (who would have stretched out all of that cable?) published a dictionary of more than 18,000 NEW AMERICAN ENGLISH WORDS brought to us by technology. Most of them are new within the last 50 years and more than half of them are much newer than that.

BTW and for the haters, there isn't a European socialist on the entire planet who can pronounce even one of the English words in this book correctly.

Just think of all of the things you have that your grandparents didn't have and tell me where they came from, and then how you are poorer.

Cheers.

71RYBQCEWHL._SX374_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

Francois Mitterrand, the socialist and hero of many current Euro socialists, visited Mao in 1961, at the height of the famine, and returned to Europe to praise "a great scholar" and "genius" and to assert that infact reports of any famine were just lies.

Socialism is a very broad spectrum, and constantly morphing. For this reason it is hard to criticise somebody for being a socialist, as it could mean so many things.

One of the dangers that I saw in my very early life, was that in Sweden the socialists taxed some professions very heavily based on their "usefulness." My grandfather was violinist at the King's Orchestra in Sweden, and violin teacher at the Royal Academy of Music in Stockholm, working both of these jobs for decades. He was very popular on the radio too. He came from a very poor background, and saved up for his first cheap violin over a period of many years. He worked very hard almost every day for fifty years, did not drink or gamble, and then retired in abject poverty. The socialists taxed him at 73% of his earnings, because he was "an artistic person" and therefor not productive. However, crushing taxes were also the norm for most other trades too.

Sweden famously is socialist, and also famously has had the highest suicide rate in the world for many years. Many might say that the crushing taxes are partly responsible.

So I do despise that type of socialism, but I am more willing to listen to more sensible hybrid forms of socialism, should they arrive one day. I support the aspirational working class, the aspirational middle class. I could never vote for anyone who imposes crushing life-destroying taxes on those essential social groups.

I couldn't check either box in the poll, because I sort of agree with both options, and I can't really put a timeline on this subject.

I do believe that Europe will increase monitoring and arrests, and will prevent more attacks. But there are unknown variables, biological weapons, radioactive dirty bombs etc.. We do not know what the public response would be if those type of attacks occurred. I doubt there would be candles and teddy bears and solidarity, if there were more serious catastrophic events.

It saddens me beyond words, even as I try to write words anyway. There are fools and lunatics on both sides of this issue, and they are in the driver's seat. Normal peaceful religious people of all faiths, and non-religious people too, we are all just passengers.

I see these as uncharted waters in every possible way, we do not know what to expect in the 21st Century, and so I can not vote in this poll, based on past events alone.

Great script for a hollywood B movie.

The truth is that real life is far more thrilling than any movie ever.

And the religious experience, at its most primary and personal level, has more dazzling special effects than the biggest Hollywood blockbuster. The joy, wonder that lies within deep prayer, is more exciting than the greatest rollercoaster. No drugs or other human pleasure experiences can ever match the sheer thrills of witnessing the divine origins of our human soul.

This is what has been lost to us, with all the religious buildings, dogma, men in funny costumes, and quite frankly Religious Politics. Underneath all those things, there exists a direct link between all human beings and God, a divine visionary state, so beautiful and amazing that it could never be faithfully documented in book or film.

Well i suppose the upside is he didnt threaten to kill me

Interesting how the "visions" are attributed to a supernatural power, and not by a "certain chemicals" acting on parts of brain causing those visions, ie interferrence of neural pathways or messing with serotonin/ receptors

She doesn't go around threatening or killing people, as it doesn't seem to achieve anything much.

On visions, they are often very vivid and detailed. This would differ from normal brain fluctuations which may cause brightness or glows, angelic type of hallucinations etc. Those things do exist too. So you are both correct that brain fluctuations, physical brain trauma or subnormal function, these things do cause hallucinations.

Visions are often very specific and contain details outside of the person's life experiences. Also, a sceptic can go from total disbelief to total belief in one vision, which is remarkable however you want to look at it.

Visions, despite the name, are not entirely visual. There is a tightening of the abdomen, a fight-or-flight response from the nervous system. This is a signature of a real event occurring.

People like myself who believe, will not stop believing, we have been convinced beyond doubt. That doesn't make us right. I don't claim to be right, I'm just convinced by what I have seen and felt, when I have allowed myself to see and feel things.

I completely respect your views and your right to hold those views ........... Well isn't that nice of you.

Some sources also come from visions during prayer................ Hallucinations

in broad daylight and while completely sober. Many people have had vivid real visions of biblical scenes......................... People with schizophrenia do too.

I believe that Satan was cast down.......................... wow! Delusional.

God is as real as the Easter Bunny.

Amen.

I completely respect your right to mock me mercilessly for completely respecting your rights.

^^

There are also written records which suggest he wasnt crucified / died or resurected, therefore there is no premise for Christianity

I could accept that the person concerned from a historical perspective being a Jewish terrorist in Romes eyes, and he may or may not have been executed for his actions against the Roman state, the rest of it, son of of god, resurection etc is all Walt Disney, fairy stories for adults

I completely respect your views and your right to hold those views.

However, they are views. Views come from all kinds of sources, written, spoken, gossip etc. Some sources also come from visions during prayer.

Scientists will admit that they know less than 10% of what happens in the human mind, they freely describe their knowledge of the human mind as "the tip of an iceberg." Scientific knowledge about mind-related visionary effects is even more sketchy. Scientists do not have explanations for the 3D Stereo dreams you have at night, or indeed the 3D Stereo memories you might have, of things that occurred 50 years ago. Science can not explain dreams or memories, these most non-contentious facts of our daily lives. So how could they possibly hope to explain religious visions?

Many sceptics have become devout Christians after having visions, in broad daylight and while completely sober. Many people have had vivid real visions of Biblical scenes, depicting scenes from a book they have never read, or film versions they have never seen.

I have had visions, and I am in no way special, they are more common than many people in today's world may think. My faith is based more on my visions than on what other people have written. I believe that Satan was cast down, and the world became his kingdom. However, he envied Jesus, because Jesus was still all-powerful, and safe from harm. Jesus chose to become mortal, weak, and exposed to all the evil and harm. God and the angels were dead against this move, but Jesus was to show the world some things that will be remembered forever. He cast aside all his power, and embraced fragile mortality, in the life of a poor and humble fishing family. He was inviting all the evils of the underworld to take their best shot, which he would face with courage and humility, with nothing but cloth and ligament to protect him.

His words and actions that followed, are still the most beautiful words and actions, and they will be remembered forever. If we choose to listen to those words, is of course another matter, and is always a truly personal choice.

He didn't kill two girls, his daft stuff did...As a kid I did daft stuff, I can remember them now, but absolutely no intensions to kill my chums...

If you look at kids stuff that goes very wrong differently to me then that is our problem here.

I was a rascal kid, many were not, perhaps from a different era where kids were kids....Who knows...

Bullying has always carried the risk of deaths or serious injury. Even in the playground, a bully beating up a smaller boy, the head injuries might only cause concussion, but as with all head injuries it could cause blindness or brain damage or even death.

The "Knock-out game" trend which was popular quite recently, caused damage ranging from minor injuries to serious injuries and even some deaths. And this was involving youths a good deal older than the 12-year old in this story. So I think age is not completely relevant, it is stupid bullies being violent, expecting the victim to survive with minor injuries, and then it goes wrong and people die.

Maybe if we didn t bomb them for 30 years we had avoided some of them.

As long as USA/Europe/Israel do not understand that their foreign politics in middle east is a TOTAL failure this will continue unfortunately

We bomb them back into the Stone Age, and then we ask them why Islam has not had an Enlightened Reformation.

Many Muslim scholars are actively seeking this Enlightened Reformation, and are openly criticising the "by the sword" archaic parts of Islamic literature. But the point is that this type of scholarly discourse can not occur in any nation that has been literally bombed back into the Stone Age. Enlightened Reformations take a long time, and they require basic levels of stability and peace in order to flower.

The internet offers hope, because Muslim scholars are able to discuss Enlightened Reformation issues, without fear of being killed by extremist thugs, or bombed into the Stone Ages by drones etc.

I think the internet and social media will be the solution to this problem, the problem of basically keeping the religious faith and prayer aspects, but letting go of by-the-sword rhetoric that belongs in earlier less enlightened times. I have seen signs of and have high hopes for this Islamic Enlightened Reformation being born in cyberspace, and spreading outwards into the physical world. Any such reformation would be a triumph on every level, and especially as it would prove once and for all that thinking can be far more powerful than bombs.

Your home is not just a building, it is your sanctuary, where your family should sleep peacefully and have happy safe dreams.

Damage caused by home invaders is not limited to theft, or even injury caused to the owners during the invasion. Home invaders leave a permanent sense of insecurity, they leave unhappy memories for the children and adults too. It is especially traumatising for senior citizens, who are often too frail to defend themselves. They often become so frightened they stop going outside, and just sit peering nervously out of the window, in what are supposed to be their golden retirement years.

I think homes should be defended with whatever force a person wants to use. Intruders have the option of not being intruders in the first place. After that, they are fair game, in my humble opinion.

Long-term real reforms to vehicle-roadworthiness testing, heightened driver skills testing, drink-drive testing, and isolating problem accident hotspots, these are incredibly expensive and long-term projects that would not reap noticeable results for many years. The people implementing these reforms will not see major success stories during their careers, it will be noticeable during the following generations. The key is to invest for the long-term, and forget about quick-fixes and instant results. In future generations these reformists will be viewed as national heroes, but will face nothing but expense and challenges during their own lifetimes.

RIP to the young gentleman. Tragic beyond words, really.

In a country where family loyalty and family bonds are historically very strong, youngsters should be encouraged by the media, to put their real loyalty to their families before any false loyalty to gangs. Not only to prevent heartbreak for parents and siblings, but also because the important tradition of kids supporting their parents in old age. These are good traditions, and make these senseless gang deaths even more tragic for everybody.

For some reason, it appears that many people around the world do not understand the concept of cause and effect of their actions. I am sure he had no idea the girls were going to drown. He just thought it would be funny to see them in the water. This is the result of a growing trend in "education" around the world, where children are taught what to think and not how to think.

For goodness sake - he was 12 years old - you can't teach a kid like that that people in water could drown, it's common sense.

In case you haven't noticed, Common Sense is becoming less and less common, no matter where one looks.

I agree with you completely about a general trend of lower basic common sense, worldwide.

However, bullies are famously stupid. My reading of this story is that he was a bully who was just tormenting two girls, push them into the dirty water, and stop them from getting out of the dirty water. I don't think he intended to kill them, he was just a typical violent bully. Bullies are stupid by nature, as there is no real long-term success gained from being a bully, it is all about short term power through tormenting others, which is really stupid when you think about it. But even the most stupid bully would not want to face murder charges, and so I do believe the deaths were not intended, just accidental effects of a very stupid cruel bully's actions.

RIP. I hope that both the girls' parents have good friends around them to support them in this terrible time.

This is a tragedy, and probably an accident. It is not a Thai problem, this is a problem common around the world, and relating to kids learning consequences from their mistakes. All kids make mistakes, this is how they learn. Sometimes those mistakes are really big mistakes with horrific consequences.

Good parents and good teachers fulfil a critical role in teaching kids the consequences of mistakes before those mistakes happen. In my era our elders beat the hell out of us day and night until we were too frightened to even whisper out of place. This did cut down the rate of mistakes quite drastically, but was certainly no fun and is now thankfully illegal in most places. Also the statistics do show that even when kids are clearly taught the consequences associated with mistakes, many kids will still make those mistakes anyway and be forced to learn from the consequences themselves.

All the same, good parenting and good schoolteachers do save lives overall, this is the most important point really.

I don't see anything contentious about monitoring known risks. For example, if religious schools or holy places have been used to recruit people or to spread incendiary rhetoric, then it makes perfect sense for the intelligence-community and police to monitor those risks in the future.

The problem with all-or-nothing extreme views is that they ignore the very fine line that must be walked, to protect all human rights. Yes we should all have the human right of privacy. But all people also have the human right of not being hurt or slain in a criminal extremist attack. So the all-or-nothing approach does not function on the ground, where a fine line has to be walked, and risk-groups risk-persons need to be monitored, based on historical similarities.

People are quick to forget that Muslims are the main death toll from ISIS and other Islamic extremists. The numbers of Muslims who have died at the hands of extremist jihad types is a staggering number.

One of the first things that happened after the illegal invasion of Iraq, was that extremists began butchering hairdressers and barbers. Barbers who had shaved men's beards in peace for decades under Saddam, were now being killed, their barbers shops burned, their bodies paraded. And these were Muslim barbers being killed just for shaving beards, as per their lifelong professional trade. The numbers of slain barbers were in the high hundreds within weeks of the invasion.

Hundreds of bookshops were also burned, and hundreds of the Muslim booksellers were killed, for selling Western literature. And again it was extremists killing normal Muslim people just for providing basic professional services.

So I think that monitoring of any "knowns" is a very good thing when it comes to extremist terrorism, as it protects everybody, including normal Muslim workers and their families.

Just from watching the BBC website headlines, and much of the mainstream controlled media, their reactions have been unusual even compared to their usual bias.

The BBC has abandoned any pretence at continuing their "inform educate entertain" remit, and simply gone 100% attacking Trump, 24/7 and on any possible front. "Stop Trump" "Trump is bad" "Everyone is horrified" are the general themes being put forward. Any story is re-titled to make him look worse, and headlined ASAP. This is like an organised concerted effort, rather than just relaying news to audiences.

This says to me that he is doing something right, because this BBC response is not just "he may be bad because" this is actually a very personal campaign against Mister Trump. This makes me question a lot of things about the New Beeb, which I had already suspected in the past. It also makes me look at Trump in a better light.

If Trump were running against five perfect human beings, then yes, let us discuss his taxes and people who endorse him against his will etc.. We could do that, because he is running against five Angels who are perfect in every way. But I'm looking at the rogues gallery on offer, and Trump actually looks good compared to most of them. I do wish the BBC would devote as much time to the very real flaws of Trump's rival candidates, and not just target Trump round the clock like its an OCD problem they just refuse to get help for.

It is truly selfish and shameful to deny others the opportunity to train at a sport, after being given this chance already. I'm glad that the equipment has been recovered, and happy that aspiring sportsmen will be able to train properly again.

Danger Islam? It is time to think about it.

No country with a Muslim majority (more than 30 worldwide) has a truly democratic government. In not a few of these states, or parts of them there is a bloody civil war: Syria, Tunisia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Mali, Yemen, Sudan, Indonesia, Somalia.

In any country with a Muslim majority, there is no real freedom of religion for Christians or other non-Islamic religions.

In some states where the followers of the Koran form a strong minority, terrorist groups are active, they are destabilizing with guerrilla tactics and terrorist attacks from the underground the States: Philippines, Thailand, India, China, Russia and Myanma

In a number of European countries where Muslims represent only small minorities, they recruiting terrorist organizations cadres and cells for the "jihad" at any of the numerous Islamist fronts. Cells that are active with spectacular attacks in their host countries.

Heartfelt condolences to the relatives of the last terrorist attack.

It's time to fight back and not always to hold out just the other cheek.

Why not apply against Islamism, which was applied against Nazism and Communism?

When it came, to oppose the spreading Nazism or Communism, was discussed extensively and the ideology analyzed.

With the Islamic extremism that seems everything else.

The Islam against its commitment in the western states a strange reluctance on. At least in the published discourse.

Islam critical opinions are indeed in the air, but are excluded from official discourse. Why?

You mention Syria in your list of Muslim nations that do not tolerate other religions. You should know that the Syrian constitution guarantees religious freedoms for all religions, including Christians. Syria, before the destabilisation efforts of recent years, was tolerant towards all religions. Saddam's Iraq was also tolerant towards all religions, before it was destabilised. Gaddafi's Libya was also tolerant towards all religions, before it was destabilised. These nations had people of all faiths practicing their religion. The West is entirely complicit in these and other destabilisations, the rise of anger and bitterness in those nations, and the genocidal war crimes in those nations.

Yemen is a disaster area now, but again, the West sells trillions of dollars of arms to the Saudis, who are bombing Yemen. Again, western leaders are complicit in destabilisation and horrific war crimes by proxy. One can only wonder what they expected to happen in these shattered nations, or what it would do to any previously tolerant and peaceful moderates in those bombed communities.

I actually agree on many of the broader points in this thread, about the need for sensible levels of controlled immigration, the EU as a failed device, and the importance of strict law and order. But crimes committed are just that, they are criminal acts and should be dealt with by police, not by priests or internet valkyries. One of the main problems is that liberal leaders in Scandinavia and the UK do not have a strong enough position on crime and punishment, and this applies to their own criminals and of course immigrant crimes too. But these are criminal cases, they do not reflect the views of non-criminal people who happen to share the same faith (or lack of faith) as a given criminal.

People should also remember that crimes such as rape, paedophilia, wife-beating, these crimes have existed in Europe since forever, and in no small sum either. So any immigrants who commit these crimes should be viewed in the same bracket as the local criminals. These are law and order issues, not faith issues.

Muslim doctors and nurses have saved my life on one occasion, during my travels. It is hard for me to repay that gift of life by going around saying "all Muslims are bad." And then I also have a lot of Muslim friends, and their lovely families, who are funny and charming and very welcoming to me in their beautiful homes. They are not extremist criminals, and I feel it is disrespectful to bracket them alongside people who are.

sorry for the dead people:( horrible photos and nearly happening every day nowadays. I hate loss of human life at such events and for nothing!

but yes, if enough tolerance is shown or Europe does not have fascist non tolerant politicians effecting the citizens, i believe maybe no ISIS or no bombings now.

so a young muslim guy being discriminated, listening Hitler rhetoric from the likes of Trump, facing hatred due to his religion from politicians and pushed by people in Europe,they are thrown out of planes just bc they muslim too.

then they become muslim radicals as those ISIS guys wash the brains of those young guys easily due to non tolerant and non supportive paranoid European society.

so non tolerance is the result of such radicalism. what do you expect?

I am attending a prayer group this evening for the victims of these barbaric and cowardly attacks upon defenceless civilians. My thoughts and prayers are with the injured, and the families of all those affected.

Many of us from Europe lost grandparents and other family members in WW2. Those family members died for only one tangible reason, to create a lasting peace in Europe. For this reason we are collectively very sensitive when the modern peace in Europe is broken. I think it is important to remember this when discussing the feelings of most Europeans when confronted by these acts.

The other issue is that many of the people caught up in these random attacks, those same people may well have marched against the invasion of Iraq. They might have written online articles for years, to protest against the terrible war crimes being committed in the Middle East. They might have given generously to Unicef in those countries, to help Muslim children affected by the wars.

There really is no "us versus them" this time, no uniforms or opposing forces lined up facing eachother on a battlefield. People who opposed the wars and genocidal crimes committed in the Middle East, might be the same people who get caught up in these random bombings. And vice versa, peaceful normal Muslim families might randomly be the ones being blamed for the terrorist acts.

As Christians, we are sickened when we see the brutality of ISIS. However, as Christians we are also sickened when we see the dead and injured Muslims whose nations were bombed in recent decades. These sorrowful feelings are shared by my peaceful atheist friends, and my peaceful Muslim friends too.

We are all collectively poorer when we abandon our humanity, for any reason whatsoever. It is important to not allow extremists and criminals from any side, to rob us of our humanity and our compassion, as that would be a surrender of the very ideals that brought peace to Europe in the first place.

I think it is relative, and what you make it, and also the luck element which is universal no matter where you live. Also the "paradise" in the title will vary from person to person.

I've been visiting Thailand since the 1970s when my Ma took me here on her back, she was an intrepid backpacker when it was unfashionable to be a single woman travelling around foreign parts.

During the 1990s my house in Leeds city centre was burgled over a dozen times, I was mugged in the street and injured by home invaders. In all cases the police caught the criminals and they received "official cautions" or community service orders. I felt unsafe living there, in the amoral liberal nosedive culture under Blair.

Also my health was failing me rapidly in the 1990s, and my doctor urged me to move to a warmer climate. I decided to spend more time in Bangkok, a city I have always adored. I bought a home here, and have lived here on-and-off for twenty years. I've never been burgled here, or robbed, or assaulted, by anyone. The local Thai blue-collar community shows me great kindness and friendship. I rarely see tourists where I live, it is a quiet neighbourhood with normal Thai working families. It is the sort of place I wish I had grown up in!

I love the sunshine, the peace and quiet, the trees and songbirds. For me, "paradise" is reading a really interesting book in the sun, undisturbed and safe from harm. That is my paradise, and I can confirm that I have found this paradise in Bangkok. The climate here has really helped with my lifelong health disorders, and as I have chosen to be single my whole life, no interest at all in romance etc., my life is free from many of the complications that I read about on these and other forums.

So "paradise" is completely subjective, and "trouble" is where you find it. The title is of course an old one, but I think it is defeated by its own vagueness and subjectivity.

You've made some good points in your post. I think I can agree to a great extent about people feeling safer in a crowded city more than in isolated locations. However, If a major incident, such as a murder(s) happens on say, a remote Thai island like Koh Tao, or anywhere else in the Samui archipelago, it is likely that local 'influences' will colour the outcome. Also, we would be foolish to underestimate the importance of the tourist $ to the Thai economy, and anything likely to lessen such revenue is quickly 'whitewashed' by TAT, as being nothing for potential tourists to worry about.

IMO the most significant similarity regarding the suspicious deaths of several tourists on Koh Tao over the last couple of years is the claim that there were no witnesses. How convenient for the felons to be able to perpetrate crimes and then be able to stage a cover-up, when there are allegedly no witnesses. There can't possibly be witnesses to these crimes, because any witness would likely be implicated, due to the times and places of the deaths.

Whilst it's fine to keep in mind what happens elsewhere in the world, this thread is after all about the Witherige family and the tragic loss of Laura. If you are in any doubt about what I've written regarding local 'influences' and the mercenary utterings of TAT, I suggest you go back and read some of the media coverage of events on Koh Tao for the 2 months following 15th September 2014.

I do agree and have been following the story since the beginning. However, as I was not actually there when it happened, I genuinely do not know what happened or who is guilty. I have my opinions of course, but they are just that, the opinions of a remote observer.

My reasons are quite plain really. For every person who travels to Thailand and has their life cut short, be that by accident or intent, there are another fifty people who come to Thailand and have their lives extended. The climate here is very kind to people with serious ailments, and the medical professionals here are among the very finest in the world. I would have been dead many years ago if I had not moved here, and many other people are in the same boat. So I think it is important to bear this in mind, when confronted with the vague "travelling to Thailand is dangerous" media spin which is what the tabloids have shrieked in recent years. It is not actually true, when viewing the macro picture. Many people come to Thailand and live long healthy lives, often many years longer than they would have lived if they had stayed locked inside some damp flat in a cold climate.

It is also wrong to allow a small group of criminals in one location, to harm the entire nation's tourist industry, which has millions of good honest and hard-working Thai people working in it, who try very hard to make tourists feel welcome, and to make a visitor's stay as pleasant and relaxing as possible.

I feel I owe it to those people, to just say that Thai people have always treated me with great kindness, the excellent doctors here have given me a second chance at life, and in the decades I have spent here I have never been the victim of any type of crime. I feel extremely fortunate to be here, and it saddens me that the occasional deeply tragic news reports can risk undoing all the hard work that so many Thais do to make tourists feel welcome, safe and happy on their holidays.

The death rate in Australia in the 6o's was pretty close to Thailand - in 1975 26.6 per 1000 and now 1bout 6 per thousand. The difference is very strict driving rules enforced. But it has taken a wealthy country nearly thirty years to really start to get on top of things. Inbdia only has a lower death rate because traffic is slow most of the time.

I think this is the crux of the problem, there is no "quick-fix solution" and so the State will be implementing laws and advocating cultural changes that will not reap rewards for decades. In any nation where polls and populism are important, there is a tendency to aim for quick-fixes that show results, however temporary or fleeting those results may be.

There needs to be strict driver education, strict road-worthiness testing of vehicles, and strict enforcement of road laws. Those things can be implemented quickly, at a truly massive cost in both money and work. However this will only nudge a cultural change, which needs to be relentlessly nudged for decades - in this particular case I would say generations. Whoever implements the new training, testing and laws, will be incredibly unpopular nationwide, seen as slowing growth and wasting resources etc. They need to be a person who can face a lot of flames today, with only the promise of positive results eventually showing up many decades after they are gone.