I Like Thai

ok...well ive learned the "giraffe" bit is just cockney for "havin a laugh",

and

pillock = idiot

gobshite = i was told this is very negative, basically you think someone is, pardon my American English, a piece of shit.

Nah, it can mean that he is a bit of an idiot, it's normally used in a friendly way if someone does something silly

while we are on the topic...

great write-up in the bbc today on "Britishisms" invading the US.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...gazine-19670686

I think if you Brits want to blame someone for a lot of the spelling differences...look no further than Noah Webster!

Anyways, I did learn two words I never knew before that had to be translated by my Brit colleague; "peckish" and "gormless"...fascinating stuff.

And another few for you.... "Pillock", "gobshite".

That's Irish

I have some video footage of George

Koh Samet

If Americans call British people pussies for drinking tea, shouldn't that give British people the right to call them idiots for not being able to tell the difference between a bird, a plane and superman?

maybe we cant see that well at a distance, but atleast we can tell who clark kent really is without his glasses.

Why is it that Americans are quite willing to accept an alien from outerspace that wears blue pyjamas and a red cape as an All American superhero. But they won't accept that their own President is actually American.

May I ask why you are 48 and still single?

I suppose he just got lucky

THANKS everyone.

I get the general jist !!

Anyhow I arrive October 15 and defo looking to meet some or all of you for beers !!

THANKS

Get yourself a triple entry tourist Visa, this will take care of the first 9 months approx. i returned home (to Ireland) recently after a 2 year stint in Thailand. Have fun, Use your time to have a look around, rent a month at a time in different areas until you find a spot you want to stay in. Stay out of Pattaya itself. It's ok for a while but gets wearisome very quickly, Try Jomtien or Naklua or something. a lot quieter, but close enough to the madness for when you want to travel in

Round him and his mates from the area up, get a football, You become the ref and organise 2 teams or if numbers are small, you become the goalie.

You say you bought him a bike, did you get one for yourself as well, if not then get one. if he is alone with his bike then he will get fed up with it easily. Go out with him on the bikes, go for cycles in the countryside, talk to him and get to know him better.

Take him on picnics and other outings, preferably the whole family.

Try to teach him some English, never try to force him to learn with threats of punishment, it will never work, in fact it will have the opposite effect.

Ireland has become a joke with the amount of people out on bail or early release.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/alarm-over-number-of-crimes-committed-by-those-out-on-bail-2218900.html

Alarm over number of crimes committed by those out on bail

A third of prisoners who go into Mountjoy are currently released back on to streets due to chronic overcrowding

Sunday June 13 2010

The main "problem" in the Irish justice and penal systems appears to be that gardai are "far too efficient" at apprehending and gaining convictions for criminals, a government source mused last week. The observation was sardonic, but, the source pointed out, quite true.

If the gardai captured fewer criminals, then the courts and prisons would be able to cope better. There would be more space in prisons and a greater ability to rehabilitate prisoners. The "revolving door" of temporary release and bail would end, so fewer criminals could be said to be at large committing crime in the community when they should have been in prison.

"Too efficient: you must be joking," was the response of a garda serving in a high-crime area of north-west Dublin. He claimed that far from prosecuting offenders -- a high proportion of whom were either on bail or temporary release from prison -- their crimes were being downgraded on official reports.

He cited a case of a man who was parking his car when he was attacked by two youths. They beat him, smashed windows in his car and robbed him of his wallet containing more than €100. The man filed a report. The garda found out later that instead of an assault, robbery from the person and criminal damage case, the incident was recorded as criminal damage -- as though a minor act of vandalism had taken place. This, he claimed, was commonplace.

He said that burglaries were regularly recorded as criminal damage -- officially a "non-headline" or non-serious crime -- or trespass, which is not necessarily a crime at all. In most cases where there had not been serious injury or a major amount of cash stolen, cases were often not investigated at all, he said.

His view was that the gardai should be prosecuting "twice as many" if they were doing their job properly.

Another garda in an area of high crime in the south of the city, when asked what percentage of crime was committed by people who should be in prison but were on bail or temporary release, replied: "Most of them."

He added that this applied mostly in the age bracket from about 17 or 18 up to mid-twenties. The "young guards", he said, were good at catching new young offenders.

And, he said, many young members of the force were very good at trying to invoke the diversion programmes to help steer new offenders away from crime.

One cited a case two weeks ago where a habitual offender in the north inner city was before Dublin District Court and sentenced to one month's imprisonment. He was driven from the court by gardai to Mountjoy Prison and admitted at around noon. Six hours later, the same gardai were amazed to learn that he had just been rearrested for theft and was in a cell in the Bridewell station.

Temporary early release because of overcrowding appears to have reached record levels, having increased steadily over the past two decades. Approximately a third of prisoners who go into Mountjoy are released, some having only been processed at reception. These are all people in on minor charges with minor sentences of six months or less. Mountjoy is perpetually overcrowded, as is most of the penal system.

The Prison Service admitted last week that more than 700 prisoners were on temporary release -- about 17 per cent of the prison population.

Figures obtained by Fine Gael's justice spokesman Charlie Flanagan show alarming statistics relating to crimes committed by people on bail.

The figures released to Mr Flanagan reveal that, since 2008, people on bail committed 15 murders, 47 sexual offences, 1,681 car theft offences, 508 burglaries, 122 aggravated burglaries (that is, burglaries accompanied by violence or threats), and 70 murder threats.

The greatest offender in the history of the State in relation to committing crime while on bail is undoubtedly Eamon Dunne, who was shot dead in Cabra two months ago. Dunne had been on bail since 2002, when he was caught by gardai with a bound and gagged man in the boot of his car, and whom he was probably intending to kill or torture. He was on bail at that stage on firearms offences. Dunne succeeded in staying free on bail for more than seven years, during which he was involved, gardai estimate, in 17 murders.

Charlie Flanagan argues: "When a person is arrested and charged with a crime, one of the effects is that the ordinary citizen is being protected from an obvious threat to society. Instead, the figures shown here are clear evidence that thousands of serious offences are committed by those under investigation for another crime because the State has seen fit to release them on bail.

"It is clear that the law is not operating as effectively as possible, and nothing has been done. The reality is that people released on bail are going on to commit serious crimes, despite the fact that their potential to commit such an offence is the very yardstick used when deciding whether or not to grant them bail.

"Put simply, Ireland's bail law is not protecting Irish citizens. Dangerous criminals under investigation are being re-released into society and, in some cases, going on to kill people. Unless the standard is raised in regard to who is let out on bail, the level of bail crime will continue to tear at the fabric of our communities. Law-abiding citizens deserve a far higher level of protection than that."

On the issue of reform of the system, he said: "There are people in prison who should not be in prison and people who should be in prison who are not in prison. We need an audit of the prison population. There are people with mental health problems who should not be in prison, homeless people."

There now appears to be disintegration in the system of juvenile justice, gardai say. Some are highly critical of the "restorative justice" ideas which have become the latest popular trend among some in garda management. Instead of punishing an offender, the idea is to bring them along to meet their victim. It is an unpleasant experience for many of the victims, gardai say, although supporters argue the opposite.

One recent initiative which gardai are optimistic about is currently being tried out in north Dublin. Under Chief Superintendent Pat Leahy from Store Street station, it was decided to assign individual gardai to individual cases, gathering all the charges into one case and one court appearance. The assigned "case manager" garda gets to know the individual, learns whether or not he or she comes from a broken family, and what domestic and social problems they face.

The Store Street initiative, unlike the "restorative justice" system which was largely dreamed up by academics, has come from the gardai on the streets. And gardai in the district say it might just work.

- JIM CUSACK

Rocket Science on Judge Judy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-sred9CCTk

This is one of the best American comedies I have seen in a long time, even though it's made in Denmark

http://youtube.googleapis.com/v/erYpXzE9Pxs%26

Why would they swap out all their boxes to 3G, when 4G is just around the corner

yesssssssssssssssssssssssssssss Stevie G

Man Utd have signed a new referee. I was hopeful when Webb wasn't refereeing today. Guess i was a bit naive

I think they would have been the same when living in their own countries.

I am a Certified Exorcist

Please forward 50,000 BHT and i will take care of your problem

Since when there more than version of the truth. It either is or isnt? Values can change truth is still truth.

Can you rewrite this? Perhaps english is not your main language. I believe the truth = the truth from an empiric standpoint. I don't think I presented a conflicting viewpoint to what you are saying?

I don't know which of the below possibilities you meant.

# Since when is there more than version of the truth?

# Since when there is more than 1 version of the truth.

The question waa why does the west impose its version of the truth on Thailand. What is the difference between western truth and Thai truth?

In matters of truth there aren't multiple versions? It is either true or a falsehood. U can half half truth but that is exactly what it is. Incomplete. If people want half truths and lies so they feel better, that's ok, but by definition, that isn't the truth.

Truth is dependent on a persons outlook or even the outlook of a culture or society. it is the perception that is important. here is an article from an Asian American that I find interesting as it looks at mis-perceptions

http://goldsea.com/Features2/Essays/get.html

Bash a Brit, how laughable! We are all after all communicating in English.

The colonies just hanker for the good old days when they payed their taxes to the crown and sang god save the quee/king. The rest of the world feels left out because they had nothing worth colonizing!

Now they have a hankering to colonise Britain itself, ain't karma a bitch

Why do you use the USA (French) version of spelling colonising ??

I forgot Allo, Allo in my list...who would have thought a sitcom starring British actors with bad french accents set in occupied France during the second world war would have been so funny

Who would have thought a sitcom starring Irish actors set in Ireland would be number 11 in the top 50 British Sitcoms.

On the buses.

Rising damp.

Hancock's half hour.

Chewin the fat.

Mrs Browns boys.

Oh look another one

I remember the first TV shows Graham Norton did in the USA. He interviewed loads of big stars and they couldn't believe just how lewd he was

Guess where he is not from ??

My Top IRISH comedies

The Irish RM

Father Ted

Mrs Browns Boys

Podge & Rodge

The point about Bloody Sunday was that it was a peaceful demonstration fired upon by Army troops.

The memory of what happened then should not be confused with Thaksin's violent red rabble in 2010.

That's how it's seen now, 40 years later. It wasn't seen that way at the time.

http://irishdiplomatichistory.com/wp/?p=1293

According to Prasun Sonwalkar (2005) journalists can rarely be untouched by their socio-cultural background. This influences how certain topics are covered in the press. In particular, news stories on war and conflicts are commonly influenced by the author’s national identity, and, moreover, they are intended for a readership belonging to a specific nation.

This paper compares the news reports published by the British Newspaper The Guardian and the Irish Newspaper Irish Independent on 31 January 1972, the day after “Bloody Sunday”, when on 30 January 1972, 13 civilians were killed by British troops in Londonderry, Northern Ireland. This paper’s aim is it to establish if both newspapers have been influenced by their publications political position and by the journalists and editors’ national identity.

The Guardian is owned by The Scott Trust and is guided by a strong set of principles of the Scott Trust Values which emphasises the importance of free press to this very day. C.P. Scott one of the most prominent editors ofThe Guardian, whose son established The Scott Trust, is famously quoted as having said “Comment is free, but facts are sacred.” But how objective can the newspaper report if it operates in line with The Scott Trusts Values and especially C.P. Scott’s ideology? C.P. Scott strongly felt that Irish rebels were authors of their own destruction. From the article on Bloody Sunday to the Lord Widgery report, The Guardian supported the British military operation in Northern Ireland and strongly opposed Irish nationalists.

On the other hand, the Irish Independent is seen as a newspaper which gives its political allegiance to the party Fine Gael. Despite having the reputation of being a nationalist and Catholic paper, the Irish Independent does not support radical ideas and did not take sides with the IRA (Irish Republican Army) during the Northern Ireland conflict. In fact the IRA destroyed the Irish Independent’s printing works in December 1919 as a result of the paper’s criticism of the IRA. (Cotrell P. 2006, p46) Furthermore, did the paper’s unsympathetic attitude towards the Republicans result in the Irish Independent’s editor receiving a death threat from the IRA during the Civil War. (O’Malley E. 1998, p81)

In general, both quality newspapers use the same style of language and have approximately a comparable imagined readership. Therefore, it comes as an even greater surprise that the style of language used in both articles differ significantly, the Irish Independent uses a highly emotionally charged language whereas The Guardian takes a rather dry and factual approach

On 31 January 1972 readers of the Irish Independent were presented with a picture of the terrible shooting which most certainly created anger about the way the British operated in Northern Ireland, whereas The Guardian’s readership read facts which most likely made them believe that British troops were not directly at fault and that the happenings were foreseeable.

Throughout the Northern Ireland conflict The Guardian held an anti-Irish position thus also supporting the key views of its founder C.P. Scott in their article “13 killed as paratroops break riot”. Despite the Irish Independentnot being particularly pro-rebellions and pro-IRA, the article “Army action condemned by Church and State leaders” shows that the newspaper sympathised with the Irish civil rights protesters who were shot dead.

Starting with the headlines of both articles and having a closer look at language and content, it becomes apparent that both differ in such a way as to allow for contradictory meaning to emerge. “Army action condemned by Church and State Leaders” states the Irish Independent – the headline serves as an opinion shaper and creates a blueprint for an attitude the reader can adopt. Additionally “condemned”, a verb with a strong negative connotation, is used and the “Church”, which is of high importance in Catholic Ireland, is mentioned before “State leaders”. The British paper on the other hand writes “13 killed as paratroops break riot” – here the reader instantly receives an explanation for what has happened. Furthermore, The Guardian chooses the noun “riot”, which has a negative tone to it and can be defined as a wild disturbance created by a large number of people, as opposed to a choosing a noun such as “demonstration”, which can be peaceful. Throughout the whole text theIrish Independent speaks of “Derry”, which is the name used by the Irish instead of the official name of the British town Londonderry. Such use can be seen as a feature of ‘Banal Journalism’, a term introduced following Billing’s notion (1995) of ‘Banal Nationalism’. ‘Banal Journalism’ essentially describes the everyday representations such as flags, national anthems, sporting teams within news media which create a sense of belonging and in the case of the use of ‘Derry’ it creates a sense of ‘whose city’ Derry is.

Martin Brennan writer at the Irish Independent speaks of the event as “Bloody Sunday”, “murder” and calls it a “massacre”. The Independent choose to print the following quotes in bold and in slightly bigger font size than the rest of the text – “Mass Murder”, “Real Terrorists”, “Bloody Butchery”, “No Return”, “White Flag”, “No Provocation”, “War Criminals”. These terms are all emotionally charged and accuse the British army of an error despite the fact that no investigation into the incident had taken place at the time of writing the article. The Irish Independentsolely published interviews with eyewitnesses, politicians and the IRA who all describe the shooting in a very colourful way and whose descriptions point towards an act of violence which was not provoked by the demonstrators – interestingly the interviewees also include British public personas.

Furthermore, the comment by The British Government does not show sympathy to the families of those who were killed and is merely a short statement announcing that there will be an investigation. This announcement, however, depicts the British Government negatively since the first interviewee for the Irish Independent, The Bishop of Derry Most Rv. Dr. Farren states that a telegram has been sent to Mr. Heath, the Prime Minister, calling for an immediate and public inquiry. The article by The Irish Independent informs that the Taoiseach, Mr. Lynch, called Mr. Heath in the evening and that Mr. Heath will receive a full report in the morning and will study them before deciding on further action. On the one hand, a call for urgency from an Irish Catholic priest: “I protest in the strongest possible manner against the action of the army, resulting in so many deaths and injuries. I demand an immediate and public inquiry.” On the other hand, the paper prints a statement by the Prime Minister which does not indicate the same urgency: “They said he would receive fuller reports in the morning when he would study them before deciding what action his Government would take”

Analysing the article written by Simon Winchester for The Guardian, the first two paragraphs are especially striking. The shooting is described as “inevitable” and “universally forecast” which leads the reader to come to the conclusion that there must have been sufficient reason for the British army to act in such a drastic way. After a short summary of the event, the author writes that the army reported two military casualties and adds that 50 to 60 demonstrators were arrested. The Irish Independent briefly mentions the arrests at the very end of their article. The Irish Independent describes the scenario vividly by writing that 20 youths were lined against the wall on their knees and held at gunpoint. Details on how many casualties the British Army suffered are not reported, likewise claiming that the protest march was illegal.

The Guardian states the Army’s official explanation which claims that there had been provocation from the demonstrators. Comparing both the Irish Independent and The Guardian, the newspapers’ interpretations of who is accountable for the shooting are contrary. The Guardian chooses to only publish minuscule parts of the interviews with officials that describe the shooting in an emotional tone but prints long statements of people who voiced their opinion in favour of the British troops, such as the statement by Mr Michael Canavan of Derry Citizens Central Council, and Mr L Thompson, who gives information on hospital admittance after the shooting. Additionally, the newspaper prints an army statement freeing the British Army from sole responsibility. This statement goes as far as to describe the action of speeding into Rossville Street Square with armoured cars, where the protest was underway, as “a tactic we have all seen before “and as “effective”. This statement disregards that civilians were injured and even killed by this military tactic. In summary, the newspaper does in fact print details which indicate that the shooting was a horrible incident but on the other hand, highlights in statements and by means of tone that this incident was not in any way an error by the army.

Contrary to the Irish Independent’s eyewitnesses The Guardian maintains that the demonstrators were in fact provoking the soldiers. After an initial shot was fired, the British Army responded. The Guardian writes that the shot was presumably fired by an IRA man. The fact that a man who is part of a radical group, which may be described as a terrorist organisation opened fire, adds to the overall impression which will emerge in the readers’ minds. The reader is presented with a story, telling of British military action as a response in a dangerous situation. Additionally, the British newspaper chooses to use the word “mob”, which defines a mass of common people and is often informally used to describe an organised gang of criminals, to describe the people that were attacked by their shootings, thereby showing a great lack of respect for the victims and their families.

The Guardian cut Bernadette Devlin’s statement to the mere three words “bloody cold-blooded murder.” In contrast, the Irish Independent printed parts of her statement that unmistakably indicated that there was no justification for the shooting and expressed clearly that she hoped the British Government would remove their military from Northern Ireland: “What happened in Derry today was mass murder by the British army… let no one say they opened fire in retaliation. They shot up a peaceful meeting at “Free Derry Corner” and then they let loose… with bloodthirsty gusto at anybody unfortunate enough to stray into their sight. This was our Sharpville. We will never forget it. There is no point in calling for a whitewashing inquiry. All we can do is stiffen our nerves and continue the struggle to rid ourselves forever of the British Army.” This is exemplary for how both newspapers tried to influence their readers’ opinions. Bernadette Devlin was a Member of Parliament, representing the Mid Ulster constituency and a prominent figure in both Irish and British media. Given the fact that Bernadette Devlin was not only an eye-witness but moreover an MP, it comes as a surprise that such a significant statement is cut by the British press. Bernadette Devlin was undoubtedly controversial. (Hacker C. 1998, p27) While making the front cover of The Guardian with parliamentary correspondent Norman Shrapnel’s (1972) article on 1 February 1972 about punching Reginald Maudling (the Secretary of State for the Home Department) for his comments on Bloody Sunday, Bernadette Devlin is only being quoted with three words in The Guardian’s article the day after Bloody Sunday. Bernadette Devlin´s opinion was undoubtedly authoritative but has been ignored – this only becomes obvious by comparing both articles and goes unnoticed for readers of the respective publication.

Within eleven weeks after the shooting, Lord Chief Justice Widgery produced a report justifying the shooting by providing evidence which concluded that some demonstrators had been firing weapons or handling bombs in the course of the afternoon. (Griffith J. 1977, p46-47) Widgery’s report has been widely judged to lack credibility as it was strongly relying on soldiery recollection which conflicted seriously with those presented immediately after the event itself (English R. 2003, p152-153). The investigation is being carried out to this very day by an organisation called the “Bloody Sunday Inquiry”. According to the “Bloody Sunday Inquiry” new evidence and eyewitness reports indicate that there was, in fact, no provocation from the demonstrators (Bloody Sunday Inquiry 2005).

On 15 June 2010 the latest report by Lord Saville, Lord Widgery’s successor, was released. The Northern Ireland Secretary Woodward said in a written statement before publication that, “the report has been long-awaited and it promises to be a hugely significant event in Northern Ireland’s history.” Richard Norton-Taylor (2010), journalist for The Guardian, felt that the completed 5,000 page report severely criticises the soldiers for firing at groups of marchers and for the claims they made in statements afterwards to the military police. The claims that the Saville Report makes contradict the report by Lord Widgery in numerous occasions. The Guardian (Foy H. 2010) published a comparative article in 2010, in which the British newspaper acknowledges that both reports differ substantially when it comes to the question of responsibility, “on the use of Paras”, “on who shot first” and “on false accounts.”

It seems that 40 years after the horrific shooting the Saville Report may not bring the hoped closure to the families and friends of the victims. While the Saville Report may clarify questions surrounding the events of 30 January 1972, it does not act as proof and the contradicting theories, as introduced by the press in the past, appear to have tarnished the truth-value of any new insights relating to the incident. Sonwalkar (2005, p.263) argues that most journalism considered as mainstream journalism is “hegemonic; it caters to the “us” and presents one view as the worldview of an entire society or nation,” and as Fairclough (1995, p.2) points out, the media holds “the power to influence knowledge, beliefs, values, social relations, social identities” due to its “signifying power (the power to represent things in a particular ways) which is largely a matter of how language is used.”

Considering that at the time of reporting no inquiry had been conducted, it can be conclusively argued, that both the Independent’s and The Guardian’s initial reporting of the events are biased accounts of Bloody Sunday. More importantly, these contradictory reports can be considered as having had an influence on how the masses made sense of the shootings. As a result, the truth of what happened on the 30 January 1972, Bloody Sunday, may never fully come to light and if so they may never be accepted as an authoritative explanation.

Yet, it is striking that, today, The Guardian is able to suggest that the shooting was illegal. 40 years later, on the day of the shooting, the Guardian (Stoddard K. 2012) criticised its own reporting of Bloody Sunday. Both the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom have taken the necessary steps towards peace. In retrospect both Irish and British newspapers, accept the shooting of 13 and injuring of 17 civilians as an act against humanity. Today’s press representation concerning the Northern Ireland troubles indicate that not only have both countries’ governments come to an agreement, but that both nation’s citizens have largely accepted the troubles as part of their history, and have let go of hostile feelings of guilt, anger and injustice.

Come on, what did you expect, this is everywhere in the world, where the rich and powerful want to do whatever they want without getting punished by law.

Confronting the truth is "a loss of Profit", do you think they're gonna give in to that?

Once in power always an a*******$$$$,

And if anybody complains, they just wanna shoot people dead, and nobody can compensate for the victim's people.

Fixed it for you

I was just trying to say that they're not relationship material. Their priorities shift too dramatically once they're worked the bar for too long.

When you first met her she made you aware that you needed to pay her money for her company and sex

When you first met her you were happy to pay her money for company and sex.

A few months later she was still telling you that you needed to pay her money for her company and sex

A few months later YOU had changed YOUR priorities in order for you to believe something else.

You are the only person in the story whose priorities have shifted dramatically

Fundamentals of ineptitude and bad judgment aside, once the athorities treated the protesters like lazy inept parents of spoilled children and then finally decided it was time for the kids to go home, there are myriad humane methods for crowd dispersal of which turning a national army on its own citizens with lethal firearms is not one. Period. End of story.

This wasn't crowd dispersal. This was dispersal of a mob within which heavily armed militants roamed taking pot shots at people and buildings. In the West, such a group would be dealt with in a very similar manner, it's just that it wouldn't be soldiers burdened with the task, it would be a section of the police. And nobody would be questioning why the police were turning its arms on its own people.

Doesn't matter whether they are your own people, or whether they are lets say Arab terrorists, if they are shooting at authorities, they will be dealt harshly anywhere in the world.

Something like this you mean, Anyone see any similarities

Unfortunately, the reds only want their version of the truth. And that would be that they were good, peaceful, unarmed victims fighting for true democracy, and that the Abhisit government and the army were evil and wanted only to crush the reds by use of excessive force.

Time to face the truth. Reconsiliation is never going to happen.

Would have to agree - the only 'truth' to be preened from this is - there will never be reconcilliation.

I think there is a consensus running through all the posts on a thread like this, for the first time since 2010! I think everyone can agree Politicians as a whole in this country should be in Jail for their blatant disregard for the public North, East, South and West! I also think everyone can agree reconciliation is a dream, but will NEVER happen in Thailand in the foreseeable future. Its a shame that Farang with absolutely no say/voting power etc can see this clearly but the Thai people cant Its really difficult to be optimistic about Thailand and its politics. It is completely impossible to see this report acknowledged in any significant way; as their would be too many powerful people having to stand up in court, and account for their activities and decisions. Time for a large beer I think

Never is a very long time.

Things change, people can amend their views. All it takes is for both sides in any conflict to realise that they are never 100% right and neither is the other side 100% wrong. This is a start

All any conflict need to be resolved is a start by both sides to try and stop it. Firstly by looking at themselves, rather than always looking at the other side and pointing the finger

Truth hurts.

You know what it can be like sometimes when you try to call a spade a spade here. When you tell your wife or girlfriend something and they put their fingers in their ears singing 'la la la la'.

If Thailand can start accepting the truth and learns to not take itself so seriously, then progress can be made. There are many ways of judging a culture and society. The best way for me is to see if a culture or society is able to make fun of itself and laugh.

Why is it always the Western "truth" that is always used to judge other cultures and societies.

Why does it always fail in every country that the West tries to impose it on ?

Don't know anything about the man, but find it unusual that a married man with a kid is living in Jomtien Complex

Why?

Jomtien is an almost exclusively gay area. Most of the people living there are Thai and Farang gay men as well as a large number of underage Thai Gay men. I find it unusual that a Farang man with a Thai wife and child would be living there.

I was unaware of that. Is all of Jomtien exclusively gay or just Jomtien Complex? I thought that there are many Russians living in Jomtien now. Are they are gay as well?

Sorry, Typo. I meant to write Jomtien Complex. I lived in Jomtien for 2 years, Jomtien itself is not exclusively gay.