pjallittle

Guys - dont be too hard on Thailand.

Shutting the door after the horse has bolted? Ok, yep, sure. But to be honest, most of OUR western health and safety rules are in place under precisely those circumstances.

It unfortunately takes a terrible tragedy for people to learn from their mistakes, identify the problems and try to do something about it.

On the face of it, Thailand is doing something. Yeah, it may be too little too late, but at least it appears to be a step in the right direction.

Frankly, it's better then doing nothing isnt it?

I entirely agree, these same kinds of tragic accidents have occurred in nightclubs in the USA despite having ordinances, laws, experienced investigators and responsible personnel. Accidents happen and will obviously happen more often when the level of activity is heightened such as when celebrations are likely to to take place.

Just recently, a store employee was trampled to death by eager shoppers who, in their frenzy, knowingly ignored the prone body to get to their bargain goods.

Officialdom is responding appropriate to the circumstance, it isn't a case of too little too late. what should they do, stay silent?

anybody know how these figures compare with other places, such as Bogota, Gutatemala City etc?

Nobody will ever know because it is a farcical exercise that no other country would pursue, particularly with indicators such as teacher-student ratio, election turnout and telephone and Internet access, which have no effect on HUMAN SECURITY.

Whoever posted this item should be hit in the windpipe twice.

You are out of touch, I'm afraid. Studies of the same kind are very commonly seen in USA and Canadian newspapers, magazines and even real estate demographic studies, often using the same criteria that the Thai Government report relies upon. It's common to see article which list the top ten cities in magazines like Forbes, Conde Nast, etc.

lI think that the term "human security" is just a poor use of English that should have been expressed differently. What the survey intends to express has to do with the most comfortable places to live in terms of safety, schooling, medical care and the general "creature comforts" which we all seek to have more enjoyable lives. There's a broad grouping of factors which make up the foundations of good living, but there's also that "different strokes for different folks" part of the equation to deal with.

Sometimes what you want may be anathema to the wants of others.

I thought it was a million?

At any rate, it's a good place to target, although I can't say they are going to do anything special for the country.

The "special" is the large infusion of dollars that they bring into the Thai economy which trickles down in the form of employment, etc. This is really quite a significant development. We were very pleased with the Thai Tourism people, they are among the better in any country we've visited.

Some of you at ThaiVisa ought to consider packaging programs that might appeal to the next level down of the less affluent Chinese, you'd make a real killing. There's a huge market there just waiting for their place in the queue.

Lots of 3 & 4 star hotels would welcome the business. It's a golden opportunity for you guys to think about.

Awww... well I trust market forces to take care of the attitude. It's very simple: Protectionism is bad for business. Once Vietnam zooms by Thailand on the passing lane, things will change rather quickly.

The "attitude" of protectionism goes back so far that attempts to relax the provision will be a tough one. The USA & Canada have none of this systemic prohibition, even China has worked out a reasonably comfortable means of accommodating Western companies.

Thailand can't get out of their 19th century mentality and that isn't about to change. I think Vietnam has already whizzed by and doubt that Thailand even noticed.

Progress isn't all that it's cracked up to be, it's part of the charm, be careful what you wish for, it may be the worst thing for the people.

The key here is that the businesses will remain in Annexe III of the act, therefore much of this must be viewed as window dressing.

that might well be. but it's the new government's positive attitude that counts.

This may be an encouraging development for Thailand should the Government broaden their policy to take more positive steps toward relaxing residency laws, allowing persons investing in Thailand the opportunity to remain in residence and thus open the doors just a little wider for foreigners who would then be more willing to make a long term financial and personal committment.

When you read between the lines, this is obviously "much ado about nothing" in terms of genuine impact on tourists. If Big Hotels are not likely to be affected, I seriously doubt that the average tourist will feel that their Thailand experience will have been significantly dampened.

Doubt very much this applies to people coming in from the european union though, thats the BIG issue we have right now!

Mark

The article clearly sets forth that this new requirement applies only to those outside of European Union members..........

"manage" immigration from outside the European Union (EU)"

thus the concerns are applicable solely to those outside of the EU.

A similiar law has been in effect in Greece for over a year. The fine is about 50 Euro for first offense and up to 350 Euro for repeated offenses or if talking on cellphone while driving actually is the cause of an accident. Not to mention possible suspension or repeal of license.

Similar laws are being passed in various State in the USA. There are also several States which prohibit deeply tinted windows which are so dark as to make it impossible to see inside the car, that law has been in effect for decades in California.

The telephone law should also include immediate confiscation of the telephone, if it doesn't already

here's a conclusion ,

as long as these incidents are forgiven as accidents they will keep happening ........................

While yours is a perfectly logical observation, it's not a conclusion. Accidents can and do happen, we should exercise patience and wait until all of the facts sre in before deciding to 'hang' the skipper or find fault.

I've now read a half dozen or more reports of this incident from sources all over the world. In only one of them, there's reference to the boat being licensed to carry 15 persons. I've also seen comments about the injured passenger having his leg cut off................

The following picture of the injured party shows otherwise:

http://www.thaisnews.com/img/0724795521p.jpg

Just shows how quickly we all jump to conclusions.............I count two legs.

Not a single word has yet been said to compliment the captain, crew and authorities for saving 59 out of 60 people in an accident that, had someone not been on their toes (captain and crew) ought to have resulted in a much greater tragedy.

There are 54 out of 55 passengers who I presume were all adults who made an intelligent choice to make the trip that lived to tell about it. That couldn't have happened in high seas in a capsized vessel if there had been anything less than commendable efforts by skipper, crew and rescue team.

Isn't it time we gave some credit where it's due?

From Today's Nation,

"Muang Krabi Deputy Superintendent, Pol Lt Col Somdej Sukkarn said the boat owner - identified only as "Loh" - was entirely at fault as he had allowed the boat to carry 59 passengers when it was only allowed to carry 15. There were 27 male and 28 female tourists and four crew members, including the pilot, on the boat when the accident occurred."

and

"Krabi Marine Transport Office Chief Suriya Kitti-monthon said the boat owner could not claim insurance as he had broken the law by taking too many passengers and therefore must take all responsibility."

http://nationmultimedia.com/2007/09/05/hea...es_30047781.php

According to the Nation, the boat was only approved for 15 passengers not 60 as claimed by AFP. If that is indeed the case the operator should be tried and imprisoned for negligent homicide not complemented and given a pat on the back.

The above referenced account was, by the time the facts had been learned, entirely discredited. The nsme of the bost owner was stated incorrectly as was the description of the vessel's authorised passenger limit.

This is typical in these stories, the first 'out of the chute' is usually wrong and the posters ignore the more reliable findings that often follow. We are often too quick to judge and jump to unwarranted conclusions.

Having read every post, it's clear that we have a lot of Monday Morning Quarterbacks on board as this story evolved. From the name of the boat, the skipper and the person who died, the story has changed several times.

Donna probably provided the best insight when stating that when her group started out, there were no indications of foul weather or impending storms. Why can't we just accept her statement at face value instead of looking for ways to blame the boat's operator, chastising him and all other tour operators for being greedy, exploiting tourists and ignoring solid information from those who were proximally located or who have had prior experience at this time of year and have told us that it's common?

Anyone who has boated for as many years as I have will know that, on any given day, without any advance warning, sudden changes can and do come up, it's the very nature of the ocean.

Not a single word has yet been said to compliment the captain, crew and authorities for saving 59 out of 60 people in an accident that, had someone not been on their toes (captain and crew) ought to have resulted in a much greater tragedy.

There are 54 out of 55 passengers who I presume were all adults who made an intelligent choice to make the trip that lived to tell about it. That couldn't have happened in high seas in a capsized vessel if there had been anything less than commendable efforts by skipper, crew and rescue team.

Isn't it time we gave some credit where it's due?

This is certainly a surprise, because most Thais I talked to were against the new constitution.

Curious what other posters think about the poll.

Here is how the story played out in the USA's Wall Street Journal

Thai Constitution Passes,

But Thaksin May Still Be Force

A WSJ NEWS ROUNDUP

August 20, 2007

BANGKOK -- Thai voters approved a new military-drafted constitution yesterday, paving the way to elections in December, but a large number of "no" votes suggested that former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra remains a political force.

A tally, with 95% of the votes counted in a nationwide referendum, showed 58.24% accepting the charter, designed to prevent a repeat of Mr. Thaksin's powerful single-party style of government.

However, 41.76% rejected it, sending a signal to the military generals who removed Mr. Thaksin in a coup last September that they will struggle to control the makeup of the next administration.

The election commission Web site said turnout was 56.63% among roughly 45 million eligible voters.

A full official result is expected today.

Having pushed for a "yes" vote, the army-appointed post-coup government had been hoping for at least a 60% turnout for what will be Thailand's 18th constitution in 75 years.

After early exit polls indicated overall approval of the charter -- approval of the charter had been widely expected -- Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont said elections would "definitely be held at the end of the year." Dec. 16 or Dec. 23 are the most likely election dates.

Chaturon Chaisaeng, a top member of Mr. Thaksin's now defunct Thai Rak Thai Party, said the former prime minister's loyalists accepted the referendum's results even though they had campaigned strongly against it and considered it unfair. Mr. Thaksin's party was ordered dissolved by the courts in May for electoral fraud last year.

The 186-page charter curbs the role of politicians, emphasizes checks and balances at the expense of participatory democracy, and could perpetuate the behind-the-scenes power the military has wielded in Thailand for decades.

Defenders of the proposed charter concede it is imperfect, but argue it is the best way out of the political stalemate that led the military to seize power last Sept. 19 amid growing unrest over alleged corruption and abuse of power by Mr. Thaksin, now living in self-exile in Britain. Mr. Thaksin has denied accusations of wrongdoing.

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva, Thailand's likely next prime minister, speaking to the TITV television network, said that politicians should join hands after the election to amend the constitution because the results showed that there were a substantial number of people who voted against it.

Analysts said investors would be relieved there had been no major upset in the referendum.

"This is telling the junta that they are going to have trouble at an election and that could mean all kinds of attempts to influence the result -- and that's worrying," Bangkok-based political analyst Chris Baker said.

The new charter would serve as a replacement for a 1997 one popularly dubbed "the people's constitution" for the extensive public consultation and debate leading to its adoption.

That version attempted to bring democratic overhauls to a system that left political parties beholden to local power brokers with little or no ideological allegiances, a system that led to unstable, short-lived coalition governments.

The new one would turn the Senate back into a partly appointed body -- the 1997 constitution made it a 100% elective office -- change electoral procedures in a manner that weakens political parties, and shift several responsibilities, such as appointments to independent government commissions, to the judiciary from the executive branch.

thanks to careless people like you (guess majority of the world), we'll all be sending our sons and daughters and their children into a lot of trouble. Great let's continue all like this, wait until the problem hit's our face.

This is exactly what we should try to teach ourselves and especially the Thai people. Let's start thinking ahead and stop being stupid!

welcome aboard ,

relax , slow down and smell the roses , you have the right ideas ,

but

no idea of the size of the mountain ............................yet

The sea level is increasing at a rate of 2mm per year, that's 40mm or 1.57 inches in 20 years. Accordingly, it's not GW or sea level increase that's the problem, it's the 4 inches per year sinking rate due to pumping out of underground water without replacing it causing BKK to lose the war.

Think Holland, not GW>

Dear God, what is this country coming to?

So now when if I use one of those "ways of circumventing censorship" to view a site that they feel is unsuitable for me, i'm to expect a knock-knock on the door from the old dam ruad? Unbelievable!

I can't seriously imagine though how they intend to police this thing. There must be thousands if not millions of internet users in this country that use pr*xies to access banned sites; do they really have the technology infrastructure and the manpower to bring all those offenders to justice?

I suppost that the guy sitting in the prison in China figured the same thing. Want to try your theory out?

Guess what, you're in a country with their laws, no one says you have to stay.

Does anyone know if Thailand the first country to enact these kind of laws?

Thailand has had some form of this before now, but is hardly alone in their attempt to oversee their computer users. See many more of these, including descriptions of the degree to which this is employed in other countries:

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

Does Intellectual Critique have geographical border??

In certain circumstances, yes. There are many local customs in various countries which do not lend themselves to an intellectual debate or critique when the persaon doing the critique hasn't any knowledge of the facts.

Intellectualism does not supplant facts, for example, if one is unaware of Thailand's stance on the King, an intellectual could come down very heavily with criticisms that would be totally out of order.

Were Noam to denigrate Ataturk for some of what he had done before becoming the person that established modern Turkey, his intellectualism would be no defense.

In this circumstance, his 'guestimation' worked out fairly well for some, not so well for others. Absent facts, which none of us really has, then we only have opinions.

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

It's just plain silliness. Kind of like talking about the weather, it's hardly in anyone's control against World currencies. Maybe it just gives Thai banks a sense of importance.

Many other countries have been through much worse, Canada, Germany, USA, UK Australia, to name a few.

Gee all you guys talking sh_ _. Don"t your countries have laws similar to this? I know at least the good old USA does. Oh I used to drink maybe more then any of you ever had. I personally think this is a step in the right direction.

While it may be a step in the right direction, it seems to me that a law is only as good as the willingness to enforce it. These same laws have been in effect for decades in other countries but it's the degree of enforcement which is the controlling influence, one without the other is meaningless.

And despite the willingness to enforce, the drunk driving deathe among teens in the USA is still very high. Advertising in the USA, as an example, has been in effect for many years but hasn't put a dent in Drunk Driving accidents. And that's with pretty rigid enforcement.

Prevailing attitudes in Thailand will take a long time to change, but there's got to be a starting point. I suppose this is the beginning of a long struggle. That's better than the status quo.

When will thry realize that in those tourist areas theywould make more money if they would change laws back to opening bars till 6am and it would help the whole country out!! What is the theory in closing? If they let one city stay open all hours like say Pattaya then eveyone would know where they could go. 24/7

hey everybody! sober up and smell the coffee!

I agree wake up! In my 60 years I have run tourist locations all over the world and 2am is more than enough time to party after that trouble begins weather it be the merry makers themself's or the local thugs. Let Thailand try to protect those that want protecting.....................

Hawai'i is probably one of the leading tourist areas anywhere in the world and California has the largest State population in the USA. Somehow, both of these areas have maintained a 2 AM closing time long before Thailand became a tourist attraction and have had no difficulty attracting people.

Perhaps the new and improved Thai Government could do everyone a service by saying that it will be to everyone's benefit to allow all places serving liquor to cease selling any alcoholic beverages after 2AM. It is common for bars in the USA to have a "last call" about 10 minutes before 2AM.

If a bar wishes to remain open after 2 AM, they are required to close the bar. Violations may result in loss of liquor licenses. No 2nd chances, one violation and you could be shut down.

More than that, smoking has been prohibited in California establishments for years and Hawaii is now following that standard.

Sunbathing on the beach at 5am come on, I know some of you are still up at 5am in Pattaya, it is still 2 hours until you see sunshine. Arguement with beach chair vendor and wait around until 5am for them to come up and shoot you, again irrational.

A set up 2 meet 2 hookers at 5 am in more likely and a paid assasination is almost a certainty. I hope the police can solve this one.

Maybe a misprint for 5 pm. The deck chairs are not out that early in the morning.

This was no misprint, to quote from one of the reports:

.....Pattaya, Chon Buri - Two Russian women were shot dead on Jomtien Beach in this seaside resort town early Saturday morning.

As observed by another TV poster, who sunbathes at that hour of the morning?

Classic case of back protection and passing the buck. If it was so worrying to him as a designer why wait until now to highlight it? If he is so publi-spirited why didn't he kick up a fuss before the airport, his airport opened? "I only did what I was told!" Sound familiar?

If you go back and read the article again, you'll see that his complaints are not so much about the design as they are about fire exits being blocked or improperly used, nearly all of his concerns come about because of the present way in which the airport is being administered and not the way it was built.

He's neither protecting his back nor passing the buck, he's pointing out that there's poor training and a series of other incompetencies. And he's probably right.

If is easy for Thailand to get its assets back. Since all profits are derived from Thailand, all they have to do is tax all monies from telecom businesses that leave Thailand at a 50% or higher rate. Singapore would be more than willing to sell the assets back without taking a loss because if they don't, Thailand could tighten the rules more until Thailand gets all the profits and is unwilling to buy the assets at the original price.

Oh thats intelligent!....Should Singapore tax all Thailands investments in Singapore too?

It strikes me that this is a saga that will run and run. Thailand, or rather those in power, of whatever political leanings, have much to learn about transparent government, corporate governance and the rule of law.

They should take a trip to Finland; perhaps there they will understand the reason why this country regularly tops the poll in corporate governance. It is small enough and outside the 'Western/American/Chinese/Russian' sphere of influence that so many in Thailand dislike (although Thais everywhere are always quick to take any 'buck' that they can get).

Is that why Finland's suicide rates are the highest in the world? All those happy people?

http://herkules.oulu.fi/isbn9514256042/html/x335.html

If is easy for Thailand to get its assets back. Since all profits are derived from Thailand, all they have to do is tax all monies from telecom businesses that leave Thailand at a 50% or higher rate. Singapore would be more than willing to sell the assets back without taking a loss because if they don't, Thailand could tighten the rules more until Thailand gets all the profits and is unwilling to buy the assets at the original price.

And it's equally easy for Singapore to flip the switch (and the bird) to the dismay of Thailand's kindergarten military junta. Their premise that it's all about Thai security is just too lame to be credible. Are they worried about Singapore finding the secret recipe for Tom Yum or Pad Thai?

I fail to understand their reasoning sometimes. The idea of foreign engineers being a disgrace to the nation?!!! I think the airport itself has been a disgrace to the nation. Outside engineers could only bring credibility to any repairs. I don't think the work needs to be done by foreigners, but some oversight, some supervision some expertise would probably make a lot of people feel more comfortable.

Clearly, there's a conflict between the upper echelon of Thai's engineers and the Airport Administration, perhaps the Engineer is more concerned about "face" whereas the head of the airport simply wants to find the best and most effective way of getting the job done at the earliest possible opportunity.

It would be interesting to know what role Thai engineers played in what appears to have been a colossal blunder in not taking into account that the foundations were poorly planned. Perhaps the solution might be found by having outside engineers who have a known expertise in dealing with just these kinds of difficulties attach to the Thai Engineers in a consulting capacity?

If it can be well demonstrated that the mistakes were due to Thai engineers own ineptitudes, then it seems only reasonable to have them step to one side or, at the very least, be put under the supervision and guidance of proven experts.

This is much too important to allow egos be the basis for deciding how to proceed.

Khun Thitnan does indeed write in English quite well. I assume he also passes US Senator Biden's test of being clean and articulate. But really, a short little descriptive essay does not quite rise one to the level of brilliance.

Go back to page 1 and review the curriculum vitae offered for our review. This man has done considerably more than a short little essay, his range and depth of experience speaks for itself.

Well I guess I need to apologize for not using some of d'em smiley faces to show that the intent of my post was one of humor regarding other poster's comments and the intent was not to denigrate, nor comment in any manner upon Achaan Thitnan's academic corpus nor his professional achievements.

And being active in local Burmese democratic activities, I am very familar with the Irrawaddy (long bookmarked on my machine), and I did take note of the source of the article. But again, I was only making a small juxtaposing the recent comments by US Senator Biden regading Obama, and the many comments here about how Thitnan's short political essay was so "well written".

It may have been intended to interject humour, but the addition of your last sentence.........But really, a short little descriptive essay does not quite rise one to the level of brilliance....suggests otherwise.