loongdavid

Looking at the photos taken when the son was DNA tested (again!) recently, I'm somewhat intrigued as to the amount of time it must take national police chief Somyot Poompanmoung to pin all the paraphernalia onto his shirt every day - always assuming he has a clean shirt every day.

And I bet when he does pin those medals on his shirt each morning the very last thing he would ever be concerned with is what some silly farang's opinion happens to be.

Cheers

raspberry !

Looking at the photos taken when the son was DNA tested (again!) recently, I'm somewhat intrigued as to the amount of time it must take national police chief Somyot Poompanmoung to pin all the paraphernalia onto his shirt every day - always assuming he has a clean shirt every day.

"The PM / ex-general is letting slip away a prime opportunity to add huge credibility to his resume".

I think of all the speculative comment that has been aired over the past month or so the above statement has to be the most relevant and to the point I have read.

BORISTHEBLADE

I completely agree with everything you said. I lived in Thailand for 9 years. And it got to the point where, I was not only gaining a dislike for the people there, but a hatred. They want your money, every one of them and couldnt care less if you dropped dead in the street.

Am I wrong for saying this? well Im afraid it works both ways, because they hate us, all of them.

The Police have made a complete mockery of this, why did it take 5 days for the DNA results of the suspects, yet 24 hours for this guy. The whole thing stinks to high heaven.

I left there 8 Months ago, and now stay in The Philippines, at least people there understand my point of view, with their knowledge of the English language, I just wish I had pissed off years ago.

I have no idea where you lived or with whom you associated but it sure as hell wasn't any of the Thais that I know and love. Your description of the Thais that came into your life can only reflect upon your own character. What a very sad and unfortunate fellow you must be to have a "hatred" in your heart.

Strange responses by foreigners that think they kniw what Thai people want.

Corruption is not taking perks of the job or paying off a cop to save you picking up your license at the station.

That is corrupion that benefits all. Corruption he refers to is that which harms the country as a whole.

Thai people WANT corruption no 1.

As for getting off with a crime - if your child did something wrong that could ruin his/her life, would you act legally or do sonething to save their life. No point criticising if you would adhere to corrupt activities.

Are you for real my Thai friend?

There is nothing strange, as you succinctly put it, about foreigners thinking they know what Thai people want (or deserve). You forget that our countries are usually way ahead of Thailand when it comes to things like democracy, the rule of law and how laws should be enforced etc etc.

There is NO CORRUPTION "...that benefits all" or any individual. If, for example, a RTP officer accepts a free burger in McDonalds, that IS CORRUPTION, plain and simple. Thailand has to get it's head around the fact that CORRUPTION is CORRUPTION no matter how big or how small.

I strongly suggest you change your way of thinking or you and this wonderful country will forever remain in the dark ages.

There will always be a level of doubt with DNA testing as long as the tests are carried out in a RTP forensic laboratory. Forensic laboratories should always be independent of the RTP and Prosecution Service. Once more we see daily press and media briefings by the RTP that usually within days (sometimes hours) contradict themselves.

Perhaps our Australian mates can assist Thailand, they have a large population of water buffaloes that were introduced many years ago. I am sure they could make a deal with the minister.

http://waltzingaustralia.wordpress.com/2008/04/03/water-buffalo/

car.jpg

I was very much under the impression that the Northern Territory Government in league with the Federal Department of Agriculture had declared the Australian water buffalo to be an invasive and noxious pest. They were introduced many years back by Indonesian and Malay sailors who brought them along as a ready food source. If memory serves me correctly, Australian water buffalo were shot to extinction some years back. The damage they caused to inland water courses and National Parks was considered too great to let them live. They were never really a source of food (excluding some minor select restaurants) so why have them.

"...train with four passenger bogies was heading for Nong Khai...".

I think it should read passenger cars, as bogies are the cluster of wheels (usually four but sometimes six) underneath the cars that swivel and allow the train to negotiate bends.

(An old train spotter from the LMS line)

Translate that to Thai and I'm sure the grieving families will thank you.

Every village has one and you're ours

"Would have thought the rail tracks would have been a clue that trains run on it and so to take care ?

"Thought," now that's an interesting word. somehow it seems to have been missed out, or never mentioned, translated into or added in the Thai language".

The phrase that's missing from every Thais vocabulary and is never, ever considered - "WHAT IF"?

"...train with four passenger bogies was heading for Nong Khai...".

I think it should read passenger cars, as bogies are the cluster of wheels (usually four but sometimes six) underneath the cars that swivel and allow the train to negotiate bends.

(An old train spotter from the LMS line)

Is there currently legislation which restricts the right of australians to enter their own country? I'd like to know which act covers this.

So far as I am aware, no.

However, as I have previously said, the minister is vested with powers that may, and sometimes do, apply outside of legislation. This is a fairly unique situation and I would not discount anything coming from this minister.

You argue that there was no other instrument to deal with these current temporary visa holders to establish that they were not a threat to the health and security of Australian citizens in Australia. I do not believe that would be possible. I was under the impression that immigration officers had wide discretion on allowing entry of persons even if they hold visas. Would this discretion not extent to the point of embarkation to require a quarantine period or some blood test or whatever might be needed to establish if the traveller is clear or not? I recall many times going through US immigration in airports in Canada when travelling to the US. I am not suggesting that this model should be adopted but surely there are tools available.

You talk about the a-political decision making process. You clearly have been or are a civil servant as was I. Senior Executive decision making always includes political considerations. That there is a process or structure to institutionally separate the political form the administrative, does not remove political influence.

Despite taking your points about the apolitical nature of this decision and the scope of its application, I am still quite convinced that it is wrong on a number of levels and I would still argue that it was influenced by domestic political considerations. I do not propose any conspiracy theories nor ascribe any manichean intentions by the current government although it is quite obvious that I oppose their immigration policies and its affect on multiculturalism. Consequently, I continue to add my voice to those who object and oppose this development.

Will we know if any of the prospective travellers have the ebola virus I wonder? And could not the Australian government have tried a nice letter to the handful of these people wanting to travel to Australia to ask them to please delay their travel plans for a period sufficient to establish if they had the virus or not? Probably so few people that the Minister could have handwritten it himself, in his Crown capacity of course.

You are of course quite correct in that it would be very naive of me to suggest that political considerations were exempt from ministerial decision making. Having said that, the current government enjoys a large mandate from the last Federal Election for its border protection policies consequently, the minister would be well placed to make binding and 'controversial' decisions 'on the run'.

Although disagreeing with your political thoughts on this matter I too wish there had been a better way to deal with it. The speed with which this terrible disease spreads warrants quick action and that in itself and by definition is not always well thought through.

I wonder how 'Minister Hacker' would have handled the crisis?

How does one restrict the right for an australian citizen to return to Australia?

By enacting legislation or the emergency powers under that legislation. Crown Ministers are able to make decisions outside of legislation if deemed to be in the national interest.

Obviously, should entry be denied for whatever reason to an Australian citizen holding an Australian passport he/she has the right of review by both the Immigration Review Tribunal and the Federal Court system.

The 'political' posters (or at least me) are not arguing about boots not he ground, nor about the government's policy on Aid management, nor really anything about the situation in Africa or America. The point is being made in reference to the banning of visas and the opportunistic nature of this decision whose intended outcomes could be achieve by a variety of other means. Injecting a political agenda into a debate on a political decision seems quite apropos to me.

The decision by the Australian Minister for Immigration to revoke any visa issued in west Africa in order to gain entry to Australia was made in his capacity as a Minister of The Crown and not as a member of any political party. It is a well established DofI / DFAT convention that visa decisions made in the name of Australia are done so 'a political'. The Minister's decision was extremely relevant to a situation that was getting more serious by the day. If visas had not been revoked there would not have been any other method by which foreign travellers having been exposed to possible infection within west Africa could have been refused entry to Australia. It would be the The Minister's opinion and on advice from a variety of government departments that it was far more expedient to deny travellers entry to Australia at their point of embarkation. It should be noted that this decision not only affects other nationals but Australians who may have been in west Africa for whatever purpose.

The UK is a large foreign aid donor also, only problem being that a large percentage of the money probably ends up in: Switzerland, the Cayman Islands etc

Australia made the decision some months ago to no longer give money but all aid should be in the form of kind or material projects. These subsequent aid offers are to be strictly supervised by Australians for their relevance and their ability to meet deadlines and completion. Corruption within aid programs at the recipients end has always been a problem and in some cases endemic.

When the rest of the world volunteers huge payments to America for handling Ebola -- then maybe they might have a right for input... but right now American tax payers are footing the bill and I am one of them...

Australia is dead on correct for taking their action... A Western Country has a prime obligation - Protect its Citizens -- not the citizens of other countries as a priority... Home Country is priority... not West Africa...

Contrary to popular belief amongst some of the more political posters, the decision by Australia not to have 'boots on the ground' in West Africa was done in consultation with many other countries and agencies. For the Australian Immigration Minister not to have made the decision he did in revoking visas from the affected countries would have opened up, amongst other things, a subsequent litigants bonanza. To some extent the minister was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. Injecting a political agenda into this debate is not only false but irrelevant and misleading as well.

Add my voice to the ones who object to this decision and I fully agree that it is entirely about spin and political gain.

I have only seen the US news coverage of this but I notice another thread that is based on a US plea to not stop travel to and from these countries as it affects the ability to deal with the health crisis in Africa. Other people have are this point on this thread. I think you are giving a pass to the government on the basis of facilities. What i have seen on the US channels covering this is that managing ebola is not a complicated or technically difficult process. I went to look on the CDC website on this issue http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/treatment/ IV fluids and oxygen and presumably some containment environment. I really don't see that Australian medical technicians would not have the facilities and ability to provide this treatment?

I am not an advocate for absolute free movement in a contagious health crisis. What I do not like is the hysteria surrounding this issue and more particularly, I do not like the opportunism for fake populism by our government. I trust in the view of the medical establishment that indicates the best way to manage this crisis is to deal with it in situ with the support of as many international health care workers as possible or necessary. Taking a position that disincentives those workers from contributing their time and expertise to help this situational is irresponsible.

Notwithstanding the Australian Federal Department of Health and the Department of Foreign Affairs' and Trade have been repeatedly warning of travel to the affected areas since day one of the outbreak, Australia has made the decision that at this time 'in kind' assistance and relief is more appropriate than 'boots on the ground'. Most former colonial powers have an unwritten agreement whereby others seek the advice of the original colonial power before taking any action in their former colony. This is essentially to prevent duplication of relief assets and to use local knowledge to the best advantage. As France was the principal former colonial power in West Africa they will of course be using their knowledge and influence to best advantage. Australia like other donor countries will also be in consultation with the French regarding the best action to take. Contrary to popular belief and irrespective of the political party(s) in government in Australia any decision taken by government will be done in full consultation with, and knowledge by, the Opposition. Humanitarian assistance is universally accepted as being offered by a country, not a political party.

The idiotic chants of 'STRAYAAA' ring through this thread....

Smoke and mirrors and the punters cry for more. Imagine if the government actually sent people over to help with the problem instead of putting on ineffectual visa bans?

Ah, but actual foreign aid doesn't go down with the punters, pretending to do something does.

STRAYAAA!!!'

Notwithstanding the ludicrous and extremely juvenile comments from the poster above, the Australian Immigration ministers decision to stop issuing entry visas is very sound and in line with his authority under the Australian Immigration Act 2010. You will most likely find that he has also divested some of that authority to Australian missions overseas thereby allowing for Australian citizens who may have been infected to have their passports recorded and be subject to further checks or quarantine action upon arrival in Australia.

Australia is the fourth largest per capita foreign aid donor in the world and one of the very few whose financial commitment to the UN is always in the black, unlike the US, UK and most of the EU.

"... the prime minister said that the National Anti-Corruption Commission would investigate the case to ascertain how they had gone missing, where was the mistake and who would be held accountable".

Assuming the translations are correct - "would investigate"! Why did the investigation not commence the moment the FRAUD was recognised for what it was? And just who does he think he's kidding, "mistake" This was a solid gold, cast in concrete premeditated crime. The only mistake here was that the BIB were not called in immediately.

If ultimately they are deported back to China their fate could be a lot worse than here in Thailand. Many previous and similar convictions for fraud and deceptive practices in China have seen the courts hand-down a death sentence.

"...what makes your defaming post towards me any better than mine towards..."

'Defame' - ... to attack the good name or reputation of. As we are all anonymous and all adults (I think) defamation is most definitely not an issue.

driving from near Si Sa Ket yesterday we had 11 police/military stops in the first 200kms going southwards. Polite officers and no problems but I agree why suddenly so many?

As I drive south out of Si Sa Ket several times a month I can only suggest your experience was a one-off and the BIB/Army were looking for someone specific. Normally, one would not see a checkpoint of any description around Si Sa Ket Province as most were removed over a month ago. All is quiet and law-abiding

I understand all you oldskool chaps who still love the flag and Britannia rules the waves and all that but you don't really have a clue what is going on in the world besides from what you see on the BBC or Sky News but if you would just take a few hours to look at the bigger picture, do a bit of research outside of the mainstream and use your common sense it will all become much clearer. Police back home answer to their boss, who in turn answers to his boss...all the way up, so don't give me your British superiority b-s about honesty, integrity and whatever more. England has one of the worst records in the world for secret agendas and black ops. They didn't get that for being so honest and trustworthy mates!

Regards,

Paddy

...and you know this from first-hand experience I suppose? Putting to one side the unfortunate abuse, please, tell us all just what you know and from where you obtained your information.

"it will never happen" is a hackneyed phrase that seems to be rolled out she the poster has no real opinion but wants to seem to be well-informed.

in reality Thailand has changed dramatically over the past decade - there are of course always those who think the past was a better place and try to maintain a hold on the ever-slippery status quo.

but the fat that this incident has erupted into both Thai and intentional media is itself "a change".

a grovelling apology? - I'd say that is extremely unlikely but certainly the Thai authorities will be looking for a way out that both appeases critics and saves the police etc from losing face - an exercise in Kraeng Jai is, i'd wager, already being put into action.

on the other if the police just blunder ahead, ignore their critics and repeatedly try to put an incomplete case to the prosecutors, it will end in massive loss of face not just for the RTP but also for the Kingdom.

To use your own words: " the poster has no real opinion, but wants to seem to be well-informed"

As for "krengjai" learn the true meaning of the word, before using it!!

Sorry but I know the meaning - the problem seems to be your inability to comprehend - if you have any criticism of my post PLEASE - why not actually formulate an argument? So far you haven't made a coherent point.

Oh! god, and here's me thinking he had left the building. I warned you all not to engage this individual in dialogue, all you'll get is insults. Cut him adrift.