richard_smith237

I don't personally care what people choose to wear - but I fully understand that others might. However, if you wish to introduce the subject of mental illness into this discussion, then it seems you are more interested in scoring points through baseless accusations than actually engaging with the substance of the debate. Moreover, you’ve failed to grasp the fundamental premise of my argument. Instead, you have once again resorted to deflection by accusing me of shaming Thai people, which was never the point. This, frankly, only serves to highlight that you are not intellectually equipped for this discussion and would rather take potshots than engage seriously. I could just as easily point out the flaws in your comprehension of the points I have raised - but I won’t. In the spirit of meaningful discussion, I’ll simply encourage you to read my points again and make a genuine effort to understand them. At its core, this is a conversation about freedom of speech, and more importantly, the necessity of basic decency for that freedom to flourish. My argument stems from that of promoting basic decency on a general level where as yours is from justifying the popularisation of Hitler Imagery specifically within thailand. I wish to make a broader point: this is not just about Westerners being offended in Thailand. It’s part of a much broader conversation about basic decency that crosses cultures and boundaries.

I agree - but don't you think it's more of a sliding spectrum? Somewhere along that spectrum lies a healthy and reasonable balance of decency. Many argue that the West has gone too far in certain respects, and to be honest, I find myself agreeing with many of those arguments. In this particular case, while I’m not personally offended - I think only a fool would willingly buy such a T-shirt - I do understand why others may take offence at the symbolism involved. Equally, I can fully appreciate how Thais, and indeed people from other cultures, might be offended by the careless popularisation of symbols that they find culturally offensive. The key point here is that this is not just about Westerners being offended in Thailand. It’s part of a much broader conversation about basic decency - as I mentioned earlier. "The boundary between decency and indecency often shifts within the fog of subjectivity. Yet, there are cases where certain imagery strays so far beyond that line that it may be argued it is simply never acceptable"

I could equally go back to an extreme example I used earlier... Its not important to everyone else... but, anyone with decency knows this would be offensive. The lines between basic decency and 'woke' (same mold and mildew that has developed in the west) are being blurred - but it shouldn't. Basic decency has never changed - our tolerance for the lack of it seems to be being eroded, thats all. Are we becoming more tolerant, or just less considerate ?

I agree.... freedom of expression and freedom of speech is one of the most important facets of modern civilisation - Yet, do we not individually hold a responsibility towards the values of freedom of expression and freedom of speech ?..... and part of that responsibility is surely not to be deliberately offensive. In this case, the shop maybe naively ignorant of the symbolism of such imagery, though, more realistically, I doubt the owner cares - and therein lies the discussion and debate.

"Decency" is a malleable and flexible concept. Once person's "decency" is another person's stupidity. Much like morality is dependent on perspective. To the snake eating the mouse it's just dinner, to the mouse it's cold blooded murder. The problem arises when some people feel their interpretation of "decency" or morality has an absolute value. Those days are gone. Perhaps they believe those days are behind them - yet the very fact that this debate continues suggests otherwise. Your argument on morality feels somewhat shallow, as it hinges on a cross-species principle. By the same logic, one could justify humans eating steak, chicken, or any other animal product. The foundation of the argument seems to miss the crux of the issue. That said, I do agree with your point regarding those who treat their sense of decency or morality as universal truths. They are not. Concepts of decency and morality exist on a spectrum, shaped by location, nationality, culture - even by time itself. Much of the tension lies in this grey area, yet it is important to recognise that extremes do exist. There are actions and symbols that are, by most reasonable standards, unequivocally indecent. Consider, for example, the symbol of Hitler. In Thailand, due to differing historical and cultural contexts, such imagery may not carry the same visceral weight as it does in France, Poland, the Netherlands, Belgium, and other countries scarred directly by his legacy. However, the world has grown small. Social media has shrunk it further still. What might once have been an isolated local misstep - selling a Hitler-themed T-shirt, for instance - now has global reach and, with it, the potential to cause Thailand embarrassment on the world stage. The boundary between decency and indecency often shifts within the fog of subjectivity. Yet, there are cases where certain imagery strays so far beyond that line that it may be argued it is simply never acceptable.

Foreigners have no right whatsoever to be telling locals what they can or cannot sell. Extreme arrogance. You are missing the point by resorting to baseless accusations instead of attempting to grasp the simple matter of basic decency. The usual lines - “We are guests in this country,” “foreigners have no right,” or “if you don’t like it, go home” - are not legitimate arguments. They are cheap jabs, often made by those more interested in scoring points than engaging in thoughtful discussion. None of these claims justify what is clearly wrong - this couple is selling T-shirts that can reasonably be seen as offensive. This has absolutely nothing to do with nationality and everything to do with fundamental human decency. She is surely aware of what Hitler did - and if, by some miracle, she wasn't, she most certainly is now - yet I suspect the offensive T-shirts remain on sale regardless. Consider this as a simple parallel: Would it be acceptable for her to sell a T-shirt depicting a deceased loved one of yours, accompanied by offensive or mocking words? Of course not. While this may be an extreme comparison, it illustrates an important truth - what one person dismisses as trivial can cause deep offence to others. And this is precisely why freedom of expression must always carry with it a measure of responsibility - the responsibility not to be deliberately offensive simply because you can. When I open up some of the posts made by 'ignored posters' its patently clear that there are those who would take active steps to deliberately be offensive - thus proving why they are on ignore in the first place, their content has no place in decent discussion. I reject the argument that foreigners have no right to voice concerns. In fact, I would say that no private individual, regardless of nationality, has the unilateral right to dictate what can or cannot be sold. That responsibility lies with the relevant authorities - those tasked with upholding decency and common standards within society. If policed correctly, i.e. if the Police here were not so apathetic and lazy, this may be seen as causing public offence, disturbance, or even perceived as inciting hate, authorities could act on that if they so wished - they don't because they are lazy. But, there is precedence of the such actions where ignorant insensitivity has led to the need to react with a decent response and a apology. In 2011, students in Chiang Mai held a Nazi-themed sports day parade (yes, really). When photos went viral internationally, it caused a scandal and formal apologies were issued by the school and Thai officials. Just because we've seen a few random market stalls selling this stuff, do not think it's actually accepted - it's more tolerated due to misunderstanding, not approval.

They're a threat to common decency - something you appear not to care about.

No, there isn’t - there is no evidence (as yet) of catastrophic damage, only images of the predictable: superficial harm. Dislodged tiles, cosmetic cracks in non-structural walls, and fractured cladding. Hardly the architectural apocalypse some would like to imagine. Simple explanation since the concept seems elusive to you. Think of it like a minor car accident: shattered headlights, a dented bumper, some scraped panels. The car still drives because the frame - the actual structure - remains intact. This is the essence of superficial damage, it looks bad. These buildings did precisely what they were engineered to do. They flexed, they swayed, they absorbed the shock - all by deliberate design. Without such ductility, rigidity would be their undoing. They would crack, snap, and fail. Architects and engineers understand this intimately; it is Seismic Design 101. But perhaps this is news to you. The earth itself is not static. It is plastic, dynamic, and unruly. Bangkok sits atop an ancient lakebed - a soft, sedimentary basin - a fact so elementary that it is cited in every relevant textbook. Seismologists even have a name for the phenomenon: the Mexico City Effect, after the devastation in 1985. Bangkok is practically the textbook case today. Japan, by contrast, dances to a different geological tune. Major fault boundaries, higher-energy quakes, and vastly different soil mechanics. Japanese buildings are crafted for that reality, just as Bangkok’s buildings are tailored to their own. Consider Taipei 101 and its colossal tuned mass damper - the swinging ball - engineered to mitigate sway in tall buildings, not because the structure is flawed, but because height amplifies movement. Combine all of the above knowledge and we soon see a picture that your musings are nothing more than that if an ill-informed, uneducated fool less mentally prepared for such a discussion than the most mediocre of laymen - like a trainee bricky mixing cement but attempting to advise on the structural complexities of Seismic Isolation Bearings. In fact you've avoided any sensible discussion on the subject instead nudging bigotry to the fray and in doing so highliting your own fundamental intellectual flaws - a perfect example of a famous quote: "Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt"

I can well imagine the fear - much of it amplified by a snowballing hysteria, the fear of the unknown, and the haunting images of catastrophic events such as the collapse of the Twin Towers. In such situations, I believe it is impossible for even the calmest and most rational minds to remain entirely unaffected. Those naturally more anxious could easily be pushed to the brink, becoming overwhelmed by worry and uncertainty. Personally, after an initial moment of disorientation - a brief sensation of vertigo, I noticed the light fixtures gently swaying, and I immediately understood the cause. Yet, even with that awareness, the unsettling question arose: how severe is this going to get? and will the house hold up? ..... I can only imagine how this same feeling would be magnified in a high-rise office tower, where the sway is more pronounced, and the panic of mass evacuation down thirty or more flights of emergency stairs creates a wave of shared anxiety, feeding off itself with every passing second.

To be fair, I was already anxious enough navigating Rama II Road beneath the maze of ongoing overpass construction. When news of the earthquake broke, I fully expected to read headlines reporting that kilometres of the structure had come crashing down. Thankfully, that wasn't the case. It seems the infrastructure, despite appearances, is structurally sound. The issues we've seen in the past have largely stemmed not from design flaws but from isolated instances of catastrophic human error - instances where major equipment failures during construction have caused localised problems. As for the stability of Bangkok’s larger buildings, while it’s true there is a fair amount of anxiety among residents, this event has demonstrated just how well these structures have performed. The 7.7Mw Magnitude Earthquake in Myanmar delivered an effective magnitude of around 4–5 Mw within Bangkok, and yet the buildings remained resilient. Superficial damage, such as cracked tiles and plaster, is certainly widespread but could also be expected, ultimately this is cosmetic. It may look unpleasant, but it does not indicate structural failure. Had Thailand’s building standards been as compromised by corruption as some critics claim, today's conversation would be a very different and tragic one. That being said, it is still essential that buildings undergo thorough inspections using specialised techniques, such as Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (UPV) testing, to ensure that no hidden damage to their structural integrity has occurred beneath the surface. With the exception of one building still under construction, I believe it’s fair to say, well done, Thailand. Given Bangkok's geological setting, this could have been far worse.

Read the OP again. The HE was a woman! I think the shop owners where a Male and Female - They do have the right to sell whatever they chose within the legal confines. However, thats the whole point of the thread and initial discussion - There's a moral grey area in which such images exists - Pol Pot, Che, Osama etc have all been mentioned in this discussion, then there are the 'language T-shirt's'... It is accepted to walk around with a T-shirt that says F**K the World or perhaps worse ? This all falls under freedom of speech and freedom of expression and in order to maintain that we also have to respect it and think.

Kanchanaburi does have several fault lines, fortunately minor, along which quakes do happen. Biggest quake we had was a 5.5 maybe about 10 years ago. Centred on Sisawat up on the Burmese border. That one made the news as it also got the high-rise blocks in Bangkok swaying. Bangkok really does have a major problem being located in an area susceptible to liquefaction during a strong quake. In that case it can be argued that Thailand is 'riddled with fault zones'.... In fact there are are faults everywhere.... The difference is they are intraplate faults, meaning they are within a tectonic plate (the Sunda Plate) rather than directly at a plate boundary. These faults are generally smaller, older, and less active. Many of them are strike-slip or normal faults, accommodating slow regional deformation rather than sudden large releases of stress. The Myanmar earthquake likely occurred along the Sagaing Fault, which is a major active plate boundary fault between the India Plate and the Sunda Plate which typically have higher slip rates, and accumulate much more stress due to the interaction between two massive plates, making them capable of producing large, damaging earthquakes. Historically, Thailand has had moderate earthquakes (usually less than magnitude 7). Myanmar, on the other hand, has experienced magnitude 7+ earthquakes repeatedly over the last century due to its plate boundary fault system. This quake was amplified in Bangkok due to its 'basin' effect, acting like a bowl and trapping and prolonging the shaking. Seismic waves bounce inside the basin, leading to longer durations of shaking compared to regions sitting on hard rock (such as Hua Hun or Pattaya).

True... and thats a valid point... I see that equally as distasteful and hypocritical. I remember seeing T-shirts with Che Guevara for sale in the Student Union (when I was at Uni)... He was seen as a revolutionary... Quite different from Mao I'd argue and I never saw in Mao T-shirts in the west.

Not need for that at all.. Send them to the US to sort out the Trump cataclysm. Congratulations. You've managed to gracelessly shoehorn 'Trump' into a topic that couldn't be less connected if you tried - a feat of intellectual bankruptcy so common it's practically a national pastime. What is it with you Americans? It's as if the entire country is locked in some festering Freudian nightmare, unable to shut up about a bloated, orange spectre who haunts your every thought. Like deranged lovers muttering the name of the one who left them - pitiful, obsessed, and utterly incapable of moving on. It's pathetic.

You are looking at this from the Western perspective. I'm looking at it from a human perspective... Its the same as Thai's getting upset when they see a Buddha image on a bikini or in bar... Thats not a Western Perspective, but the same principle applies.

Is it entitlement, or is it a deeper understanding that there should be greater consideration shown by all ?

I've seen photos of Thai rescue teams - they have their search dogs etc. If I'm not mistaken, Thailand sends its experts overseas as part of an international effort when similar issues happen (i.e. Turkiye and Iran), so I don't believe there is a reason to suspect inexperience. That said, calling in any help is not a bad thing.

It was 580km away and an estimated 4.5Mw Magnitude by the time the energy reached Bangkok (within approximately 1.5 minutes after the quake in Myanmar) There can't be a quake in Chiang Mai or Kanchanaburi because its not on a plate boundary. This earthquake, in Myanmar was from the Sagaing Fault, which is a strike-slip (transform) fault where the Indian Plate and the Sunda Plate (or Burma Microplate) slide past each other horizontally.

Yup... its been in the Thai social media already... Families unable to travel getting absolutely creamed by Taxi drivers... 500-1000 baht for a 50-100 baht fare etc... Hopefully this gets the media attention it deserves and triggers the Police to deal with the scam taxi drivers refusing to use meters etc once and for all... I won't be holding my breath...

...in your opinion. Those who buy the shirts have exactly the same rights as you to have opinions, whether or not you arrogantly describe them as "extremely ignorant". Good luck on your next Hitler T-shirt shopping spree....

I recall when stalls were selling Osama Bin Laden T-shirts.... I thought at the time... there's a segment of society here that is incredibly juvenile and insensitive to world events. Of course, a simple T-Shirt can't harm anyone, but the imagery is powerful and this shows extreme ignorance - instead of defending herself, the vendor should be ashamed and embarrassed, as should anyone who purchases such items.

True... I wonder if in the same manner an 'epi-pen' can be carried on a flight, can a Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) pen (i.e clexane) be carried to administer in emergencies ? Then the question begs: Can airlines even carry epi-pens or are they reliant on those with allerigies to carry them themselves ? The question then is: Could the airline flight crew be more 'active' or better protected to admistister medication considered critical without fear of being found at fault - perhaps through 'some sort of international flight laws' that allow for that....

Can it [chat GPT] also replicate the money entering our account ??? IF not... this is just a nothing story...... as any time we send or receive money it shows immediately in our accounts and we get an SMS.

Sounds horrific... to have to go through that alone while suffering the loss of a life long partner. If only governments could show some compassion and work with local consular offices to make such process as smooth and compassionate as possible - it can't be that difficult when all thats needed in most cases is a signature. ... It seems the 'humanity' of her suffering was ignored and replaced with indiscriminate bureaucracy - but brutal an completely lacking in basic human decency. At least the lady was sensible enough to have her beloved cremated instead of dealing with the expensive process of bringing home his body. Quite rightly so.

Have they tested the Ship's Pilot & crew on duty (Captain) for booze ?