Orac

I am not slinging mud - -read my post 151 again, And maybe read some of Plus's and others posts.

SR has again in post 129 commented on no corroboration. A point he made in the early days of the thread.

Sorry caf but I am not getting dragged back into this arguement again, especially as the mods have clearly requested that we stick to the topic AND that you already answered this post in your post number 167.

What comments do you have on my latest post:

"So what do you make of the statement made by the Interior Minister about having six million signatures already - or is this in question too.

I am no udd/red shirt supporter and do hope that Abhisit is given the space to sort things out as he appears to be the best, if not only, good thing going for Thailand politically at the moment, however, given your valid points above, how much control does he have over his own government. It is my belief that it will not be the likes of Thaksin or the Red Shirts that will stop Abhisit from doing what is needed but problems caused from within his own government. "

Sorry LaoPo I was referring to the BP poll that the thread was adressing. Does anyone here seriously think that 92% actually support the runaway fugitives demand for a whitewash of crimes, and only 8% support the dignity of the higher institution and rule of law.

Doubtful in the extreme.

The question is not whether the demands should be granted but who the petition should be heard by. IF the petition is not illegal in itself then you could argue that 92 % are supporting the dignity of the higher institution and saying that it is not the place of the PM to stop it.

Still no 'noise' from the udd/red shirts about the alleged petition to rebutt the red shirt pardon petition.

To me this speaks volumes.

I'm hard pressed to believe that PM Abhisit would have sanctioned such a petition and I can't believe he would have allowed any scenario whereby public servants etc., were forced to sign.

If his collation partners (some of whom are fairly brainless and I wouldn't trust many of them) did start up such a petition, I'm confident Abhisit would have squashed it immediately.

I repeat, where the 'noise' from the udd/red shirts?

So what do you make of the statement made by the Interior Minister about having six million signatures already - or is this in question too.

I am no udd/red shirt supporter and do hope that Abhisit is given the space to sort things out as he appears to be the best, if not only, good thing going for Thailand politically at the moment, however, given your valid points above, how much control does he have over his own government. It is my belief that it will not be the likes of Thaksin or the Red Shirts that will stop Abhisit from doing what is needed but problems caused from within his own government.

I have no problem with Newbies as I said in my post but how many posts has Lost in Los made and what is his motivation. Also look at some of the lother threads Photojourn has actually posted and make you own mind up. No-one is slinging mud - in fact I have asked and so have othersw for his sources and his journalistic background.

Why on earth do you now need to know Lost in Los 'motivation'. He made a very clear post after having looked into the background of John Le Fevre, - something which you are advocating that we do but clearly haven't done yourself as you are still asking for details rather than making the effort to look yourself.

Your attempt to brand him as a newbie is truly pathetic and patronizing particularly since he has been a member here nearly twice as long as yourself

Are you serious about wearing a condom when walking through a park or shopping on your own????

..majority of posters on this thread who, in my opinion, not liking what has been said, have sought to sling mud and discredit him to attempt to divert the conversation away from what is actually being said.

I don't think "we" are slinging mud. Forgive us of being sceptical regarding news sources and media in general at this point in Thai development, and it's actually author's job to establish his credibility.

I think I know where the problem lies here.

Normally we assign some sort of "credibility index" to any news or source we come across and it depends on many factors. Friends and personal acquaintances, professional media outlets, rumors, government announcements, previous history - it all matters and we usually process this in milliseconds and unconsciously.

If the news has official appearance we tend to put it into "official" category, and that's where the main problem with John lies - his article is presented here at a level normally associated with "official" sources. It's not entirely his fault, btw.

So now we have this credibility gap between what we personally ascribe to John and how it appears on TV, this gap creates tensions as both sides tends to pull the others closer to their level and meet with resistance.

Nothing to worry, eventually we will negotiate a common understanding - either by agreeing on a common credibility level for John Le Fevre articles, or leaving the argument altogether as unproductive - like fighting over which color media is better.

I think we are both coming from the same place on this. I accept the validity of the report based the following reasons:

1. John Le Fevre is an experienced journalist who has operated in Africa and Asia for a number of years (I know you could argue that I got this from his own website but the articles he has written are there and stand up to MY scrutiny).

2. Thai Visa have published the article under the Thai News Banner - I personally would class Thai Visa as a 'trusted source' and, in view of forum rules and moderation have faith that an inflamatory article such as this would not be 'offically' recognised without some scrutiny.

3. A poster has already corroberated the article (PoliteExpat) by confirming he knows people who have been pressured to sign said petition.

4. The story itself is perfectly credible.

Clearly everyone has differing standards and definitions of corroberation - I am accepting Johns report as 'official' as per your post whereas you, as is your perogative, are not. I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

It would be nice for all concerned if the requirements to get a visa were more transparent.

Apparently the "requirements" someone listed above are not quite right, as someone else said his girl got a visa w/out anywhere near that amount of money.

There are also factors which disqualify one for a visa, I think - isn't any history as a sex-worker or bar girl one such?

I assume this would depend on the country the visa is for though I am not aware of any restrictions on sex-workers for the UK.

I just simply wanted to post this for a few various reasons but none the less I feel certain some embassies actually have no interest in giving visas. Mind you I am aware that for thai people you either

Probably 500,000 baht or more in bangkok account

House Title

Employment Verification and lots of other requirements to. Which I understand why but I feel some embassies should just put a giant sign on their embassy just saying straight out WE DON"T WELCOME THAI's period. Also it would appear to me that even if you are married to a foreigner. I've heard stories ( key word stories ) that if a thai marries a foreigner the process just to go the foreigners country can easily take 2 years.

Have any of you had, seen, know of events like this. My thai wife has been fine getting a visa, but she works to and we make better money here anyway. She's gotten visas to Japan, UK, Switzerland, Austria. A few other places to. The only place we won't waste the time on is to get a tourist visa for the U.S. . any comments, are welcome.

You seem to be contradicting yourself a bit here - the first part of the posts states, along with the title, that it is difficult or near impossible for Thai to get a visa then you go on to say in the last paragraph that your actual experience of this through your wife is that she has obtained visas to many countries without a problem.

To answer your question, my only experience of getting a visa was for my wife to the UK which wasn't a problem despite the fact that she didn't have a job, house or 500,000 baht to her name.

Western Union would be your quickest method as the money would be available virtually immediately and there are agents all over Thailand. If you check their website - westernunion with a dot com - you can find the nearest agent to you and in Thailand or, as I use to, send from their website with a credit card (classed as a cash transaction though so you will pay interest straight away and if you don't pay off all your bills it will remain there as the last thing to pay off).

Your sister in Law will need the MTCN number (transaction number given by WU), your name, city and country sent from and the amount along with showing her ID card and they will just hand the cash over.

I was questioning John's Le Fevre's sources, and that was it.

Nothing slanderous towards him as a person that I remember.

But so far there is no corroboration that has been brought to my attention.

Corroboration DOES matter.

Nation and Bkk Post do get raked over the coals for bad reporting here too.

ESPECIALLY for relying on single source internet stories lacking corroboration.

Also i was being humorously ironic about the efficacy of Tweets as a viable news source.

But did that mention John, nope, it was referencing someone elses catch phrase

I WAS castigating the Thaksin tweets as a source for anything for sure.

Different kettles of fish.

But hey lump me in any group you want.

I'll believe news when I am more confident of the source. I have no confidence in this one. And why is Lost in Los taking up the banner? What motivation? I welcome newbies of course and they can contribute as much as the rest of us. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Lost in Los appears to have taken the time to investigate the journalist in question and then form an opinion based on what he has discovered as opposed to the majority of posters on this thread who, in my opinion, not liking what has been said, have sought to sling mud and discredit him to attempt to divert the conversation away from what is actually being said.

Not entirely sure who the newbie is you are welcoming as you appear to one of the newest members contributing to this thread (especially since it looks like Ferwert has now been banned!).

Good point. John doesn't post his articles himself.

George posts them just as he does with any other news. In those case he is not endorising content in any way.

I guess it means we should judge John's articles on their own merit and on his own history, just as with any other news source.

There's no point in asking him - where did you get this? Or what does "reports are filtering out" mean?

That's just how he operates. His friends of red political persuasion send him tweets and e-mails and he regurgitates them into news articles, trying to fool the public into believing that they have any factual basis or reliability.

I'm sure he trusts his sources, as any other poster who starts with "I heard from my friends at the bar...". It's just in John's presentation it comes as "face to face interviews", and tweets come as "reports are filtering out".

This has not been posted the same way as other news - it has been posted under the banner of Thai Visa news and, since you posted, we now have confirmation that John Le Fevre has been commissioned by Thai Visa to provide it.

"I do not understand your statement that there is no point asking for conformation as this is exactly what I did earlier on in the topic and he answered with the following:

quote

The information on people being intimidated and told to meet signature quotas came from talking to civil servants employed in the north and northeast of Thailand. Other events are reported from having spoken to and in some cases obtained written accounts of events from eyewitnesses to those events."

end quote

You seem to have taken the position that, because of his political beliefs/affiliations, he is lying and making this up which seems bizarre since you have also stated more than once in this thread that you are not surprised if these tactics were being used. Obviously, since this news has been commisioned by Thai Visa I assume the powers that be have also made their own inquiries as to the veracity of what has been reported.

If Thai Visa is now choosing to portray itself as a news provider then it must take responsibilty for what is being posted in its name as this article is clearly posted as 'news' as opposed to an opinion piece.

From Forum Rules:

..We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. The messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Thaivisa.com or any entity associated with Thaivisa.com.

This guy is entirely on his own and can post any bullshit with absolute impunity.

I see your point however surely there is a grey area since it has been posted by George on not by the journalist himself.

It seems that the people looking to squash this story as unfounded aren't bothering to read the posts.

No, not at all. We just want to know what the story is founded on exactly.

We want to know what professional standards does this journalist follow? Is he a member of any accredited journalist organization, or is he self-proclaimed "journalist"? Who among real, professional journalists can vouch for his credibility? Who will take responsibility if he goes off the rails?

There's a contract between the public and the media - we put certain amount of trust in the media, and the media is accountable for what it reports to us. Where does John Le Fevre fit in this? Is he accountable in any way?

Until all that can be settled to OUR satisfaction, we will treat his "news" on their own merit - someone somewhere has probably said something, or it could have been a hoax from the start.

Surely the contract between the public and the media in this case is Thai Visa members (public) and Thai Visa management (media). If Thai Visa is now choosing to portray itself as a news provider then it must take responsibilty for what is being posted in its name as this article is clearly posted as 'news' as opposed to an opinion piece.

I cannot remember a journalist being subject to such scrutiny before and certainly without questions being asked of the agency he is 'working' for.

McGee said she had to remember the women by their numbers as she asked around for them on any given night. Some were known by nicknames given to them by others, but most were known only by number, she said.

I have yet to meet anyone who didn't have a name - maybe they just didn't want to talk to her ????

...and maybe they're just sick of hearing people talk out of their ass without being able to back it up.

Surely there's no need to get uncivil about it.

and insinuating that many members' wives are prostitutes is civil?

Erm - were thank you very much. If the implication is that they had to keep on working after marriage I would take issue with it.

Sorry JT but the first word that came into my head when I saw this was OBSESSED

Haven't seen anything on this in Reuters, AP, BBC, NNT, MCOT, Bangkok Post, The Nation, PTV, TAN, or heard anything on this from Thai TV news or the four family members that are civil servants.

John leFevre did not give any sources, did he

What is his journalistic background

surely you aren't expecting him to name the civil servants and eyewitnesses that he obtained this information from are you???

Where did Le Fevre obtain this information?

"Likewise, some district, town and village administrators, most notably in the north and northeast of the country – traditional Thaksin strongholds – are claiming they have been instructed to obtain 100 percent support for the government petition from residents, or face dismissal and loose all central government budget funding.

According to a number of civil servants in the Northern Province of Chiang Mai, each employee has been told to collect 100 signatures for the government’s rebuttal petition by Friday, August 14, or face dismissal.

The reports from Chiang Mai match similar ones from the Northeastern Province of Chaiyaphum where the Interior Ministry appointed governor is reported to have summoned district and sub-district leaders to a meeting at City Hall on August 12 and instructed them they must obtain the signatures of all village residents - without exception."

Did he interview district, town and village administrators? How many? Where? Did he actually recieved reports from Chiang Mai and Chayaphum?

>>>>

Regardless - the Interior Ministry that rnus this "reported" campaign is run by Newin's men. I would be surprised if they didn't do anything stupid like that at all.

And maybe John Le Fevre, who apparently knows all this information first hand, can provide us with the text of this counter-petition everyone is signing. What does it say and who is it addressed to?

I was also wary of this hence my earlier question to Mr Le Fevre which he has clearly answered confirming that information was gained from talking to civil servants and eyewitnesses in the areas concerned.

Since he has confirmed the veracity of the information (and also since George has seen fit to show it under the Thai Visa News banner which in itself speaks volumes) I would like to congratulate him on what appears to be a good piece of investagative journalism which has reaffirmed for me the political independence of Thai Visa given the number of recent allegations of Anti-Thaksin bias.

Who is John Le Fevre and what is a loose job? It doesn't sound very secure in the first place.

John,

Since I see you are reading this thread at the moment, are you able to confirm if you have spoken directly with the officials mentioned to get these comments or have you pieced this together from other media sources. Since none of this appears to be in the mainstream english language press and they are clearly sensitive issues i, and i am sure others, would be interested to know what verification process you have gone through on this.

Many Thanks

Orac

Using your example above if someone had commited 10 murders in Sweden and then moved to Thailand it would be perfectly legal to extradite him to Sweden as murder is a crime in both Sweden and Thailand. To compare this to the current situation if someone had commited 10 murders in Sweden and had then moved to Thailand I would assume the Thai courts would not allow him to be extradited to the USA if he wasn't a US citizen or murdered a US citizen.

OK Orac, point taken.

Lets put the shoe on another foot. Suppose the Russian had supplied arms to the insurgents in Southern Thailand, causing many casualties. Later he is apprehended by Thai security agents in the USA, but the US judicial system rules that he can not be extradited to Thailand.

I doubt the Thais would be happy with that decision.

Interesting scenario but why would the US refuse extradition as in this case as there would clearly be a crime commited against the sovreign territory of Thailand. The problem with the original situation is that the US has enacted laws that are not restricted to within their own sovreign territory or crimes against its own citizens - a closer analogy would be for Thailand to try and apply lesse majesty laws is the US and seek extradition of US citizens which would clearly not go down very well.

What did you expect Thailand to do? Bow down and become another whipping boy for the US? The man had comitted no offence in Thailand or the USA. There is no evidence to say he is an arms dealer. Good on Thailand for standing against the trash they call the USA they have proved they are a better country than the US by far.

Actually I am starting to come around to your way of thinking and agree with your logic. If a person commits 10 murders in Sweeden and then moves to Thailand, why should the Thais extradite him?

Maybe the Ruskie dealer could pay a little tea money, be set free -and to show his appreciation- sell a few toys to the nice patriots in Southern Thailand.

The best argument against allowing free lance arms merchants is a five minute conversation with a few Thai Visa posters

Using your example above if someone had commited 10 murders in Sweden and then moved to Thailand it would be perfectly legal to extradite him to Sweden as murder is a crime in both Sweden and Thailand. To compare this to the current situation if someone had commited 10 murders in Sweden and had then moved to Thailand I would assume the Thai courts would not allow him to be extradited to the USA if he wasn't a US citizen or murdered a US citizen.

This should go down as one of the larger screw ups the US has perpetrated.

They get a guy arrested without being sure that he had actually committed a crime in the country where they got him arrested!

It's a bit like busting a cannabis smoker in Amsterdam.

Almost - you would not be able to extradite someone from The Netherlands to the USA who is being charged with smoking cannabis in the USA because the crime has to exist in both countries for the extradition order to be valid.

What has happenned here is that the Thai courts have made a correct legal judgement based on the law - the crime the extradition warrant covers does not exist in Thailand as the courts have clearly stated and therefore he cannot be extradited. It is not a case of him having to have committed that crime in Thailand just that such a crime is recognised as such under Thai law.

What I cannot understand is why, if this guy is as evil as many are saying, they cannot come up with proper evidence to show that he has committed an offence that Thailand has on its statute books or he isn't being extradited to somewhere where there is a clear case against him.

In the UK they are called sidelights rather than parking lights. UK Law states that sidelights must be used between sunset and sunrise - headlights must be used at night (defined as 30 minutes after sunset and 30 minutes before sunrise).

In practice I was always taught that if there was a need to use lights ie, to see or be seen, then why use sidelights as a half measure when headlights would be more effective in all cases.

Actually an interesting article, but begs the question...why so many in Thailand ??

The average kuhn somchai tea leaf generally doesnt know the nationality, other that the victim is a farang, therefore suggests to me a few thing:

1. British tourists in Thailand spend more time drunk than other nationalities, therefore making themselves a easier victims ??

2. British tourists in Thailand are more trusting than other nationalities and therefore let themselves get into compromising positions and therefore become a victim ??

3. Its the attitude of the tourists, ie gobbing off etc etc..

4. More tourists from the UK than other nationalities therefore statisically the numbers who are victims of crime will be higher...

Any thoughts ?

Though it wouldn't surprise me if you are correct with the above assumptions, the original post only refers to Britons and does not mention other nationalities - to justify your comments we would need to have figures for other nationalities to compare them to.

Your post has no relation to reality - you should have read the story. Only 200 (out of 2500+/-) members used the 5-year visa scheme.

I suspect it is actually YOUR post which has no relation to reality. You should not believe everything you read

The article states that only 200 people applied for RENEWAL of the 5 year visa which suggests they previously had the 5 year visa so I assume these are the people who joined in the first year as the people who joined after this would not need to renew yet. The article also states that 139 memberships were sold in the first year which seems to contradict an earlier statement that 400 were sold in the first 4 months.