zthyadat

Finally though, with the THai attitude to Indians being what it is, why was this guy appointed? I know the UK powers that be champion the anti-racism cause, even with the PM saying that multiculturalism has failed, but why put a guy who will obviously have problems due to his appearance into Thailand. Next, they'll put a Goldberg into an arab country.

Anti-racism isa good cause, but why try to export it. Looks like another type of colonialism.

Why try to export it? (Dear me, how deliciously ironic that statement is.) Okay.... Because to acquiesce to the prejudices of other countries is tantamount to IMPORTING them. You are going to tell a British civil servant (and British citizen) that you are discriminating against him because he is too dark skinned for Thai tastes? Seems to me the ideology should be moving in the other direction. The Thais need to outgrow this ridiculous prejudice, and giving in isn't going to help them get there. (Come to think of it, good God, what were they thinking when they made a black man head of the UN? Don't they know how some countries feel about blacks?!)

And in the case of the British embassy, I reckon that Britain holds the upper hand in that relationship. If Thais want the investment money and technological assistance, they'd better learn how to deal with the 'khaek' ambassador quick smart. In any case, I suspect that the people he deals with are generally a step or two beyond the "he have dark skin dirty poo-poo man!" stage of caveman thinking. Maybe the Thais you hang out with are still at that stage.

It just occurred to me as well (your post is truly inspiring) that it must be really difficult for some of the African countries to decide who to send to least offend their host country. "dam_n! We're all black... what should we do to keep Thailand happy?" One supposes they scour the countryside for albinos and train them to be ambassadors to Asian countries.

And come to think of it, Thais don't exactly like white people much either, so why doesn't Britain find a Thai who is now a British citizen and make them the Ambassador to Thailand? Of course that Thai person better be of the proper social class and skin colour...

Much as you may see yourself as a practical man of common sense, your argument is flawed, racist, backward and just plain silly.

And in case you didn't know, "Thai attitude" notwithstanding, there are a lot of very rich Indians in this country, holding full Thai passports (many for a few generations), and in spite of the "Thai attitude" they have managed to do business with Thai people and thrive in a place that apparently looks down on them. Looks like the colour of your money is ultimately more important.

Now go to your room young man, and stay there until you've given some serious thought to how you treat your fellow human beings.

Always fun seeing the Australian and US use of the word "fanny".

And it is always fun hearing Brits use the word c**t.

If they cracked down on fat passengers, I would consider flying with them again.

Flying a plane uses fuel and each kilo requires a certain amount of fuel to get sky-born and complete the journey. Fat people smell, use more space and more fuel so they should be put in seats away from others and charged by the kilo.

HOWEVER..... discriminating on the grounds of image and having an arbitrary yardstick such as waistline is just another example of how Thailand's ruling classes are a bunch of incompetent no-hopers who have only got the job through nepotism or graft.

I hope Thai Air continue to be the laughing stock of the aviation industry and this little snippet will add to their continued embarassment.

in the meantime I'll continue to search of other airlines rather than fly with this miserable bunch of wanke_rs.

Many airlines do require obese people to buy two seats. However, I wasn't aware that "fat people smell'

As for a person's weight effecting fuel consumption ... I think the effects are small very small. Consider too that during winter months typical passengers weight will increase from 2 to 8 pounds because of winter clothing.

As for Thai Airways being a "laughing stock" ... not only is it profitable (100%+ profits up last year) it also is often ranked within the top 10 as being one of the best airlines by travelers. However, I don't think they are doing themselves much service with this news story.

I am not surprised their profits are high - their prices are absurd. I don;t know why anyone chooses to fly with them internationally when there are better airlines available for less.

If they cracked down on fat passengers, I would consider flying with them again.

Flying a plane uses fuel and each kilo requires a certain amount of fuel to get sky-born and complete the journey. Fat people smell, use more space and more fuel so they should be put in seats away from others and charged by the kilo.

HOWEVER..... discriminating on the grounds of image and having an arbitrary yardstick such as waistline is just another example of how Thailand's ruling classes are a bunch of incompetent no-hopers who have only got the job through nepotism or graft.

I hope Thai Air continue to be the laughing stock of the aviation industry and this little snippet will add to their continued embarassment.

in the meantime I'll continue to search of other airlines rather than fly with this miserable bunch of wanke_rs.

and people with no brain are really annoying yet others have the pleasure to put up with them in every day life.

You should continue your search for other airlines who accomodate "special" ones, or you can always stay in Oz and do a huge favor to the rest of the world

Sorry, but why did this person's opinion offend you? Why exactly should they stay in Oz? What, if I may ask, makes you so "special"?

I think many of those passengers just watched that demonstration very closely for the first time in their lives, and I would've too.

I am sure very few if any where actually listening to the message or looking at how to use the safety devices ... kind of the same attention/respect they will give to these dancers in the event of an emergency.

Debbie Downer

It hardly matters... those "safety devices" (seatbelts aside) rarely if ever save lives anyway - it is the same illusion as airport security. Elaborate bull**it to lull you into docility.

I like the thai way of just saying what they really want for job qualifications than lying and acting like they are open to all applicants.

Oh yes, like on a Thai job application where they ask who your parents are and their occupations. (A few years ago they all included grandparents and some applications still do.) Sure they are up front and honest alright - that is the "Thai way". It is like a sign that says: "We want to know who your people are to prevent any undeserved social mobility that goes against the status quo. Children of rice farmers, no matter how well educated you have somehow managed to become, how well you have bleached your skin and cleaned up your diction, will be shunned in favour of someone from a "good" family.

I miss America's blunt honesty as well - like how in the 50s they would just put up a sign saying "no coloreds allowed".

And of course there is the alternate explanation in this case put forward by the labour ministry woman herself (the one designated to protect the interests of the employees) that the company may just concerned for their employees' health. Oh yeah, that must be it. No obfuscation or sugar coating here.

It is a shame the Reds' illustrious leader didn't do anything to make Thailand's appalling prisons a little more humane and comfortable during his five year reign.

According to one prison activist, the medical care budget per prisoner is 20 baht per YEAR. Regular prisoners (most of whom originated from Thaksin's voter demographic, since rich people don't go to jail) have to put up with far more serious ailments than an itchy nose, a runny eye, or a sore ringpiece. Spoilt brats.

"Mummy, Mummy, they were positively beastly to me in there, Mummy! I had the sniffles and nobody brought me Ovaltine or held my tissues for me!"

So 12 'high profile' (whatever that is supposed to mean) doctors say that a M16 was the weapon that fired the fatal bullet while 'a respected doctor' says it was an AK47 - and his opinion was based on looking at photographs! No credibility problem there then - well no more than a lot.

My mind would be comforted if Khunying Pornthip Rojanasunand M.D. had been involved in the investigation process. This formidable lady lives by a mantra of 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth'. In spite of not being part of the Establishment she has risen to the top of her tree and few, apart from the Police, would question her credibility.

For those not familiar with this ladies career, the following are extracts from Wikipedia.

Pornthip is presently Director of the Central Institute of Forensic Science, Ministry of Justice, in Bangkok. During the Thaksin Shinawatra government, she repeatedly publicly accused the police of abuses.[2] During Thaksin's anti-drug campaign in early 2003, during which more than 2,500 people were killed in what most non-government observers cited as extrajudicial killings, Pornthip claimed that some of these deaths were caused by police.[3] Other sources claim that some of the killings were carried out to silence those who knew which police officials were involved in the drug trade.

n the aftermath of the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake, Pornthip took charge of the effort to identify victims of the tsunami in the Phang Nga region.[7] She and her team were widely praised for their hard work and dedication,[citation needed] but on January 13, 2005 Police General Nopadol Somboonsab complained that the police's identification centre in Phuket should have charge of all identification operations. Pornthip attributed the intervention to Nopadol's supposed personal vendetta against her.[8] Nopadol was ultimately successful, and the Phang Nga operation was closed down on February 3, 2005.[9

She also justified the purchase and use of the gt2000 bomb/drug/explosive/troll/ogre/druid/harrypotter detectors..........Thereby ensuring her credibility.

Yes, unfortunately, whether she liked it or not, she has had to take sides to survive - and that means bodily as well as professionally. Khunyings tend to end up on the military side, oddly enough.

It is interesting to note that in the course of supporting the GT2000 (which I think she initially did in innocence or gullibility), she trusted it as providing evidence in the death of a young yellow shirt protester (I believe that it was a case of "sophisticated equipment" proving she wasn't carrying a bomb). After the revelation that the GT2000 was a scam, that case and several others should have been reviewed from square one. After years of building up credibility in the face of a corrupt police force, she undermined it all in one stroke. A woman of science believing in divining rods....

There is one other piece of legislation, which is very powerful in suppressing the freedom of expression and thus the freedom of the press: the Thai law about libel.

As far as I understand, the defendant in a libel case cannot argue that his words are the truth and thus justified. All that matters is how the plaintiff perceived the words.

Moreover it is an "ex officio" crime and is not limited to expressions made in Thailand. A newspaper article written and published abroad can also make the author liable to a libel lawsuit in Thailand. Nasty surprises may expect him when coming to Thailand for a holiday.

Yes, the libel law should be renamed the "Losing Face Law". If your statements cause the other guy to lose face, you go to the slammer. Makes sense in a society where not being publicly caught out as a fool or an incompetent or a thief is almost as important as life itself - and if someone is exposed as such, it is the fault of the guy who pointed out the elephant in the room, not of the incompetent thieving fool. "He made me blush! Crucify him!!"

The British Nationality Act 1981 was an Act of Parliament passed by the British Parliament concerning British nationality. It has been the basis of British nationality law since 1 January 1983.

The Act also modified the application of Jus soli in British nationality. Prior to the Act coming into force, any person born in Britain (with limited exceptions such as children of diplomats and enemy aliens) was entitled to British Citizenship. After the Act came into force, it was necessary for at least one parent of a United Kingdom-born child to be a British citizen or "settled" in the United Kingdom (a permanent resident).

So in simple language, if Abhisit was born before 1981 he is entitled to British citizenship, born after that and he is not.. But note the word "entitled", an entitlement is something one normally requests. I would suggest he did not exercise this right otherwise he would not have paid the International fees at university.

So it depends on whether he is "entitled" to British citizenship, and therefore has to take it up (which I assume he didn't), or he automatically gets British citizenship and therefore needs to renounce it (which is claimed that he did - or at least didn't need to based on the first point).

The problem with renouncing British citizenship is that you can make a declaration if you want, but the British govt doesn't have a formal renouncement process and will always give you a passport, so it is a bit meaningless to renounce it in the first place.

It would seem to me that if he chose to pay the foreign student fees, this would have been a deliberate move, since Thai laws are rather strict on multiple citizenship.

Add morons too, because they are BOUND to get caught... Pictures are taken at every ATM... classic not thinking past the moment syndrome. I want, I want, give me now, maybe I take now, I have now, good, good, tomorrow is another day...

Not so sure about BOUND to get caught, given that police brains work a similar way.

Hun Sen should know what he's talking about: wasn't he a member of the Khymer Rouge? Anyway, it's about time we had another war again perhaps it'll bring down the value of the Thai Baht!!!!!

Perhaps you may have intended the request for war as a humorous bit of sarcasm. Sadly, it falls flat and is in very poor taste. Do you really want to have a war which would see a return to kids being blown to bits or coming back with missing limbs? Do you not understand that there would be a significant impact upon the civilian population and the environment in a war zone? Is a 10% devaluation of the baht worth the misery that a war would bring? Do you realize that a war with Cambodia would shutdown of a large part of tourism. What of the tourists and other civilians that would be trapped? Are you going to take care of them?

How about this option? I ask the Thai military to explode some ordinance in close proximity to you, not enough to kill you, but sizeable enough to maim you, perhaps blindness or a loss of a leg or arm, and I give you 1000 baht. The 1000 baht will represent your gain from the currency fluctuations and the ordinance discharge will be a sharing of the joys of war. Is that ok?

I think it is pretty obvious to anyone over the age of ten that it was sarcasm, so let a little air out of your windbag and take it as he intended it. Or someone could respond to your suggestion as being in poor taste - do you really want to see that poster maimed? Would you really give him 1,000 baht to teach him a lesson?

We all know war is misery, that this situation is insane and little more than a political tool. But thanks for filling us all in, wise man.

Breath-taking, the number of foreigners who think it is their right to inhabit someone else's country on their terms.

Come to the USA and REALLY have your breath 'abated'! Millions (12 to 20?) of illegals who would laugh at the notion of a visa and equally-laughable immigration enforcement, anchor babies, impractical deportation, high levels of imprisoned illegals ... need I go on?

...people picking fruit that would otherwise rot on the vines...

Is it just me or does anyone else suspect that the forum contributors who get all sanctimonious about law and order and being a taught a lesson by spending a few days in one of the world's worst prisons have only been here for less than a year? [When did Thailand start attracting such long-term arch conservatives?]

And has anyone else noticed that the working pedos who got caught just happened to have work permits? (And no, getting caught had nothing to do with the "legitimacy" of their visa.)

This guy is hilarious. If the Thai government is so worried about the criminals they might consider the police, the businesses, and especially the motorcycle shops. That would pretty much fill up their prisons.

,if they want to kick out their tourists. Nothing we can do about it .

They don't. They want people to have the correct visas, as to be regulated properly. Too many paedos and criminals working illegally just to stay here and not using the correct visa procedures and working/teaching on Tourist Visas.

The reigns should be tightened. You either qualify to work/live here, or you don't. Questionable people living/working here on tourist visas from neighbouring countries should be reined in, and if they don't meet the requirements to live/work here legally, they should be shipped out, with a short stay in a prison cell to teach them some respect for another country's visa laws.

Tourists don't need 4 Tourist visas.

Good to see them cracking down on people illegally abusing the system.

Should really make it a limit of 2, not 3. Or even a limit of one in neighbouring countries.

Well, aren't you the grumpy old spoilsport? But honestly, "illegally abusing the system"? "Cracking down" ? This is the equivalent of arresting jaywalkers while a massacre is allowed to continue across the road.

Right. Sure. They join up with the red shirts. They topple the government.

AND THEN WHAT?

and then they start to fight each other . or agree on some lunatic to govern the country (but i doubt it)

This is why i was saying that possibly military government could be the solution not to allow the 2 lunatics to ruin the country totally.

Yeah, the military government did such a fine job last time.

I don't see why a pedophile ever gets out of prison, at all.

Because there are other ways of moderating their behaviour? And by your rationale, why keep them in prison wasting taxpayers money? Why not put him up against the wall and shoot him?

And what's the jail term for growing hemp? I think it's 5 years - for growing a highly useful plant which is legal in Canada, China, Australia and many other countries worldwide - and can't get you stoned, no matter how much you smoke.

So what you're trying to say: There shouldn't be jail for people who smoke pot, right?

Moreover people here ( Thais as foreigners ) should tell cops if there's a suspicious person doing weird things with kids.

But most people avoid to contact cops..too many problems, reports and and and....:jap:

Agree on all three counts

Tourists who can not afford a hotel should not be in Phuket or Thailand full stop.

Rather then building housing for those who can not afford it, they should spend this money on the local kids and housing for the locals living in sheds made out of advertising boards.

So if someone gets robbed and are stuck without money, they should not be in Thailand anymore?

He will be black listed and deported when he has done his time. With big PERSONA NON GRATA in his passport.

What makes you so certain of that? Persona non grata status has to be signed off by the minister and he is far too busy to bother...

I have covered the elephant polo story a couple of times for various publications and these guys don't have all their facts straight. They obviously don;t understand elephants or their situation in Thailand either. At the elephant polo in Thailand, they don't have a "stable" of elephants, because the game, in spite of what AFP (and some PETA woman who appears to know nothing about it) may say, is not "popular", it is played for charity once a year. (In Nepal they might play more frequently, so can't speak for that). The charity is an elephant sanctuary up north (and a legit one) run by an offshoot of the Anantara resort, owned by one of Bill Heinecke's companies.

The elephants they use are the ones that are already wandering about with bugger all to do. They don;t steal them from their mothers to make them play polo. The spikes that they use don't torture the elephant, they don't even penetrate the skin. When they play polo, they are hardly forced to do so. They love it and it is evident when you watch a match. They go tearing after the ball without their mahout even having to prompt them. Elephants are social, and love group activities - they are also very intelligent, and the younger ones sometimes pick up the ball and throw it into the net with their trunks (these goals don't count) so they understand the object of the game. If they didn't want to play the game, it would be extremely difficult to get them to do so. They only play for ten minutes and then the

It is not cruel - at least not in Thailand - and then they change elephants for the next chukka. The elephants who were playing are hosed down, given water to drink and fed rice balls with molasses.

It is just a typical wire story, gathered together by telephone by someone who hasn't witnessed any of it first hand, and depends only on a PETA spokesperson and the folks from Guinness. They didn't bother to contact the elephant polo association to get their side of it, so it is unbalanced conjecture.

I think this was a grand move by Guinness, even if a token gesture. And as for horses vs. elephants, the treatment the two receive is vastly different for this sport. Elephants have the unique problem that they are more then likely owned by people who don't know how to care for domesticated or wild animals, or don't have the financial means to do them justice. I am sure the stables owned by Pablo Wilson operate much differently then any elephant polo stable. The ones here in Nepal are a disgrace.

www.animalnepal.org

A PETA spokeswoman told AFP that the decision "reflects the public consensus that the archaic use of live animals for human entertainment should remain in the pages of record book history"

However, it's ok for other polo forms, because, while elephants are "live animals", horses are not...

The most durable polo player is Pablo Moreno Wilson (Chile) (b. 15 October 1924), who has been playing polo regularly for over 62 years.

Guinness World Records

They are BURMESE so a threat to national security.. Don't you know anything.. They did it before so they will do it again....invade that is... remember Ayythuya,,,,,,

A more recent example might be when Burmese invaded a hospital in Ratchaburi and held the patients hostage in 2000.

They were not Burmese, they were Karen. And the story is not nearly so simple as you make it out to be- it is a tough topic to cover in a single line.

The Karen came to the hospital by public bus, went in and asked for some Doctors to come with them to their village on the other side of the border. They were armed but they were not menacing or holding anyone hostage. They were desperate because the Burmese army had just conducted one of their infamous vicious raids on their village, shooting, raping and burning in accordance with the Burmese army intimidation handbook. Many people were badly wounded (and killed) and the Karen were seeking medical care. Admittedly a bit of a misguided way of going about it, but they didn't see any alternatives.

At the time, the media said that they held patients hostage, but patients interviewed by investigative journalists (ones who got another version of the story besides that of the military) said they were not held hostage, guns were not pointed at them. The doctors and nurses concurred that they didn't feel under threat from these people.

The Thai army arrived, the Karen surrendered. Then the soldiers took the Karen into a room, made them strip off and executed them with bullets to the back of the head. Doctors at the hospital also said that shooting the Karen was far from necessary - none of it was done in self defense - it was straight up murder.

After that bit of fun, these animals proudly displayed their kills, wrapped in sheets and lined up like cord wood outside the hospital (a place where people are supposed to be healed, not slaughtered)... And oh how the mainstream media loved it - the army were heroes. Apparently in ABAC polls a majority of Thais feel that summary executions - completely skipping any judicial process - are just fine and dandy for alleged drug dealers and anyone from the other side of the Burmese border. In actuality, the Thai military just help finish the job that the Burmese Army started.

Off topic a bit, but it is a good example of how some Thais seem to feel it is perfectly okay to treat anyone from Burma like garbage.

these guys are not mafia,, mafia do not do things like that, these are just idiots getting off on beating a defensive woman,, calling these guys mafia will only give a boost to there egos.

six men against one women, what a bunch of cowards. Says it all about the Thai mafia really.

Sorry, what sort of things do the mafia do? Are you suggesting the Thai mafia are too honourable to do such a thing? Here on a short holiday, are you?

Going back many years I can remember when the first Indian immigrants arrived in England.

At first the very few that lived mostly in the big cities including London were mainly Indian restaurant owners and workers and was considered somewhat of a novelty and the native white population tolerated them and treated these people with respect.

Then during the 1970s the British government relaxed it`s policies on Immigration and suddenly brown people from all over South Asia and many from Uganda began immigrating to England in droves.

Then everything changed, the unions called for strikes fearing the loss of jobs to Asians and there was frequent and violent attacks on Asians including actual riots in many parts of the country.

My point is that I don`t believe the permitting of too many people of a different race and culture into a country is a good thing. It has been proven that multiculturalism doesn't work and will lead to conflicts.

During my time here in Thailand I am seeing more and more farangs even in the most remote areas and as I see the situation, this can only cause problems for the farangs already living here, the same as what happened in the United Kingdom 40 years ago.

I quite agree with you, I remember it all too well and the warnings a certain man gave starting in the late fifties and into the sixties. The only difference here though is that not many of us will be taking jobs away from locals and more likely to provide jobs and we certainly wont get rich on the local social security system which of course is a bone of contention in modern times U.K. and I fear unless the Government get a handle on it the backlash will not be pleasant. I do not think it will happen here as for the most part we provide and supply, we do not take. (says he hopefully!)

Who was the "certain man"? Couldn't have been Hitler - he was dead by then.

My point is that I don`t believe the permitting of too many people of a different race and culture into a country is a good thing. It has been proven that multiculturalism doesn't work and will lead to conflicts.

During my time here in Thailand I am seeing more and more farangs even in the most remote areas and as I see the situation, this can only cause problems for the farangs already living here, the same as what happened in the United Kingdom 40 years ago.

Maybe you'd better leave then and help reduce the pressure...

"It has been proven that multiculturalism doesn’t work and will lead to conflicts." Maybe in the UK, but Canada is an example of a peaceful multicultural society. Yeah, there were growing pains in the 70s as in Britain - though Canadians, being a somewhat less warlike people than the Brits, we didn't have fully-fledged riots - mostly harassment and social ostracism. But it all simmered down after afew years when the ever-tolerant white people slowly realised that they weren't being invaded by hordes of apes who intended to take over their country.

So what proof can you show that multiculturalism "doesn't work"? Is that based on any sort of relevant study, or is it just something you pulled out the hat based on your own observations?