jitenshaman

Gives a real meaning to the film: No Country for Old Men!

Chiang Mai has some of the most reasonable and honest taxi/transport services in Thailand, this complainer obviously hasn't been to Samui or Phuket! Here's the situation;

the transport in Chiang Mai is dominated by red songteaws, about 3,000 of them (for a population of 300,000!) which are organised by a well establish Sri-Lanna Taxi Association (effectively an untouchable mafia), they are a traffic nuisance but always available, cheap, honest, and will take you anywhere in the city for under 50 baht, that's what this tourist should bave used.

Then there are tuktuks lurking in tourist areas, offering shorter rides for about 60-100 baht, not a rip off but not the cheapest. They are useful at night or outside tourist sites.

The metered taxis were only introduced a few years ago and generally operate from the airport or outside key points like Airport Plaza. Since they aren't allowed (by the taxi mafia) to trawl the streets, they generally only survive by agreeing set fees (since they can't pick up someone off the street for the return journey), but generally don't overcharge severely like some of the islands. They are under the semi supervision of the taxi association.

Then there is a bus service, introduced a few years back after much haggling between the mayor and the taxi mafia, but they are confined to set routes and the city council has to pay the taxi mafia a compensation fee to keep the songteaws off those routes.

Best thing to do in Chiang Mai is rent a scooter!

yes, the drivers in CM obviously way way better than down south, but i still wouldn't call them honest. The fare to go anywhere within the city is 15 baht, that is what I pay every time I get into a songthaew in CM. I usually catch the songthaews from around Worarot Market, as the ones that are in motion especially around the moat always ask for more. If they ask for 20, i just wait for another, because nobody is paying 20 except for tourists. The other day, i went all the way to Bo Sang Umbrella market...the white songthaew drivers are more apt to charge the correct price, which is 15 baht to go 9 km, way past the ring road, way out of town...so this nonsense that the red songthaews cant make ends meet because of the price of petrol blah blah blah blah blah is nonsense. The price is 15 baht, period. I do find CM tuk tuk drivers far easier going than southerners. I was with 3 others and we wanted to do a short jaunt from the old town to the Worarot market. The guy asked for 100, we told him we'd just take a songthaew for 15 each, and he immediately dropped to 60. Then again, if you dont speak Thai, you will pay more. Several times in red songthaews, after asking the driver, "15 baht, right?", i have seen him pick up farangs and tell them 20 or 30.

dam_n! its back to using plastic food bags then........

and Tesco bags to boot! Lucky it isn't the US, or Tesco would be getting hit with endless lawsuits.

I read before that this Pattaya competition was only open to married couples as Thai people are very conservative and frown on public displays of affection.

TheWalkingMan

That's true, we wouldn't want to see any displays of affection along Walking Street, God forbid!

I saw this on TV a few months ago. Tourists are allowed to walk among the tigers. IMHO, this is a crazy thing to do. But, apparently, lots of people do it. I've had several friends who have been bitten/attacked by their own pet dogs. These cats are a bit more dangerous...and not pets for sure...

This place has been in the news quite a bit over the past year or two. It initially got good reports, but there have been many accusations of druggings and mistreatment (of the tigers), not to mention that the place now smacks of "making a fast baht." Not surprised other incidences like this haven't happened, and am sure more will occur given the nature of the enterprise.

I' d assume it was the reporter who wrote it up to appear as such drivel. I have also cycled around the world, and had the experience of cycling through both El Paso as well as through Alabama, and as a Caucasian American, was treated wonderfully by Hispanic Americans and Black Americans. I also didn't have any Aussies wanting to fight me outside of my tent. Maybe I just hit a lucky streak.

I'm not really sure what to make of the stat....so, China is at 51, Cambodia is at 46, and yes, the US is quite ahead of Thailand in terms of unequal distribution of wealth coming in at #39....and then again, all of these figures are based on dates that are out of date?? http://www.photius.com/rankings/economy/distribution_of_family_income_gini_index_2010_0.html

it doesn't have to be time consuming or expensive. I just came back from Perth...booked far in advance, so was able to get a flight on Air Asia (from KL) for 2500 baht!! And return on Tiger to Singapore for 5000 baht. Non O's in Perth are a joy to obtain. You do now need a photocopy of a Thai person's ID card (supposedly the "friend" that you want to visit), but that is it...visa can be issued in about 2 hours if requested beforehand. If you factor in that you wont require a visa for 15 more months (compared to doing runs in the region for tourist visas), you actually save on time and money. As to why the visa cant be obtained in the region, who knows what goes on behind the scenes. Remember when Penang used to be THE choice for visa runs, and then all of the sudden you couldn't even get a visa in Penang, whereas Vientiane was giving double entries with no questions asked Who knows what rule will come next and which place will become hot/not

I must inform you that the charges you are talking about is used by all countries almost throughout thr world. And as somebody said, here in tThailand, we can afford it, I think.

Glegolo

let's see, should i make a list of the countries I have traveled to in the past few years? China, India, Laos, Vietnam, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Australia, South Africa, Namibia, Madagascar, Egypt, Jordan, Israel....let's see in EVERY one of those countries, I put my ATM card in the machine in 99% of the banks, and I get money out with no charge no commission. Now my bank at home does charge me a fee for using the card and making a transaction, but that is my bank. When I put my ATM card into 99.9% of the banks in Thailand, I am charged a fee by my home bank, AND the 150 baht fee by the Thai bank for using the ATM with the international card. So Thailand is one of the ONLY countries in the world that does this. And yes, surely most people who have bank accounts and ATM's are not going to starve if they have to pay 150 baht, but that is completely besides the point. Why dont grocery shops start tacking on 150 baht surcharge to farang shoppers, why doesn't the BTS charge farangs an extra 150 baht on their tickets, why dont movie theatres tack on 150 baht, after all, we can all afford it right. The point is not afford or not afford, the point is that it is a policy not done anywhere else in the world with few options and is basically a greedy way to rip folks off even more.

Sinsod is a scam ... "Farang no money"

If you think sinsod is only payable by farang men then you may have missed something.

It's not some kind of tradition put on to acquire more money out of farangs...

Another way of looking at this:

We pay for my wife's sister to go to uni, we paid for her to study over seas, i pay her mobile phone bills and her school texts etc. This isn't my responsibility because I'm white. It's my responsibility because we are the eldest siblings in the family.

When my wife's parents pass away and move on then the family houses, land and money etc will also become ours to manage. More recently; the deposit on my newest car was gifted by my wife's family

Obviously in poorer families the pre-payment of sinsod may out way the advantages of inheritance witnessed in wealthier families; but i think you'll find it comes from the same original concepts of family unity etc.

If the eldest siblings have responsibility than why do i see so many girls who are the youngest playing caretaker, in many many situations the eldest do not help. Secondly, in many many Thai cases, the guys somewhat get the sin sot back in the form of property (house bought by parents, et al)...whereas that will not be the case for a farang because he cannot own the property.

Your assessments about the tradition are correct, but unfortunately, many many farang are used when it comes to sin sod.

tourists are never in any danger in Phuket, except of course if they run into a belligerent tuk tuk driver or jet ski operator.

'Is it OK to shoot foreigners and journalists?'

May 22, 2010

The sniper and his comrade are like two surgeons operating with great precision. Ahead of the bunker, Rama IV Road, normally a major arterial road, is empty. The soldiers are becoming agitated by the return gunfire and exploding M79s, and send back a rain of bullets at the Red Shirts.

There is a lull in the fire, and in a twist of reality, one of the soldiers yells across the road to an officer in an adjacent bunker: ''Is it OK to shoot foreigners and journalists?''

I am mortified. There is a pause before the answer is screamed back from the adjacent bunker: ''No''.

I crane my head around a cement wall that adjoins the bunker and I can see foreign photojournalists in the distance. I call a colleague on my mobile phone and ask where she is. It is close to where the sniper is aiming. I say quietly: ''I am with army snipers and I think you are in their sights, get the f--- out of there, move to the side. I would go down the side street now, they are going to shoot!''

His finger squeezes again - it is excruciatingly slow - and his deadly payload is delivered again but she has moved out of the line of fire.

Well, Jack can certainly write a riveting story. You think he speaks enough Thai to have actually understood what the soldiers were saying or could that have been a bit of literary license?

I do wonder why the storey was titled to be about shooting journalists rather then the Army fighting armed protestors:

The Red Shirts are about 200 metres up the road. They pop out of the side street and hurl one of their primitive improvised devices or launch one of their homemade rockets (fire crackers) that explode far short of the bunker I am in. I can't help thinking that the army is replying with heavy-handed and disproportionate force. But then I hear the sickening whirl of incoming high-velocity bullets, coming close to the bunker, followed by the thump of M79 grenades.

Is making the question about shooting journalist and foreigners the main thrust of storey rather then the confirmation that the Army was under attack by more then "primitive improvised devices or launch one of their homemade rockets " a bias or just simple sensationalism?

TH

TH, not only is your assessment of this spot on, but people need to start investigating their media reports a lot more thoroughly. The reporter writes "I am in a Thai army bunker," meaning he has obviously been allowed in or brought along by the Thai army to give reports, presumably according to the army, that yes, there really is a threat out there and that they are not taking out journalists or innocent bystanders. I would have some fairly sincere doubts about a soldier yelling that across the road, with him understanding it in Thai, not to mention the fact of his yelling that with a farang sitting next to him....my guess is if it really happened, the soldier was wondering if it was okay to still shoot at the perpetrators with grenades and rockets when you could also see farang press reporters near them..but again, i dont believe it....going further with this, I proceeded to google the reporter's name...only one comes up, a freelance Australian photojournalist who lives in Bangkok. When you go to his website, there are no links to articles, stories, etc (maybe some similar journalism from the Sarajevo conflict he mentioned), just offers for a photography course and a portfolio of photos for sale that have no link whatsoever to the type of journalism displayed here. So in terms of a well written report on the ground fronting the Sydney Herald, I think a bit more credibility is needed here.

just to update that last post....the reporter does have some good credentials and conflict stuff on his website, my bad for it not coming up when i first checked it....but I still think the story is slanted.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/is-it-ok-to-sh...00521-w1ur.html

'Is it OK to shoot foreigners and journalists?'

May 22, 2010

The sniper and his comrade are like two surgeons operating with great precision. Ahead of the bunker, Rama IV Road, normally a major arterial road, is empty. The soldiers are becoming agitated by the return gunfire and exploding M79s, and send back a rain of bullets at the Red Shirts.

There is a lull in the fire, and in a twist of reality, one of the soldiers yells across the road to an officer in an adjacent bunker: ''Is it OK to shoot foreigners and journalists?''

I am mortified. There is a pause before the answer is screamed back from the adjacent bunker: ''No''.

I crane my head around a cement wall that adjoins the bunker and I can see foreign photojournalists in the distance. I call a colleague on my mobile phone and ask where she is. It is close to where the sniper is aiming. I say quietly: ''I am with army snipers and I think you are in their sights, get the f--- out of there, move to the side. I would go down the side street now, they are going to shoot!''

His finger squeezes again - it is excruciatingly slow - and his deadly payload is delivered again but she has moved out of the line of fire.

Well, Jack can certainly write a riveting story. You think he speaks enough Thai to have actually understood what the soldiers were saying or could that have been a bit of literary license?

I do wonder why the storey was titled to be about shooting journalists rather then the Army fighting armed protestors:

The Red Shirts are about 200 metres up the road. They pop out of the side street and hurl one of their primitive improvised devices or launch one of their homemade rockets (fire crackers) that explode far short of the bunker I am in. I can't help thinking that the army is replying with heavy-handed and disproportionate force. But then I hear the sickening whirl of incoming high-velocity bullets, coming close to the bunker, followed by the thump of M79 grenades.

Is making the question about shooting journalist and foreigners the main thrust of storey rather then the confirmation that the Army was under attack by more then "primitive improvised devices or launch one of their homemade rockets " a bias or just simple sensationalism?

TH

TH, not only is your assessment of this spot on, but people need to start investigating their media reports a lot more thoroughly. The reporter writes "I am in a Thai army bunker," meaning he has obviously been allowed in or brought along by the Thai army to give reports, presumably according to the army, that yes, there really is a threat out there and that they are not taking out journalists or innocent bystanders. I would have some fairly sincere doubts about a soldier yelling that across the road, with him understanding it in Thai, not to mention the fact of his yelling that with a farang sitting next to him....my guess is if it really happened, the soldier was wondering if it was okay to still shoot at the perpetrators with grenades and rockets when you could also see farang press reporters near them..but again, i dont believe it....going further with this, I proceeded to google the reporter's name...only one comes up, a freelance Australian photojournalist who lives in Bangkok. When you go to his website, there are no links to articles, stories, etc (maybe some similar journalism from the Sarajevo conflict he mentioned), just offers for a photography course and a portfolio of photos for sale that have no link whatsoever to the type of journalism displayed here. So in terms of a well written report on the ground fronting the Sydney Herald, I think a bit more credibility is needed here.

- Frustrated, homeless and bitterly disappointed -- this is the reality for "Red Shirt" Parichart Chanmanee as she returns to her northern hometown after two months of protesting in Bangkok.

The single mother-of-two made the long journey back by bus on Thursday after a deadly military crackdown forced the anti-government movement's leaders to surrender, sparking looting and major arson attacks by hardcore protestors.

As she came home angered by the protest's failure to bring about the government's downfall, the 52-year-old faced another blow: she was homeless, with her belongings thrown out for failing to pay rent while she was away.

Thrown out by whom, obviously not by the rich Bangkok people, must have been her rural Red land owners.

most of the poor farmers and others, the ones i assumed were at the rally, tend to have family homes (basic, but still theirs) as opposed to paying rent upcountry. I assume this woman just wanted democracy so much, she up and quit her job, went to rally for several months in Bangkok for no payment whatsoever, and pretty much just forgot about the fact that rent would be do each month? And of course her most likely red shirt supportive landlord rather than knowing that she was out there furthering the cause for democracy, decided to throw her out for not paying rent....this reeks of something far stronger than pla ra!

Does anybody know why these targets were chosen?

For instance, they could have gone for Gaysorn, Amarin and Siam Paragon. Neither was targeted.

Why did they choose the two cinemas and Central World? Also, why Center One? Is that the big mall where everybody goes to buy clothes with the McDonalds on the ground floor?

The targets seem an odd choice to me.

.... I see somebody else has asked the same questions.

I still also think that my theory that the arsons were allowed to take place in order to clearly paint the UDD as the villains is plausible. Remember that the US government used the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center as a prelude and justification to their war in Iraq (even though they could not find any link between Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein).

Possibly some of the attacks were not connected with the UDD at all; criminals may have simply taken the opportunity to break into stores and enter and steal.

I went down there yesterday...while places like Gaysorn were not targeted, it does have plenty of bullet holes and smashed glass as a by product of the fighting, but what seems very very strange is that Siam Paragon, while the entire side of the street opposite it has been gutted, does not have one scratch, one blemish on it...how is that possible? You'd think in the middle of a massive riot and firefight that something would have been damaged.

for progress in Thai films.

And lets hope this one can be shown at the cinemas in Thailand unlike the directors previous movie "Syndromes and a Century" which was banned by the Thai Censorship Board in 2007.

we also now have a few less theatres where the film can be screened.

Articles like this are written by those who don't really understand the basics of good journalism. A lot of Thais live in a fantasy world where what you see on television represents an absolute truth. All CNN, BBC and other news organisations did is report from the ground and present both sides of the argument. Because this balanced approach conflicts with simplistic absolute truth of good guys vs terrorists presented by the Thai media, a lot of Thais believe "The Truth" can be found on their little Thai television programmes and "Lies" is found on the "foreigner television".

actually, as a Bangkok resident, Al Jazeera aside, I thought the Nation was far more credible and at least giving reports with some trace of reality compared to most of the overseas networks...to say that one is reporting from the ground and that the protesters had no weapons and were just sitting peacefully while the big bad military dictatorship went in and slaughtered them makes me wonder where exactly that ground was? Perhaps a bar stool somewhere in the top of a high end hotel?

Doesn't matter what you call it, it's what they call it. Thailand is far from the only country in the world that takes a dim view of foreigners attempting to live in the country posing as a visitor.

yet but Thailand is one of the few countries not having a sensible policy for foreigners attempting to live in the country and not pose as visitors. Some folks do not need to work here and are not yet 50 and yet in the average consulate/embassy are not able to obtain O's or B's.

you are right in all your points, BUT...it does say on the entry stamp up until when the entry stay is valid until. I have a few Santa type friends who make this mistake all the time and it ends up hurting them.

That explains things then. Its all the Fault of that Idoit Brit. Surely there was Cambodians involved too. Everythings good.

How dare you accuse the Cambodians. It was a Burmese.

Well the video is pretty straightforward. Those that still support this "peaceful demonstration" are either weak minded and don't fully grasp the violent leaders manipulating the people or are spouting off BS rhetoric and fully support the terrorist leaders behind the red shirt movement. Please do not reply unless you have watched the video. Then, please comment on how the speakers who fomented the burning and destruction of these Thai properties, hospital and private homes are acting as anything other than armed insurrectionists. Bet you can't do that.

actually there is something far worse than having to listen to these <deleted> froth at the mouth. It is having to listen to Thaksin sing about 2/3 of the way through the video!

Just saw a report on Al Jazeera talking about a major red leader there saying the new red movement will be like south Thailand's terrorism, with random attacks on innocent people in places like malls. It seems credible. How long before the USA and Europe get on board with the Thai government to root out these TERRORISTS? You think tourism is dead now, wait until they actually follow through on killing masses of civilians and tourists with a random bomb. Shame on the reds if they copy the southern Muslim radicals. Shame on them for even THREATENING this. That in itself is a soft form of terrorism. There are peaceful avenues for change possible in Thailand, now more than ever. Where is the regard for human life?

Just to clear up one thing - and not defending what is going on in the south at all, but - i do not know of one foreigner that has been killed down there by the separatists / mafia. I seem to remember one being injured in an explosion outside a Tesco a few years ago. Terror attacks that included foreigners would be a death blow to Thailand, but that is not what's been happening down south.

Based on the desperation of Thaksin and his cohorts, bombings in Bangkok would not surprise me.

your statement was correct up until a few years ago, when several bombs went off in Hat Yai, including one in front of a pub popular with foreigners and a young man (American or Canadian, can't remember) was killed. That was the first time the violence had come into contact with the tourism or expat sector....then again, anytime you have bombs going off in public places, anyone becomes at risk.

This is probably far from over as the core of the problem was not resolved. The only thing that happened was the gov cleared the reds out of Bangkok in what was the most violent clash in Thailand's history, yet not a single issue the reds were there for was addressed.

The only hope there is, will be if the reds wake up and see the movement as the sham it is. They are only pawns in a game of power hungry men. Having said that, Thaksin did more for Issan than anyone ever has so it will be very difficult to convince any of them otherwise.

Without even digging you see statements like, "7 years imprisonment for anyone caught burning a tire." While the yellows closed the airport and nothing happened to them. This is the very fuel that may start the fire again.

It's not so black and white. That Thaksin has done more for them is an unfair sentiment as well. He was PM for 5 years, and it's not his programs that people love him for, it's his cash handouts that many are addicted and dependent on. Abhisit has not at all been ignoring the rural parts of the country, but at the same time, he came to power during a global economic crisis and a local political crisis. He has not even been given a chance despite ALREADY having made efforts to change things upcountry. If he were given a full term he could have easily managed some good, long term changes that would bring many of the proper solutions on track.

Giving each village a million baht is not going to do jack shit to solve any real problems these people face. The dilemma is, though, that humans are much more keen on instant gratification than they are future gratification. Besides, what was done with the millions of baht given to villages? Built new schools? Infrastructure? Road improvement? Nope. Pick up trucks, mobile phones, booze and gambling. NICE. This country's problems are far from solvable by just 'letting the reds vote and win'. Someone needs to forcibly inject the northern part of the country with education, jobs and long term reforms because they don't even want that themselves.

My 2 cents.

your 2 cents is right on, unfortunately, i dont see the NE/reds ever liking Abhisit no matter what he does for them, he is too ingrained as a monster right now...and yes, instant gratification rules. I mean imagine all the young ladies going back to their village homes and saying, "I met a farang, he isn't going to buy me a house or get you a pickup truck, but he is going to pay for me to get an education."

I'm saying I think the numbers they are considering to be 'tourism related' must be including jobs that aren't really tourism based, but that have some tourists as customers. Like all the waiters at an MK restaurant in MBK, even if 90% of the customers are Thai. I don't think 4 million people are employed at beach resorts, Khao San Road, Suhkumvit, etc.

then again, probably 90% of the jobs in Phuket, Samui, and Pattaya are tourist related or dependent. Might be easier to figure out if there were some kind of numbers for the regular office sector jobs, businesses in Bangkok and elsewhere basically for Thais, plus all the rural farming etc work numbers, and then subtract from there...it's kind of like that figure that gets floated from time to time that 10% of the female population has served in the entertainment industry at one time or another. Hard to pinpoint, and a lot of gray areas.

Amsterdam says he was with the leaders in their compound drafting a platform that contains pledges to avoid violence and to negotiate unconditionally. (Amsterdam's personal blog chronicles some of his other experiences on the ground in Bangkok, as does this op-ed he wrote about the Red Shirts for The Australian.)

Somehow it seems that the nonviolence pledge had a burn everything to the ground clause substituted. But I am sure Mr. Amsterdam knows nothing about that, maybe there was just an error made in translation.