Jump to content

Tiger Temple to sue 'National Geographic' over damning report


webfact

Recommended Posts

'Tiger Temple' to Sue NatGeo Over Damning Report
By Teeranai Charuvastra
Staff Reporter

14537245601453724715l.jpg
Monks and volunteers block government vehicles in April 2015 from leaving a commercial wildlife center operating as a temple in Kanchanaburi province.

KANCHANABURI — Days after National Geographic published an article accusing the infamous Tiger Temple in western Thailand of trafficking some of its 147 tigers, a lawyer for the temple announced that he’s preparing a libel suit against the news agency.

Responding to the Jan. 21 article, "Tiger Temple Accused of Supplying Black Market,” the temple spokesman admitted Monday his organization is breaking the law by keeping its tigers there but said the article was wrong to assert that money changed hands with a Laotian breeder, as alleged in the report.

“We are about to press charges. I’ve already read the article,” lawyer Saiyood Pengboonchoo said on behalf of the temple, which is formally known as Wat Pha Luang Ta Bua Yanasampanno in an interview with Khaosod English today.

As to the latest effort by wildlife officials to remove the temple’s tigers, most recently delayed to today, Saiyood said the temple did not feel the tigers were ready to go.

According to National Geographic, the Tiger Temple authorized a trade of tigers with a commercial breeder in Laos in 2004. The article went on to note that cross-border commerce in live tigers is outlawed under CITES, an international treaty on wild animals to which Thailand is a signatory.

Full story: http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1453724560&typecate=06&section=

kse.png
-- Khaosod English 2016-01-26

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I wouldn't be surprised if after much carry on that this just fades into nothing and the case dropped due to incontrovertible evidence and face saving.

Many people think that this COMMERCIAL operation acting as a temple should have been shut down years ago, or better yet NEVER been allowed to operate in the first place............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't care about the law when it come to returning the Tigers....

But as soon as someone write a word criticizing them...... lets get the law to sue them...

remind you of something? yeah.... kindergarten !

and it is all in the name of Buddhism

TIT

wai2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All bluster. There will be no case, no charges. National Geographic is way too big a target and is not a Thai entity.

This is simply a denial of the facts by going on the offensive. (since the facts cannot be denied)

Alternatively you could call it "shoot the messenger".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'' ...the temple spokesman admitted Monday his organization is breaking the law by keeping its tigers there but said the article was wrong to assert that money changed hands with a Laotian breeder , as alleged in the report.''

So they got the Nationality wrong :rolleyes: Not denying that money changed hands though...probably a Thai breeder -_-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well hardly a surprise .,,, BUT there are a lot of factors to weigh up.....

Firstly one would assume the Nat Geo are prepared for this

Secondly what about CEE4Life who actually prepared the report? Will the temple go after them too?

It seems that under Thai law they concentrate not so much on the veracity of the allegations so much as whether or not they have caused damages - this is of course pretty indisputable....so it’s not so much did they pay for the tiger as how much this revelation has damaged the temple’s reputation.

The last time the temple tried to sue WFFT Edwin Wiek, they withdrew the action. One reason for this may well have been the fear of the inevitable adverse publicity and revelations such an action would bring.

It seems to me that the chances of the temple actually winning any legal action are quite good, given the state of Thai law and their connections, but can they survive the publicity generated by taking action against what is just about the biggest international publication in the world?

The magazine might be banned in Thailand but it will still be available worldwide where the temples customers come from.

We’ve already seen how irascible the abbot can be (the video of bird confiscation) but will he pursue this action? He needs to weigh the odds.

It might be good to have the whole thing aired in court though?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All bluster. There will be no case, no charges. National Geographic is way too big a target and is not a Thai entity.

This is simply a denial of the facts by going on the offensive. (since the facts cannot be denied)

Alternatively you could call it "shoot the messenger".

Just republishing the story can, potentially, get you in trouble also. Welcome to Thailand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only in Thailand could this happen.

We have been breaking the law for years. We are only interested( like 99.9999% of thais) in money.

How dare you tell the world the truth about what we are doing, tut, tut, tut.

Can you imagine any court ( other than in Thailand) siding with the temple????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Between the Temple and Nat Geo, which of the 2 do you think is more credible? Would someone please make a poll on this PLEASE? My reply might, however might be misconstrued as defamation so there you have it.

I think my vote would go to NG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Between the Temple and Nat Geo, which of the 2 do you think is more credible? Would someone please make a poll on this PLEASE? My reply might, however might be misconstrued as defamation so there you have it.

If you think this boils down to credibility, then you are being incredibly naive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any legal action won't be a simple action between a monk and an international magazine.

It is more likely a challenge by a magazine against the reputation of a sizeable chunk of the country's elite...people who are part of the nation's legislative, executive and JUDICIARY..............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.








×
×
  • Create New...