metisdead Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Inflammatory posts and replies have been removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orac Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 I haven't seen the NG article but like other posters here I tend to think NG got it right. NG is not just any magazine or reporting tabloid it's major (popular) scientific organisation that has to get 'it right'. One can find many cd's in Thai shops (and in schools) on various topics which report the current understanding/research. Its research and reporting belong to the National Geographic Society and print in many languages and have been outspoken on many subjects. I am not saying that they don't make mistakes but I doubt very much that this article is one of them. Is that still true - i thought the National Geographic Society was now a separate entity to the NG tv channels and magazine which come control and ownership of Rupert Murdochs Fox Media group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howiehotspur Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 I visited that temple years and years ago when they only had two tigers.... me too , there were only 4 when I was there ... I throughly enjoyed it too .. Took about 30 great pics with them .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balance Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 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? It seems that Thai law around libel and slander has nothing to do with whether or not the person "slandered" or libeled did the things said or written about them. Instead, it appears to be whether or not face was lost or they were shown in "bad light," or it was an affront to Thainess. \ Does anyone know if a libel case has ever been lost at trial due to the defendant proving that the things written about were true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TKDfella Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 I haven't seen the NG article but like other posters here I tend to think NG got it right. NG is not just any magazine or reporting tabloid it's major (popular) scientific organisation that has to get 'it right'. One can find many cd's in Thai shops (and in schools) on various topics which report the current understanding/research. Its research and reporting belong to the National Geographic Society and print in many languages and have been outspoken on many subjects. I am not saying that they don't make mistakes but I doubt very much that this article is one of them. Is that still true - i thought the National Geographic Society was now a separate entity to the NG tv channels and magazine which come control and ownership of Rupert Murdochs Fox Media group. Yes you are quite correct, and happened when RM's 'empire' was split in two. As of September 2015 quote: The National Geographic Society and 21st Century Fox announced on Wednesday that they are expanding their partnership in a venture that will include National Geographic's cable channels, its 127-year-old magazine, digital and social platforms, maps, travel, and other media. However, note the quote speaks of the NGS and not just the magazine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maoro2013 Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Natgeo is an old and very respected magazine and I am sure the reporting would be sound These guys just don't like the facts getting out there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soalbundy Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 They cant let the tigers go anywhere else now,they'll start talking,it'll be all over the jungle in no time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melyn Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 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? It seems that Thai law around libel and slander has nothing to do with whether or not the person "slandered" or libeled did the things said or written about them. Instead, it appears to be whether or not face was lost or they were shown in "bad light," or it was an affront to Thainess. \Does anyone know if a libel case has ever been lost at trial due to the defendant proving that the things written about were true? In addition to the bizarre libel laws, I don't think legal precedence matters here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spidermike007 Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 I bet the Nat Geo people were spewing coffee out their noses in laughter when they saw this threat. Sigh, when will these idiotic Thai entities learn this blustering bull shit only works in Thailand with these insane libel laws. But outside in the real world that Nat Geo lives in it will just cause mirth.... So here is an idea. The Tiger Temple should go on public media and refute the report point by point...........Oh wait they probably cannot do that. Very, very true. Cowards like these guys at the temple, and their lawyer are clowns in the eyes of the world. These defamation laws are a big joke, intended to allow criminals, gangsters, politicians, and major corporations engaged in wrong doing, to deflect blame from themselves, and not have to answer for their crimes. It was a ghastly law, passed by a parliamentarian no doubt, who was bought and paid for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Usernames Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Does this mean the NatGeo channel will be banned in Thailand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoneyboy Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Does this mean the NatGeo channel will be banned in Thailand? More than likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingdoc Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 How many people writing posts have been to the Temple recently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 How many people writing posts have been to the Temple recently? Whether one has visited the temple is pretty much irrelevant. The allegations against the temple are not the sort of thing that you are likely to witness on a half day's visit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairynuff Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 As someone who has lived in Thailand and traveled all over for many years I am tired of the constant attacks this place gets. Anyone who have been around knows of far worse places that just because of their affiliations are ignored. Don't get me wrong we all want these majestic creatures back in the wild and no one want to see acts of cruelty, but 1. Would you prefer the animal dead or alive? 2. I have never seen evidence of drugging here and I have been many times and while I am no expert it does not take one to see when an animal is drugged, and I grisly believe they are not 3. We all know bad press is better than good 4. I cannot believe the vast number of European volunteers at the temple would allow cruelty to prevail 5. I would imagine most of those posting here have never even been 6. It appears to me as with 90% of the posts on here it's another opportunity to skate the country. To those I say if it really is as you say then please go home and let those who understand and enjoy the life here live it with out your sour mouthed comments. As far as I can see from my many visits to the temple things get better every time and it's about time the sandals touting hippie community found something else to moan about if you don't like something don't do it The last sentence of your post says a lot more than the rest of your delusional diatribe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairynuff Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 How many people writing posts have been to the Temple recently? Given that most of the posters do not support this place, I'd guess that none of them have visited. Thank goodness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairynuff Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Whether these animals are drugged or not is almost irrelevant. The fact is that tigers are (supposed to be) wild animals. Being hugged by idiot humans is not what tigers are about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker69 Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Good job NG for the report. Bad on Animal Planet for promoting this Temple, years back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NancyL Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 As third generation members of the National Geographic Society, Hubby and I were very disappointed to learn that they'd sold out to Murdoch. At least we thought we were members of a "society", not merely subscribers to a magazine. Both of us had grown up with maps and books our parents bought with hard-earned cash -- items that were held in high esteem in our households. For decades, through many homes and offices, we've had the National Geographic three-section, room-size map-of-the-world installed on a wall. In fact, having a place for installation of "The Map" entered into selection of new homes. We watched another trusted journalistic institution, The Wall Street Journal, bend to his will and nearly cancelled our membership when we learned he took over National Geographic. I expect that any day now, they'll be saying that climate change is all a hoax. While I agree with the concerns about the goings-on at the Tiger Temple, please remember that today's National Geographic isn't the trusted institution of your youth. They may very well have been hoping for this lawsuit for the publicity value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soi Sauce Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 I cannot see the importance of having been there or not. I never was at Belsen, not in Cambodia when Pol Pot was having his fun, and never was in an Arabian market blown to hell by IS/ Al Queda suicide bombers. I do know however what happened in these places due to good reporting. Wrong is wrong and I'd take the view of a hugely respected org. such as Nat Geo over that of a corrupt monk anyday. BTW, has anyone checked how many Benzes he has? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manarak Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Protecting animals is good, but on the other hand, if all the animal rights nuts had their way, we wouldn't anymore have a chance to see any tigers, dolphins, etc. up close at all, it will be quite sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smotherb Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Oh, Thailand. The bigger the truth - the bigger the libel. The temple lost face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keesters Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 Leave the Tigers where they are and move the monks out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gemguy Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 Ha ha... Oh yes sir, yes indeed a lawsuit will resolve everything....and everything will be back to: Sabai Sabai As always, every religious organization around the world does not accept any criticism of their conduct. In the case of the monks at the Tiger temple they have lost face ...so we will sue the people that exposed our dirty deeds under the guise of a Buddhist temple because they upset our ability to make loads of money in a unsavory way. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 Leave the Tigers where they are and move the monks out. As a practical way to BEGIN to resolve the situation, that is IMO the best idea. The temple is not a satisfactory place to keep the tigers long term, but the MAIN problem is with the management. It would seem the logical fist step is REGIME CHANGE - take the running of the place out of the hands of the monks and install a team of experts. They can then arrange first a proper diet and scientific care protocols and then disperse the tigers over a reasonable period of time. just going in and taking the tigers out in big groups seems a rather complicated and unsatisfactory way of tackling the problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncat1 Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 (edited) Will they also be suing the Daily Mail for their report and video ? Incidentally the link may not work because the site has been blocked by the Thai government. But this link does appear to work at the moment http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3411541/The-shocking-moment-sanctuary-worker-PUNCHES-tiger-face-famous-Thai-temple.html Edited January 27, 2016 by johncat1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncat1 Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 Leave the Tigers where they are and move the monks out. Better still. Drug the monks and let the tigers play with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 If you really want to do something about the temple may I suggest you share the Nat Geo article on Facebook and get your friends to do the same....that way it will reach thousands of extra people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryB Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 The National Geographic is not above the law. They should be sued for their damaging damning report. They are just jealous of the Monks and the Temples They want to sell magazines and do not care who they smear They should be forced to pay Billions of US Dollars in damages Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 The National Geographic is not above the law. They should be sued for their damaging damning report. They are just jealous of the Monks and the Temples They want to sell magazines and do not care who they smear They should be forced to pay Billions of US Dollars in damages so you are saying that all the allegations are false? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryB Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 The National Geographic should write about the drugging of Children in America by Doctors and Gangs This more important than worrying about a Tiger being Drugged so they will not Bite People Do you want tigers to bite People? I say if tigers are drugged keep them drugged so they will not bite Have the America children are still being drugged Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now