Gaybutton

Are you sure you posted this on the right web site? I don't really understand what you're trying to do. If your post is not a personals ad, and if you already have extensive traveling experience, then why do you need a travel companion?

Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I was referring to the Cambodian "leaders," not the Thai leaders, if any of them can really be called leaders. Even so, the dispute is not over vast areas of land this time and it can be resolved at the bargaining table or with arbitration via the UN. It's over a tiny area and, in my opinion, certainly not worth a war, no matter who starts shooting first. Not only that, but this sort of thing could quickly escalate into something major. I hope it doesn't come to that. If it does, nobody wins. Here's the latest, both articles from THE NATION: _____ Thai Army Vows to Maintain Troops in Disputed Area The Thai army on Tuesday vowed to maintain its troops in the disputed area near Preah Vihear Temple despite Cambodia's ultimatum for Thailand to withdraw the troops. Thai army said in a statement that it was prepared for a confrontation with Cambodia if the spat escalated. "The armed forces reaffirmed that all three armed forces -- army, navy and air force -- are ready for confrontation in the area and are confident in our potential to defend Thailand's sovereignty," it said. "We will neither start fighting or invade into Cambodia first, but we will surely act in self-defence if Cambodia invades into our territory," the army said. Cambodia's Prime Minister Hun Sen issued an ultimatum on Monday to open wars if Thailand failed to withdraw its troops from an area near Preah Vihear Temple. Meanwhile Thai Foreign Minister Sompong Amornwiwat said, "All 80 troops will remain in the disputed area because Thailand has overseen that area for 20 to 30 years." Sompong said of those 80 troops deployed to the area, 20 of them are mine clearance workers and the rest offer protection for the mine clearance troops. Thailand insists it has not encroached in any territory, he said. _____ Thailand Will Act in Self-Defence : Cambodia Told By The Nation If Cambodia resorts to use of force, Thailand will have to exercise its right of self-defence as provided under the Charter of the United Nations : Thai FM Tensions along Thai and Cambodian border have flared up again on Tuesday after Thailand refused to follow Cambodia's threat to withdraw its troops from an area near Preah Vihear Temple. Thai Foreign Ministry's statement said, ""If Cambodia does resort to the use of force in accordance with its so-called ultimatum, Thailand will have to exercise its right of self-defence as provided under the Charter of the United Nations." Cambodia's Prime Minister Hun Sen issued the ultimatum on Monday, saying Bangkok could face large-scale conflict if Thailand failed to abide by his threat. He issued the threat after Thai Foreign Minister Sompong Wongsawat met with his Cambodian counterpart Hor Nam Hong in a border meeting in Phnom Penh on Monday. "The Veal Intry area is the dead or alive point for us "The situation at the Veal Intry area is too hot. They have to remove tonight or tomorrow. If they don't remove from the Veal Intry area, war will be waged," he said. Meanwhile Thai Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat on Tuesday chaired an urgent meeting to discuss about the matters Cambodia's threat to start war if Thailand did not evacuate its troops from an area near the Preah Vihear Temple. Somchai reiterated that it is not possible for the Thai troops to withdraw from the area. "It is like you are asked to retreat from your own house," he said. Thai premier quoted Sompong as saying that he was surprised that Hun Sen made such a threat after the meeting. "During the meeting, Prime Minister Hun Sen seemed to have no problems on the matters. It was surprising that he came out of the meeting room to say that," Sompong said. Sompong told the meeting in Phnom Penh that Thailand will not have any problem to withdraw if Cambodia did the same to avoid any confrontation. Asked whether he will telephone Hun Sen about the issue, Somchai said he will look into details and surrounding circumstances before deciding the next step.

I wonder if these "leaders" are actually idiotic enough to let this dispute start to escalate into actual battles. We'll see. The following appears in the BANGKOK POST: _____ War Threat By Thanida Tansubhapol and Wassana Nanuam Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen ordered fresh troops to the border with an ultimatum to Thailand: Pull military forces back today or the border will become a "life and death battle zone". Hun Sen told reporters in Phnom Penh that he had warned Thailand's visiting Foreign Minister Sompong Amornvivat that without a quick pullout, Thai soldiers could face being fired upon by Cambodian troops in "large-scale armed conflict". "If they cannot withdraw tonight, they must withdraw tomorrow," said Hun Sen. "We have tried to be patient, but I told the Thai foreign minister today that the area is a life-and-death battle zone." His comments came after talks with Mr Sompong in Phnom Penh. Mr Sompong also met with his counterpart Hor Namhong in a bid to resolve the dispute over the area near the ancient Preah Vihear temple. The Cambodian foreign minister said yesterday's talks failed to end in agreement because his Thai opposite number "could not sign anything". Hun Sen and Hor Namhong both told reporters that Cambodia could choose to take the border dispute before an international court if it was not resolved soon. The comments made by the Cambodian prime minister and foreign minister surprised Mr Sompong and Thai officials, who were adamant that the meetings had not been a failure. Mr Sompong said the tone during the meetings between the two countries had been different as the Cambodian leaders agreed that both sides had to be patient in resolving the border spat. He said no Thai troop withdrawals would be made from the 4.6 sq km overlapping area between Kantharalak district in Si Sa Ket and Preah Vihear province of Cambodia until the dispute over ownership is cleared through negotiations in the Joint Boundary Commission that was set up to demarcate the land border. Thailand reiterated its ownership over the area, Mr Sompong said in Bangkok and rushed to report the talks to Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat. Suranaree Task Force commander Maj-Gen Kanok Netrakavaesana will hold talks with his Cambodian counterpart tomorrow on the border issues and the Thai and Cambodian defence ministers will meet next Tuesday , according to Mr Sompong. Cambodian Deputy Defence Minister Gen Neang Phat said more Cambodian troops were heading to the area after up to 500 Thai soldiers had tried to cross the border near an ancient Hindu temple that is claimed by both countries. "We are building up our troops at the border in response to Thailand, but I cannot reveal the number," he told reporters. Maj-Gen Srey Deok, who oversees the Cambodian military in the disputed area, said: "Thai troops have already entered the area. They are confronting our troops." But Maj-Gen Kanok denied that more troops had been sent to the disputed area near the Preah Vihear temple. Thailand and Cambodia have 10 soldiers each at the Keo Sikha Kiri Svara pagoda near the Preah Vihear temple and 45 around the compound on joint patrol, according to the agreement between the two countries to ease border tension. The two countries also have back-up troops near the border. The number of soldiers there remained unchanged, Maj-Gen Kanok said. Maj-Gen Kanok slammed Cambodia for distorting information and taking advantage of the political crisis in Thailand to launch an offensive move for its own political benefit. The Suranaree chief, his patience wearing thin, called for a quick solution to the border spat and a clear direction to be provided by the government as it could become an armed conflict if it was left unsettled. "I want the government to solve this problem and make it clear what to do. If it is left this way, nobody knows what is going to happen," he said. Tensions between Thailand and Cambodia first flared in July after the Preah Vihear temple was awarded World Heritage status by the World Heritage Committee. The International Court of Justice ruled in 1962 that the temple belongs to Cambodia, but the surrounding land remains in dispute. Tensions escalated into a military confrontation in which up to 1,000 Cambodian and Thai troops faced off for six weeks. The two countries have swapped accusations of violating each other's territory in the dispute.

I gave up trying to predict election outcomes ever since Dewey defeated Truman.

The following appears in the BANGKOK POST: _____ PM Faces Ouster Time is running out for Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat - and not on the streets, and not in the courts. A 10-year-old corruption investigation comes to a climax this week and there is only one penalty: Dismissal from office. EXCLUSIVE By Veera Prateepchaikul Veera Prateepchaikul is Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Post Publishing Co Ltd Army Commander-in-Chief Gen Anupong Paojinda became the latest public figure to join a chorus of calls for the government to show responsibility for the Oct 7 crackdown on the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) protesters which left two people dead and more than 400 injured. Yet, Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat has persistently resisted the calls, although he said last week that he would consider a response at an appropriate time. Obviously, the embattled premier wants to buy time to delay his decision to show responsibility until an investigation into the tragic event by an independent truth commission is completed. But time may not be on his side. Instead, it is running out fast. The prime minister may be forced to stand down, not because of a military putsch or because of a Constitution Court order to dissolve the People Power party on electoral fraud charges, but because of a verdict of the National Counter Corruption Commission, which is due tomorrow or Thursday, relating to a decade-long malfeasance case against the prime minister. To sum up, the case was brought to public attention in 1998 by a chief judge of a panel of the Criminal Court. It referred to the auction of a plot of land in Thanyaburi district of Pathum Thani conducted by the Legal Execution Department under the supervision of the department's deputy director-general, Manit Suthaporn. It was alleged Mr Manit had not properly performed his duty for failing to demand 43 million baht in tax from the successful bidder for the land deal. Also, Mr Manit had returned the 70 million baht deposit posted by the bidder to the land owner after the first auction was scrapped following the bidder's failure to come up with the money to close the deal. It was discovered afterward by the NCCC that Mr Manit had received 10,000 shares as a favour in return for services rendered. Mr Somchai was then deputy permanent secretary for justice and Suthas Ngernmuen of the Democrat party was then the justice minister. Instead of being complimented for his whistle-blowing by his superiors in the judiciary and the Justice Ministry, the intrepid judge, who had no business whatever to do with the deal or with the Legal Execution Department, received threats, intimidation and even offers of bribes to have his case withdrawn. Unperturbed he pressed on and a probe was finally ordered and headed by a vice president of the Supreme Court who also worked under heavy pressure. The probe was completed two years afterward with the Legal Execution Department, instead of Mr Manit, being faulted for the failure to claim the 43 million baht land sale tax for the state. The probe panel also recommended that the case must be followed up to ensure that someone be held accountable for the tax loss. The case was then swept under the carpet and Mr Manit was promoted to deputy permanent secretary for justice whereas Mr Somchai was named the permanent secretary. Disappointed by the negative response from Mr Somchai, the judge decided to take the case against both Mr Somchai and Mr Manit to the NCCC. It wasn't until the Surayud government took power in 2006 that the NCCC finished the probe against Mr Manit, who was faulted with malfeasance in office. He was eventually fired without any pension in the same year by Gen Surayud's government. But the case against Mr Somchai who was accused of negligence of duty for his failure to follow up with action against Mr Manit is still pending with the NCCC. A sub-committee headed by Klanarong Chantik has already completed its probe into Mr Somchai's role and has made a recommendation to the NCCC board which is due to deliver its final ruling this week. The timing of the verdict could not be more appropriate given the growing chorus for the embattled prime minister to show responsibility for the Oct 7 bloodletting. Instead of a coup to force political change which will further exacerbate Thailand's faltering image in the international community, the NCCC should provide a better alternative solution. And there is no reason for the NCCC board to postpone its crucial ruling. If faulted for gross negligence related to a graft case, the only penalty to be meted out is dismissal from service. As such Mr Somchai's qualifications as an MP will be in doubt in accordance with Article 102 (6) of the Constitution. And since he is an MP, his status as prime minister will be in jeopardy too.

The following appears in THE NATION: _____ Resignation, House Dissolution Not Solution: Somchai Published on October 12, 2008 His government has several tasks, including royal cremation, Asean summit, to complete first Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat announced on TV Sunday night that he is willing to resign or dissolve the House if it could bring the country out of the political crisis. But he said he was not sure that House dissolution or his resignation would really solve the problem. He urged all sides in the conflicts to help find a clear solution, which is acceptable to all. "I am willing to say goodbye but we need to find a solution first. We have to turn to one another and cooperate to solve the problems for the sake of unity and peace so that we can stay together under the grace of His Majesty the King," the prime minister said. Somchai was speaking live on NBT at 8:30 pm and his public address was also relayed to other channels. The prime minister urged the public to exercise judgment so that they would not fall to rumours spread by certain persons. Somchai said the country was now under severe conflicts and sometimes protesters violated the laws. "So, I would like to ask protesters or demonstrators to stay within the limit of the laws," Somchai said. He said his government came from an election and had to be responsible to the Parliament and the people. He said he was sorry for the clashes on October 7 and he set up two panels to investigate what happened and to provide remedy to the affected people. The prime minister said political crisis was not the only crisis troubling the country but the country was also facing an economic crisis similar to the 1997 crisis. Somchai said the financial crisis would hit the world and even Europe. He said Asian countries could not avoid the crisis because the countries depended on exports to the United States and Europe. The prime minister also urged the public members to cooperate with the government to get the royal cremation of HRH Princess Galyani Vadhana done. After the royal cremation, the government will also have to hold the birthday celebration for His Majesty the King, he said. He said his government also had a task to hold the Asean summit later this year.

The following appears in THE NATION: _____ PM Somchai to Talk about Violent Crackdown Tonight Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat will address in a special television programme on Sunday night to talk about police's violent dispesal of protesters. Somchai who took office about three weeks ago will also outline how his government will handle the situation. Government spokesman Nattawut Saikoe said the special programme will be held on state-run NBT station at 8.30pm. The spokesman reiterated that PM will not definitely announce his resignation. PM Somchai on Saturday had said that he'll consider pros and cons of all available alternatives which included resignation and dissolution of the House of Representatives, in the wake of last week's violent crackdown on protesters. "I'm not attached to the idea of being prime minister," he told reporters during an interview at his residence. When asked if he would resign or dissolve the House, the premier said: "It's an issue that I must consider, what's best in both the short and long term. "I have to study the pros and cons of each scenario, such as dissolving the House or resignation," he said. His statements sparked speculations that he may resign or dissolve the House.

On the beach they sell for 80 baht. I guess they're going for the crowd that has no idea what they normally sell for. Looks like this time he spent the wrong couple of minutes.

In the USA I always recommend contacting Rhonda, at Norcross Travel, for prices before committing to anything. She nearly always manages to come up with prices hundreds of dollars less than anything else you can find. Now, with software such as Skype and the availability of E-Tickets, she might even be able to help people who are in other countries. It can't hurt to contact her and find out. With Skype ( http://www.skype.com ) you can place a call to toll-free numbers in the USA from anywhere in the world. Just make sure you ask to speak to Rhonda. The toll-free number is 1-888-888-7157. You may have to drop the '1' before if you are using Skype. I don't remember.

Well, here's a major crime story that merits headline news, which appears in the PATTAYA DAILY NEWS: for photos see http://www.pattayadailynews.com/shownews.p...NEWS=0000007495 _____ Two Men Caught Selling Gay Porn Pattaya police arrested two men for selling gay pornographic DVDs and VCDs at various Pattaya beer bars. On 11th October, at 2:00 AM, Police Major Wittaya Yeunyong, Pattaya police inspector, Chonburi, arrested two Thai men who were selling porn DVDs and VCDs to tourists at bars in the Jomtien Soi 5, Jomtien Beach Road area. The two men were Mr. Terdsak Terbtoe(24) from Sakaew and Mr. Pisit Supananset (31) from U-Thai Thani. Police found the evidence of more than 1000 gay pornographic DVDs and VCDs. They explained that they bought the materials from agencies in Bangkok. Most of them were gay pornographic because gay community is bigger market now. They buy them for sixty baht each and sell them for two to three hundred baht, a piece. They usually go around selling the obscene material at gay bars around Pattaya. The two men were charged with selling pornographic materials. __________ I think along with my "I Don't Get It List" I ought to start a "You've Got to be Kidding Me" list. This is news? While it's true that selling gay porn is a felony in Thailand, if the police were serious about wanting to arrest the vendors all they would have to do is go to the beach on any day. Even on the rare occasions when there are no other vendors, there are always about five or ten gay porn vendors making the rounds. Now, why am I thinking this particular arrest just may have been only for show and these two guys are going to end up heavily fined and probably jailed for the sake of it?

Court Makes Conn. 3rd State to Allow Gay Marriage By DAVE COLLINS, Associated Press Writer A sharply divided Connecticut Supreme Court ruled Friday that gay couples have the right to get married, saying legislators did not go far enough when they approved same-sex civil unions that were identical to marriages in virtually every respect except the name. The 4-3 ruling will make Connecticut the third state, behind Massachusetts and California, to allow same-sex marriages, decisions that in all cases were made by the highest state court. The decision marks the first time that a court rejected civil unions as an alternative to granting gay couples the right to marry. Californians will vote next month on a ballot measure that would reinstate the gay-marriage ban, but Connecticut's governor and attorney general said there is little chance of a similar challenge to Friday's ruling. "The Supreme Court has spoken," said Gov. M. Jodi Rell, a Republican who opposes same-sex marriage. "I do not believe their voice reflects the majority of the people of Connecticut. However, I am also firmly convinced that attempts to reverse this decision — either legislatively or by amending the state Constitution — will not meet with success." Same-sex weddings are expected to begin in Connecticut in less than a month. Out-of-staters will be eligible, but few other states are likely to recognize the unions. The ruling was thrilling for the plaintiffs, eight couples who sued in 2004 after they tried to get wedding licenses. "I can't believe it. We're thrilled; we're absolutely overjoyed. We're finally going to be able, after 33 years, to get married," said plaintiff Janet Peck of Colchester. Peck said that when the decision was announced, she and her partner, Carole Conklin, started crying and hugging while juggling excited phone calls from her brother and other relatives and friends. "We've always dreamed of being married," she said. "Even though we were lesbians and didn't know if that would ever come true, we always dreamed of it." A year after the suit was filed, Connecticut's General Assembly approved a civil union law that gave same-sex couples the same rights as married couples. At the time, no other state had granted so many rights to gay couples without being ordered to do so by a court, but the plaintiffs declined to drop their lawsuit and said they wanted full marriage rights. In the majority opinion, Supreme Court Justice Richard N. Palmer wrote that denying marriage to same-sex couples would create separate standards. "Interpreting our state constitutional provisions in accordance with firmly established equal protection principles leads inevitably to the conclusion that gay persons are entitled to marry the otherwise qualified same sex partner of their choice," Palmer wrote. Three justices issued separate dissenting opinions. Justice Peter T. Zarella wrote that he believes there is no fundamental right to same-sex marriage, and that the court's majority failed to discuss the purpose of marriage laws, which he said is to "privilege and regulate procreative conduct." Zarella added, "The ancient definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman has its basis in biology, not bigotry. If the state no longer has an interest in the regulation of procreation, then that is a decision for the legislature or the people of the state and not this court." The ruling cannot be appealed to federal courts because it deals with state constitutional issues, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said. The ruling overturns a decision from New Haven Superior Court. It becomes effective Oct. 28, and weddings are expected to begin within days after the lower court holds a hearing to implement the high court's ruling. The White House reacted to the ruling by again raising the prospect of a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. "It's unfortunate that activist judges continue to seek to redefine marriage by court order without regard for the will of the people," Karl Zinsmeister, President Bush's domestic policy adviser, said in a written statement. "Today's decision by the Connecticut Supreme Court illustrates that a federal constitutional amendment may be needed if the people are to decide what marriage means." The Family Institute of Connecticut, a political action group that opposes gay marriage, called the ruling outrageous. "Even the legislature, as liberal as ours, decided that marriage is between a man and a woman," said executive director Peter Wolfgang. "This is about our right to govern ourselves. It is bigger than gay marriage." Getting a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage on Connecticut's ballot would require the approval of three-quarters of the General Assembly — a highly unlikely prospect, with both houses controlled by Democrats sympathetic to same-sex marriage. A gay marriage ban also could be approved by a constitutional convention. Connecticut law requires a state referendum every 20 years asking whether it should hold a convention at which delegates would consider rewriting anything in the state's Constitution. The referendum happens to be scheduled for next month, but there is little, if any, appetite for such a move among state leaders, regardless of party. State Sen. Michael Lawlor, chairman of the legislature's Judiciary Committee, said he expects the General Assembly to pass a gay marriage law next year codifying the Supreme Court ruling. "It's important that both the legislature and the court weigh in," he said. "The court is saying that it's a constitutional requirement that marriage should be equally available to gays and straights and the legislature should weigh in saying whether or not it's constitutionally required, it's the right thing to do." The couples who sued said the state's marriage law violated their constitutional rights to equal protection and due process, denying them the financial, social and emotional benefits of marriage enjoyed by heterosexual couples. The vast majority of states do not allow gay marriage. Voters in 27 states have taken the extra step of approving constitutional amendments to reinforce that prohibition. Civil unions and a similar arrangement, known as domestic partnerships, are offered to same-sex couples in Vermont, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Oregon, Hawaii, Maine, Washington and the District of Columbia.

More like to dis-prove them.

It can also be dangerous. Often the only way to get around it is to step into the street. I don't mind having to be inconvenienced to get around a vendor, and I do understand they are only trying to make an honest living, but being forced to step out into the street is a different story. In any case, I would think City Hall ought to have other priorities.

In that case I would recommend either The Ambiance or Le Café Royale. The Ambiance: http://www.ambiancehotel.com Le Café Royale: http://www.caferoyale-pattaya.com They are located directly across the street from each other, about 50 feet apart. Read both web sites, flip a coin, and take your pick.

My friend, if you feel that it's perfectly safe, then by all means go ahead and cruise to your heart's content. If after you go there and cruise it turns out to really be perfectly safe, and I hope it is, as well as getting to and from there from the popular gay hotels, then I hope you will post again and tell us so. Considering that my posts about Saranrom Park always encourage people to go there and give it a try, then asking me if I 'have something against cruising' seems kind of strange to me. It should be obvious that I have nothing against cruising. I'm merely concerned for people's safety. If I'm going to be wrong, I'm much happier erring on the side of caution. I'd much rather be conservative right now than be someone who writes posts saying there is no problem about it at all, and then having to explain why I said that if someone inadvertently gets caught up in one of the brouhahas. I haven't advised people against going to the Grand Palace, Wat Pho, Wat Phra Kaew, or any other popular tourist destinations . . . during the day. The Saranrom Park boys are there during the night. Maybe it's just as safe as ever. I hope so. Again, if you or anybody else reading this decides to go, let us know if there are any problems. If there are none, then I'll be delighted to eat my words.

Then you suppose wrong. You're making a mistake by trying to say that blanket "logic" applies and if one statement applies then it stands to reason the other statement must also apply. I don't see it as the same principle at all. I don't even see a similarity between the two types of crime. Rape is a far more serious and far less common crime than snatching of people's personal belongings. I would go as far as saying rape is quite rare in Pattaya. Also, when it comes to very violent crime such as rape, the police do respond and act as quickly as they can to catch the rapist. Most criminals looking for ya-ba money, or whatever they're looking for, aren't out there trying to rape women to get it, but many are out there committing these kinds of theft crimes. We read about it on almost a daily basis. It is relatively easy to avoid becoming a victim of these thefts and I don't understand why people don't take the simple steps to prevent themselves from becoming victims of it. Also, from where are you getting the idea that I am implying that the victims of these thefts have only themselves to blame? I said no such thing. I blame the criminals, not the victims. But I am saying people ought to have sense enough to take simple precautions so they don't end up becoming victims. If you want to wear gold chains, fine. Just hide them until you arrive at your destination. Then put on the chain. Take it off as you leave, hide it again, and stow it away when you get back to wherever you are staying. What's the hard part?

I don't get it. Another one for my list. First, the following letter-to-the-editor appears in today's PATTAYA MAIL: _____ Gold chain thieves Editor; When will something be done for the local and tourist police to show a little interest in arresting the Thai men stealing gold chains? I’m back one day riding on motorcycle and one guy drives by to rip a chain off my girlfriend. The tourist police tell me to call the local police in Banglamung. I proceed to advise they speak little English and are no help. They say sorry; they can’t do anything. So what’s the point in having 300 more being trained by those who don’t care and do nothing? Two months ago I had my 5 baht necklace ripped off in the same way from a bike. Calling the tourist police to explain the Banglamung police don’t speak English so I asked for a tourist police who can speak English. They insisted the local can help me. I gave up at that point and asked what I can do once I catch this guy on his bike or find out where he lives. What is legal vs me tearing his head off and smashing his motorcycle? He says; just call the police. You have to give up! Terry _____ The part that's on my "I Don't Get It" list is why people insist on wearing gold chains, expensive jewelery, carrying large amounts of cash, or otherwise virtually advertising their vulnerability. Obviously people who read the English language media for Pattaya are well aware that this type of theft, along with pickpocketing, happens in Pattaya more times than Carter's has Liver Pills. Why do people wear them around here? I don't understand what's so important about displaying expensive chains or whatever. To impress who? It impresses the thieves, that's for sure. I don't know who else it's supposed to impress. It certainly doesn't impress me, except maybe impressing me with foolishness. If you are someone who just has to wear these things, has it occurred to you that it might be at least a tad safer to keep these items hidden in your pocket until you either arrive at your destination or arrive back to your home or hotel room again? Do you really need to wear gold chains en route? Sometimes the police really will make an effort to help and sometimes they won't. I agree it would be nice if you could truly rely on the police to try to help, but I think most people who read these boards are well aware that realistically you simply cannot count on it. I certainly sympathize with victims of theft, but it also seems to me to be on the wrong side of stupidity to make one's self a walking advertisement to the thieves.

Well, it's a start anyway. Actually, I don't think the vendors are what people complain about so much. I think the complaints are primarily the utility poles, telephone booths, etc. that some genius thought placing right in the middle of the walkways was a good idea. Details are in the PATTAYA MAIL: http://www.pattayamail.com/current/news.shtml#hd6

Details are in the following PATTAYA MAIL article: http://www.pattayamail.com/current/news.shtml#hd3

The following appears in THE NATION: _____ PAD Plans Major March Against Police By Veena Thoopkrajae Boosted by legal "victories", anti-government protesters are determined to hold police responsible for Tuesday bloodshed Buoyed by return of key leader Chamlong Srimuang and a court injunction prohibiting more drastic measures against it by the government, the People's Alliance for Democracy is stepping up a campaign against the police following Tuesday's bloodbath. PAD protesters will march to the national police headquarters on Monday morning to protest violent measures that left two demonstrators killed and hundreds injured as the PAD tried to seize Parliament Tuesday morning. Sondhi Limthongkul, a key PAD leader, told the protesters inside Government House that PAD followers will gather on Monday morning at 9am at the National Stadium and march to stage a protest in front of the police headquarters. The rally at Government House Thursday night was filled with swollen crowds as the protesters gathered to welcome their two leaders _ Chamlong Srimuang and Chaiwat Sinsuwong _ who were released on bail after the Appeals Court dropped treason charges against core PAD members earlier in the day. In another perceived legal victory for the PAD, the Central Administrative Court on Thursday also issued an injunction demanding the prime minister to strictly observe the international standards on crowd control when dealing with the protesters. The court issued the injunction following a suit filed by some senators against Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat and the police, accusing them of using excessive force to disperse protesters on Tuesday. The court said the injunction would be in place until the court makes a ruling in the case. Sondhi said the PAD would not take any action now because they were in the mourning period. However, PAD lawyers are preparing to file a lawsuit against Pol Maj Gen Surapol Thuanthong, deputy spokesman of the Royal Thai Police, and deputy national police chief Umnuay Nimmano for their claims that slain protester Angkhana Raduppanyawut was carrying a bomb with her. "Apart from this case, the police will face a number of charges," said Sondhi. The anti-government movement will also seek justice for those killed and injured, he announced. The PAD is planning to release five millions copies of a book featuring all information about the Tuesday clashes with the riot police. "We're about to start publishing it. When finished, the books will be distributed with CD to the public free of charge," said Sondhi. He was speaking on stage during a routine prime time, when key leaders normally address the crowd at the Government House. On Thursday night it was special as the protesters welcomed back the two detained leaders. Chamlong was the first speaker of the night. He cheered up the crowds with his story from behind bars. He claimed that everyone - from prison guards to prisoners - were sympathetic with the PAD. Chamlong warned that the other seven leaders of PAD should not give in to the police unless bails are guaranteed. "We've to stay with our prople. The government want to separate us," he said. Chaiwat echoed Chamlong's remarks that they were treated well and there were also PAD supporters inside the jail. He said he missed the protesters the most. "I also miss Thaksin Shinawatra especially when I saw the signboard 'Money is the root of evil' in jail." In a home-coming mood, Chaiwat and Chamlong shared their light-hearted speeches especially on their days in jail. "The day I went to court I was handcuffed but they said there was no need for Lung Chamlong because he was old. They considered me young," said Chaiwat. Meanwhile, Army chief Anupong Paochinda on Thursday ruled out a military coup to lead the country out of political paralysis, scotching a rumour that he had conferred with Privy Council president Prem Tinsulanonda. "It would not be a way to solve the problem but it would create another problem, instead. Its consequences could ruin the country," Anupong told reporters.

Probably nothing is happening there, but I'm not going to be the one to go and find out. It may be perfectly safe, but until all this turmoil is over I don't think it's a good idea to advise people coming to Thailand for a holiday to go hunting for Bangkok boys at night anywhere other than the established gay scene areas. Saranrom Park is not near any of the gay areas, but it's not all that far from the known trouble spots. For the time being it won't be me, thank you very much. I could be wrong, but I'm guessing that even if it's perfectly safe there are still going to be police check points and other hazards. I just don't think it's a great idea to venture away from the established tourist and shopping areas in Bangkok at night right now. I haven't been to Bangkok since all this got started, so if any of you are familiar enough with Bangkok to tell us whether going to Saranrom Park on a boy hunt right now is a dangerous thing to do, please let us know.

bump

bump

bump

bump