Forum
| Reviews |
|---|
|
10/03/10 07:51
KarenHON |
|
 |
quote SerenaSinful : So... I have been tussling with this quandary for a while now...hypothetically speaking, could an explicit review(s) could be used as evidence against a provider if screening methods failed and said provider found him/herself a victim of entrapment? I haven't had much luck getting reviews anyway, my regulars have all given reasons they "can't" review me >:P I have one review on my website, and it's legit, but I doubt many potential clients would see it that way, given that it's on my site :/ Your thoughts, anyone? A very good and very justified question! A reply certainly depends on the related local judiciary. In my opinion from a general point of view reviews must be seen risky for a provider, not necessarily as a cardinal evidence but as a supplementary one (in combination with an evident payment). What do you think, how does a normal personal evaluate assessments about "Pussy Size" and sexual skills forwarded by different clients? - Reviews for a tour guide? As mentioned already, it depends on your country. There are countries where advertising on a website like this is enough for being classified as a prostitute, but where law is not enforced for 'political' reasons and there are countries where the burden of evidence is more complex and difficult. |
|
|
|
| How I see the war in Iraq |
|---|
|
10/01/10 06:10
KarenHON |
|
|
|
quote Doc77 : ...So long as persons believe that they lost the war, the question can be asked, if they had fought harder, could they have won? Some Americans still talk about how they fought the Vietnam War with one hand tied behind their back... The common discussions regarding fighting the war with hands tied is more about how President Johnson personally directed what targets should be bombed with what kind of bombs, when, how etc. He totally micro-managed the activities of combat and the military found themselves running in circles. Earlier this year Viet Nam admitted they were within one month of surrender, but they defeated the U.S. at the negotiating table and in the court of public opinion. So the U.S. lost the war after winning many battles (if you can call the bombings a battle). Well, let me simply ask you what does winning a war mean, nowadays? Raping the enemies' women, enslave the population, steal the treasure and destroy the castles, go home and everything will be fine? I think we agree that such a philosophy is not up to date any more. :) It would be a nonsensical discussion if small and weak countries could or can compete the military superpower USA. They cannot! From a soldier's point of view countries like Vietnam, Iraq, and the Taliban in Afghanistan are not serious opponents in a military conflict. These conflicts are more than pure military conflicts. But being in war is much more difficult for countries of the so called "Free World" than it is for a totalitarian regime. Persons, citizens who are free have access to informations. They have learnt to have an own opinion which is not the opinion of a teacher, father or a propagandistic opinion maker. This point is not a disadvantage but the controlling privilege of freedom which does not make being in war easy. During the war in Vietnam the US policy-makers lost credibility at home. Consequently they had to leave Vietnam. Especially during the passed 20 years the case has been less or more equal and more international. Ethic and moral credibility and reliability was seen decreasing and power political, nearly imperialistic, interests have increased. US policy-makers more and more suffer from a bad reputation abroad. They are seen being extremely influenced by business interests and a double standard morality. Being diplomatic does not mean being arrogant and characterless. |
|
|
|
| How I see the war in Iraq |
|---|
|
09/24/10 07:02
KarenHON |
|
|
|
quote paulh50 : The Communists did not win the war. They might have defeated the South Vaietnamesse Army after the US pull out but the US never lost the war. If you did a little more searching of the history of Vietnam you would have known that Vietnam or IndoChina as it was called has been at war for 100s of years with itself and it's neighbors. General Nyguen Giap, leader of the North Vietnamesse said; "The American Soldiers are by far the best trained, best equipped and the most Honorable and Noble Men he has ever fought." He, also, said he regreted the terrible waste of human life on both sides. Had it not been for the American's failure to support their troops the NVA would not have been able to defeat the Americans. Look it up in an Old issure of American Legion around 1994. As for Afghanistan we were there to help the Afghans kick out the Russians. Like I said :"Charlie Wilson's War" History made easy. American could have had it and left it to the "victors". The only reason America Sticks it's nose in other countries business is because they know that without America's support and aid there is no way they will succeed in their mission. You seem to think that only the U.S. is involved in Iraq and Afganistan when it is a mult-national group of soldiers from the Ukraine to Australia and everywhere in-between. Paulh50, thank you for your comments about the US engagement in Vietnam. It is interesting reading from you although I must say that your attitude certainly is not a generally accepted one. I agree with you that the USA never lost the Vietnam war. But my bias for stating this is a Chinese one based on which I disagree with you in many points. US helicopters taking off from the roof of an apartment building near the US embassy in Saigon is a less or more a powerful image of defeated US Americans getting out just before the Vietnamese they fought against took over the city from the from the South Vietnamese they supported. An image which does not not stand for a winning party. I have learnt - and agree to what I have learnt - that after the war in Vietnam US policy-makers have secured a huge propaganda victory in shaping perceptions about that war and, paradoxically, one of the propaganda achievements has been convincing people that they lost. The reason for the seemingly strange strategy is simple: Putting forward the idea that they lost obscures both the real reason they fought the war diverts attention from US crimes during the war. Despite the claims of US leaders, they did not fight in Vietnam to establish democracy. Instead, they fought in Vietnam to derail democracy. After the Vietnamese defeat of French colonialism in 1954, the Geneva Conference called for free elections in 1954. But the United States and its client regime in South Vietnam blocked those elections. Why? In his memoirs, US President Eisenhower explained honestly: In free elections, the socialist government of Ho Chi Min would have won by an overwhelming margin. As is typical, the USA is all for elections in other countries, if they turn out the way they want. The central goal of US policy-makers in Vietnam was to make sure that an independent socialist course of development did not succeed. US leaders relied on Cold War rhetoric about the communist monolith but really feared that a virus of such independent development could infect the rest of Asia, perhaps even becoming a model for all the Third World. What might happen if all nations emerging from colonialism believed they had a right to decide their own futures, outside the US orbit? It is much easier to obscure these US war aims if we talk about how they lost the war, leading to the fall of a South Vietnamese democracy that never existed. It also is easier to obscure the brutality of the US war. So long as persons believe that they lost the war, the question can be asked, if they had fought harder, could they have won? Some Americans still talk about how they fought the Vietnam War with one hand tied behind their back, - yet with only one hand they managed to drop 6.5 million tons of bombs and 400,000 tons of napalm on the people of South-East Asia. Short of nuclear weapons, it is not clear what additional forms of violence they could have unleashed on the people of Vietnam. If people can convince themselves that they were restrained gentlemen during the war, it is easier to ignore the saturation bombing of civilian areas, counter-terrorism programs that included political assassination, routine killings of civilians, and 11.2 million of gallons of Agent Orange to destroy crops and ground cover, - all part of the US terror war in not only Vietnam but Laos and Cambodia as well. All those are clear violations of international law, - that is, war crimes. Thirty-five years later, the virus US policy-makers feared has been largely stamped out, with only a few stubborn holdouts. South-East Asia, - indeed, most of the Third World-, is safe not only for the US style democracy (that is, democracy with results favourable to the United States) but for multinational corporations to take advantage of the resources and exploit the labour. By telling the story that they lost the war, the United States can continue to evade the truth about its foreign policy. While it is true that they did not achieve total conquest of South Vietnam, 35 years later the nature of the US victory is clear. Vietnam, still recovering from the massive destruction caused by the United States attack, is forced to accept - by economic pressure not bombs - its place in the international economic order run out of Washington and New York. |
|
|
|
| Thailand |
|---|
|
08/08/10 04:18
KarenHON |
|
|
|
Quite a complete political analysis of the situation, refering to Thailand's past, presence, and future, can be found h e r e.
|
|
|
|
| Thailand |
|---|
|
08/03/10 10:12
KarenHON |
|
|
|
quote KarenHON : "1984" by George Orwell as a reality show? :) The information board on the picture below can be found beside a big motorway in Bangkok. It shows a picture of prime minister Abhisit and the text: "If you find an inappropriate website then call 1212." The witch-hunt seems to be open for everybody. What makes a website inappropriate? Does it refer to Computer Crime Act of 2007 (2550)? |
|
|
|
| Thailand |
|---|
|
07/22/10 14:52
KarenHON |
|
|
|
see here
|
|
|
|
| Thailand |
|---|
|
07/12/10 04:50
KarenHON |
|
|
|
quote luli123 : When Being Thai Means Believing Suthep Source When things get tough for you in a debate, accusing your opposite party of being unpatriotic has been a tried and trusted method of ending the conversation – so long as you don’t care how silly that will make you sound. According to at least three Thai-language sources (see here, here and here), Deputy PM Suthep on Friday had a heated exchange with reporters over the issue of the April-May red-shirt crisis. One particular thorny question was who were responsible for the violence and the deaths. When a reporter asked him what the CRES (the vastly powerful government-military agency set up to oversee the emergency situation) would do about people’s belief that civilians were shot by army troops, Suthep at once pointed to that reporter’s face and angrily asked “Are you Thai?” before quickly disappearing into his office. As is repeated time and time again, the official version of what transpired during the red-shirt encampment is that all violence was perpetrated by “some” red-shirt protesters and mysterious unaligned paramilitary forces. None of the deaths were caused by the army, who, lest we forget, were authorised to fire live rounds in the protest zone. We may be curious how long it takes this regime to convince the people that the heads of the demonstrators jumped against the bullets that were actually shot in the air. |
|
|
|
| Thailand |
|---|
|
07/05/10 00:54
KarenHON |
|
|
|
quote meriposa : Yes Kitty - it is very hard to have respect for most (but not all) journalists. There seems to no news unless is bad news or some stupid gossip. Soo, may be you have some good news to tell? I would like to know. The only stupid gossip I can find in this thread up to now is some general propaganda about the Redsirts and a typical persecution complex with regards to critical news which are not welcome for some person(s). What an argument is this, do not discuss problems unless you can solve them!? Are critical - in your words bad - news wrong news? |
|
|
|
| Thailand |
|---|
|
07/01/10 01:31
KarenHON |
|
|
|
As you can see reading my first post for this thread I am interested in international reactions and comments.
I have the following questions: What about the USA, - is there an official statement or are they too busy with other problems? The cold war is over and persons in Europe are talking about the 'double morality system' of the USA (Iraq, Iran, Israel, Thailand). Furthermore is it possible that Thailand moves closer to China? By the way the Chinese one party system may have advantages in the eyes of many leaders in Thailand? China is certainly open for a 'closer' relationship with Thailand. Any ideas? |
|
|
|
| Thailand |
|---|
|
07/01/10 01:11
KarenHON |
|
|
|
quote meriposa : quote luli123 : "The more stupid and simple one person, the easier it is to to control it." I have just heard that Google's free online language translation service is blocked in Thailand, now. Is there anybody to confirm this? Just checked it and seems to work as before. But maybe you using some other page. I am using Slim Browser that has language translator on the tool bar. I opened some web page in Thai, then clicked on "translate this page to English" on the Language tool bar menu and it worked. I used Google right now to research something about this topic. I found this message here: "I was trying hard to translate some thai to english but when I log on to www.google.co.th/ and click on "translate", it appear to say... This Website has been blocked by ICT. :) Does anyone encounter this problem?" But reading it completely and Meriposa's reply then there seem to be many options which work. |
|
|
|
| Thailand |
|---|
|
06/30/10 07:15
KarenHON |
|
|
|
"1984" by George Orwell as a reality show? :)
|
|
|
|
| Thailand |
|---|
|
05/31/10 08:27
KarenHON |
|
|
|
Well, I think it is time to also present an article and comment. It is about the style how western media report about South East Asia and Thailand especially.
The author of the article is Andre Vltchek a novelist, journalist and filmmaker who is very active in SEA and who makes impression on me. :-) His comment and analysis are as follows: Western Media Perverts Information about Thailand Rebellion was crushed and Bangkok streets were covered with blood, mostly that of poor Thai peasants with their origins in the country's north or northeast. Armored vehicles crashed through the barricades made of old tires and bamboo rods, and government-employed snipers performed their terrible task, shooting people from tall buildings, often aiming directly at their heads. The reaction of Western media was one of almost calm. "Peace was largely restored in the city Thursday, a day after a military crackdown on anti-government protesters triggered rioting in which 39 buildings were burned," reported the Associate Press (AP) just one day after the carnage. Not surprisingly, it was AP whose news appeared for days on the front page of Yahoo News, shaping public opinion in Europe and the United States as well as Southeast Asia itself. Early on, it appeared that no one visiting the Redshirts stronghold at the Ratchaprasong area in Bangkok could ignore the pleas of protesters for social justice. While the military coup against Thaksin Shinavatra remained one of the main grievances of the rebels, the issue was gradually fading, replaced by much more urgent ones. Thaksin's images gave way to the red stars on the hats and jackets of defenders of the barricades. In Western media reports, practically all talk about poverty and discrimination and arrogance of ruling elites quickly disappeared from dispatches of major press agencies. Expressions like "struggle for social justice" became self-censored by journalists in almost all English-language publications and wire services. A propaganda machine went to work. Government snipers killing protesters came to be described as "clashes between protesters and government troops." The murder (by one of the snipers) of Major General Khattiya Sawasdiphol, who had earlier switched sides and joined the Redshirts, was played down, while agencies, newspapers and magazines in the United Kingdom and United States even invented a derogatory definition for this fallen soldier: rogue general. In the same breath, in one of its recent reports, AP described the country's monarch both as "revered" and "beloved." With almost no exception, Western media stood by the morally and financially corrupt Thai establishment. Murder of civilians became synonymous with "restoring peace." Shooting into the crowd was labeled as the "quelling of violence." Rarely was the illegitimate government of British-born and Oxford-educated Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva described as a "regime," (a favorite expression of Western media when dealing with anti-corporate and anti-Western governments), despite the fact that he came to power through the barrel of a gun after an illegal coup-d'etat. While little sympathy or outrage over the killing of civilians was expressed, one could read laments over destroyed high-end real estate properties. Southeast Asia's history of manipulated news Southeast Asia is where manipulation of the Western media reached shameful and dizzying heights. Barbaric and brutal bombing of Laotian countryside during the Vietnam War (by U.S. forces, but also with enormous Thai assistance) was called a "secret war," reflecting the willingness of the U.S. and European press to muzzle itself in exchange for the usual perks. The whole truth about Western involvement in Cambodia, including its support for Khmer Rouge, is virtually unknown beyond the boundaries of this part of the world. Western allies in Southeast Asia became virtually untouchable. The Philippines is very rarely exposed for its brutal feudal system, but is constantly hailed for its "democracy." Indonesia could be designated as the textbook case. Almost no country managed to escape scrutiny of the Western media as much. The Western-backed coup in 1965 against Sukarno killed between 1 million and 3 million communists, leftists, intellectuals, teachers and people from the Chinese minority. It also opened doors to unbridled capitalism, corruption and religious (Muslim) control of the society, but mainly to the plunder of natural resources. Naturally, most Western media outlets refused to comment on the occupation and genocide in East Timor or the massacres in Aceh. There was hardly any reporting on the more than 100,000 people who died in Papua, the remote Indonesian province consistently plundered by both Western companies and Indonesian state and military. Read dispatches of major Western press agencies, and the conclusion you will arrive at is that Indonesia is a democracy (not the brutal feudal state it really is), the largest Southeast Asian economy (not the country with basic services like drinking water at a lower supply than in India or even Bangladesh) and "tolerant Muslim-majority state" (not the country where minorities are historically oppressed to the extreme, where churches periodically go up in flames and atheism is banned by law). Thailand: land of violent smiles Despite the cliché of it being a "country of smiles," Thailand is actually a country with one of the most brutal modern histories. In many ways it is a very tough, heartless and aggressive country, which oppresses almost all intellectual, religious and ethnic minorities. But you would hardly find a report on this topic. The longest-serving (and the richest) monarch on Earth still rules the country that went through 18 military coups. Some coups were relatively "benign," but some were brutal. Pro feudal to the extreme, the Thailand ruling elite systematically liquidates its opposition, particularly any opposition striving for social justice. It has massacred left-wing students and leaders and even burned alleged communists in barrels of oil. October 1973 saw some of the most brutal massacres on the streets of any Southeast Asian capital, in the name of the fight against communism. Again, there was no word of condemnation from the West, which promoted the country as an excellent place for beaches, massages, cheap food and sex. AP published a piece in defense of the 1973 massacre with the title, "Experts: 'Bangkok crackdown no replay of Tiananmen,'" proclaiming that "Thailand is a democracy, albeit one now in crisis and long prone to military coups, while China was and is staunchly authoritarian." For years, Thailand has been ruled by military juntas, with the monarch ceremonial head of state and with anti-communism the main rallying cry of Thai elites. In the name of anti-communism, local opposition was liquidated while the country participated in regional military adventures, basically invading and deeply wounding people of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia on behalf of the United States, Australia and other Western powers. Killing and torturing of the opposition is not the only issue not ventilated on the pages of U.S. and European newspapers. Other topics include terrible treatment of minorities (many non-Thai minorities do not have citizenship and therefore are deprived of basic services and assistance) and refugees (of the more than 1 million Burmese refugees, some endure near slave labor or virtual sexual slavery). On September 19, 2006, a military junta calling itself the Council for National Security overthrew Thaksin's government while he was abroad. The Yellow Shirts—a movement that defends monarchy and elites—inspired the event, which fell on the 60th anniversary of King Bhumibol's reign. As long as the elite structure and the monarchy were not endangered, the West did nothing to stop this gross interference in democratic process. No major international organizations left Bangkok, and no sanctions from abroad were imposed. (Compare this to the coup in Fiji, which endangered Australian interests there and led to both sanctions and an enormous media campaign). Although Thailand was never actually a democracy, since the country was for decades a staunch anti-communist warrior and ally, it was always awarded democratic status by Western media. One of the main cadres of the Yellow Shirts, Pipob Tongchai, said in February, "The U.S. wants to have 'traditional' government in Thailand. On September 19 the U.S. took no action against the Thai military. Coups don't matter as long as there is continuity. There was no U.S. intervention. And when Thailand has 'traditional' government, it actually means that the U.S. is fully in charge. It doesn't matter who is at its head—so Thaksin really doesn't matter." Now Western media is attempting to look objective once again, just as it was "objective" in covering East Timor up to 1999, Indonesian in 1965, or Papua and the Philippines today. In some publications one can hear voices of reason and truth. On May 18, the International Herald Tribune published a report by Thomas Fuller and Seth Mydans that said, "The protest movement defiantly encamped in Bangkok has its roots as a reaction to Mr. Thaksin's ouster, but it has since expanded to resemble a large social movement by less-affluent segments of Thai society rebelling against what they say is an elite that meddles to control Thailand's democratic institutions." The same reports later stated, "The government has insisted that soldiers fire only in self defense, but the death toll has been lopsidedly among civilians since violence erupted last Thursday. A government bureau said that 34 civilians and two soldiers, including General Khattiya, had been killed since Thursday and that 256 people had been wounded, almost all of them civilians. … Protesters have attributed some of the deaths to snipers who are stationed in several places around the city on top of tall buildings." But these voices are in minority. Not surprisingly, Western media corporations now control almost all news distributed around the world. Japanese filmmaker Takeshi Hata said, "All that Japanese networks report about Thailand is just a copy of what is said on CNN, BBC and other English-language news outlets." In neighboring Southeast Asian countries, the situation is even more extreme. The great majority of The Jakarta Post articles covering events in Thailand now comes directly from Reuters, and the situation is not much different when it comes to publications in Bahasa Indonesia, including dailies like Sinar Harapan. "The other side to media distortion and self-censorship is the way that mostly American academia have treated Thailand," explained Geoffrey C. Gunn, a longtime student of Lao politics and society. "What is going on now is a kind of white terror, pay back and disappearances and the entrenchment of a de facto military government. Of course big business and the West will look the other way. It was the Australian foreign minister who congratulated Abhisit on his near bloodless solution." It has been made increasingly irrelevant what the Redshirts really wanted to achieve, the cause for which they fought and many died. Their voices—those of poor men and women from the countryside and shantytowns—were silenced again, by both media and the military. |
|
|
|
| East European pros flocking in Thailand |
|---|
|
03/08/10 04:59
KarenHON |
|
|
|
quote Naughty Kitty : This is not about you Doc but I want to say. - If you visit to the grand Canyon in USA many times does it make you know more then a park ranger live there. - If you touch the Blarney Stone in Ireland are now an expert and can teach the Irish their country? - If you sit in cafe in France eating snails do you now know all there is about France? - IF you read a book on Israel does that mean when you go there you know all there is to know? if any of these questions is no then please tell me so many men come here sit in a bar or talk to ther buddies, or read on the net and then knwo my world more then I do? Kitty, you are an impressive person and you even get it making me to reflect about your argumentation, although it is not new to me. In a certain way your reaction is usual for a lot of Thai persons, whom I have had the pleasure to meet and to talk to. But what is qualifying you to proclaim for yourself being right? - You are Thai and you are born here; - I guess you have visited Thai schools making you being a product of Thai school system; - You live your life may be keeping your eyes more open than a lot of other Thai persons; - You are an independent escort woman; You tend not to allow non Thai persons having a critical opinion about things in Thailand. It is equal to my government in China. In its opinion China is Chinese business. But if other countries accepted this rule, nothing would improve on the field of human rights and freedom and welfare for the big majority of Chinese persons. Is Afghanistan business of the Talibans and local war lords, only? Should the USA and their allies there leave the country at once, because they cannot understand the situation as non born Afghan persons? You presume, that foreigners are not qualified or allowed discussing these things. Well, why not? What if persons publishing informations receive these informations from (Thai) persons who are more involved in these things than you can imagine? What if these persons have been working on such a matter for years, already? What if these persons spend more time and energy on these topics than you do, because it is their business? Finally, there are really Thai persons complaining by writing books and assessments. A friend of mine, she is a born Thai lady, often asks rhetorically: "How can Thai society improve, if we do not allow criticism and presume, that we and everything is great per definition?" May be, it is not absurd, when you start to write down your ideas. How can you know, that Thailand would not like your book? Who is Thailand in your understanding? I am open to learn from you. Take care Karen |
|
|
|
| Why are Asian Male Escorts failing? |
|---|
|
11/16/09 01:01
KarenHON |
|
|
|
Well, Kitty and Alexa,
a reply on this question is really quite simple! Why should an Asian woman (like me for ex.) pay for an (Asian) male escort? I cannot find one reason for doing this. Have a look on the avatars they often use, - pictures of their penises. Wow, very impressing :-(; a totally wrong sign! How could I be impressed by such a boy who might be sitting there, having nothing to show than his penis and his smile? Sorry, but this is not enough and furthermore the priorities are wrong. I would have to give him the money before a dinner date. During dinner, about what would we talk then? All these points would be a total turn off. It is in a certain way a logical reaction, when Asian women booking a male escort do not treat them well. A more interesting questions is, why do they book them? May be there are educational and historic reasons, too. As a woman I want to be conquered and impressed. In our case discussed, where is the impression such a guy is making on me? In my opinion it does not depend on the world area. Male escort providers are by far less numerous than female providers are. Karen |
|
|
|
| Blacklist launched! |
|---|
|
09/23/09 15:11
KarenHON |
|
|
|
quote Naughty Kitty : Karen why curious? do believe I have had men pay my rate only to have lunch and talk to me and no alone or sex of any kind? It true. I have had men too ask me go to business dinner and pretend I him wife. I do that too and they no sex. OF CAUSE most man want sex but it is not automatic. Peopel may be black and white in colour but not in they thinking. not every one is the same. Kitty, please do not misunderstand, you are right. Generally, not in this case only, I can say, that I agree with you. I like to read that business is not necessarily sex related. Then there should not be any problem, that we both will have a date for shopping and dinner during my next stay in Bangkok. :-) But you are talking about you. I have read, that your clients are business expats and business travellers. Weeks ago I have learnt, that there are escorts who are not interested in expats. These escorts seem having their clients among (quality) tourists. And now imagine, all escorts all over our planet had equal rates. Would then be an influence on escort business in Thailand or not? Furthermore things are often about money. Why are business expats living in Thailand and running production companies there, which export the produced items. It is not, because they cannot produce in the US, Japan or Europe. It is because total amounts on the pay roll are lower in Thailand. May be we can agree that the rates of escort have a certain influence at least? ;-) |
|
|
|
| • New Replies
• No New Replies ♥ Hot Topic (New Replies) ♥ Hot Topic (No New Replies) |
x Locked Topic
> Moved Topic |
|