Feedback:by email
Other Useful links
World Time Clock Exchange
Rates Nationsonline.org
Amnesty
International Reporters w/o
borders
Sister Joan - Bangkok
BKK Magazine
The opinions expressed on these pages are entirely personal unless they are credited; you may not agree with all, or anything, that I write. So please use the feedback page to respond, comment or berate me.
| Patriotic Games 21 February 2004 A week ago flying through Hong Kong the newspapers were full of the debate over what defines a patriot in Hong Kong. Today flying through Hong Kong the same debate is still on the front page. China Daily stirred up the latest debate: the newspaper argued that those who rule Hong Kong must love the motherland (China) and must safeguard the fundamental interests of the country. The China Daily editorial was outrageous. It basically said that dissenting views, debate, foreign interference and discussions of democracy should not be tolerated. I have argued before that one country two systems will not last the planned 50 years. It may not even last for 10 years. China's expectation is one country one system. China Daily said that "some people in the SAR, who are currently in positions of power, do not meet this pre-requisite to be rulers of Hong Kong. They are not willing to live under "One Country". They keep on hassling the SAR government and the central authorities. They are opposed to legislation for national security, organize or participate in activities against the central government, invite foreign intervention in Hong Kong affairs and lend open support to Taiwan independence." Beijing is clearly trying to intensify the political reform debate; and to move Hong Kong away from a move to greater democracy. It is simply not good enough to brand the democrats as unpatriotic. There is nothing wrong with loving your country whilst also seeking political reform. The two can, and often do, go hand in hand. You can have pride in your nation irrespective of your political persuasion. The danger with such an emotional term as patriotism is that anyone who is defined as unpatriotic can find that they are persecuted for a crime that they have not committed. The 500,000 Hong Kong Chinese who marched last July were not unpatriotic. The students in Tianenmen Square were not unpatriotic. Many patriots embrace and want change because it makes the country that they love a better place. Patriotism is not blind obedience to the government of a country. Patriotism is about what is best for the people and for the country; not necessarily for its government. Is it patriotic to accept a government that suppresses critical information on infectious diseases (SARS and avian flu), that does not allow religious freedom; that seeks to control freedom of speech and association. True patriots will look past this and should be applauded for doing so. Being patriotic is about what is best for the people not for the ruling party. This is the message that Hong Kong could help promote. Another plea to free the Guantanamo 600 20 February 2004 I have argued before that the lock up of over 600 people in Guantanamo is immoral and illegal. The US prides itself in its constitution and its human rights. In its post September 11 trauma people have been locked up now for 2 years, without charges, without legal representation and without knowing the evidence (if any) against them. Two reports follow; one from Amnesty International and one from the Guardian newspaper; both should raise serious concerns among fair minded people at the conditions and well - being of the detainees. This report from the Guardian is indicative of the conditions that the hostages (that really is the only word for them) are kept in. Action is needed; press charges; go to trial; or release these hostages immediately. Amnesty International: USA: "Double jeopardy" for some Guantánamo detainees
Write to President George Bush today to seek justice for the Guantánamo detainees. You may wish to use the letter below as a guide. Appeals to
No rights, no charges, no lawyers
... life in the Cuban camp beyond the law
Among those detained were nine British nationals, captured in Afghanistan or Pakistan by the US or its allies, who were wheeled in on trolleys, blindfolded and manacled, wearing orange jumpsuits. The Britons were sometimes locked up for 24 hours a day, seeing nothing apart from the cramped cells in which they were kept, a small exercise yard and the American interrogators who questioned them without any legal restriction. They were classed by the US authorities as illegal enemy combatants, and Washington argued they were thus not entitled to the protection of international law. The US case was that they were hardened terrorists linked to violence. But some in the US military admitted that the detainees were actually being held for any information they might have about suspected terrorists. Their families in Britain have feared for the mental health of the nine, and without any hard news, have feared that they have been tortured. The only contact they have is occasional letters which are censored by the US. Outrage over Guantanamo Bay gradually became an embarrassing political problem for Tony Blair, with MPs from all parties condemning the US for a regime that broke international laws. Even some in the Bush administration admitted that the issue was damaging America's standing abroad. The British government was accused of being less vocal than other countries in efforts to aid the detainees. The pressure on the prime minister to secure the return of the nine increased in July last year after President George Bush designated two Britons to stand trial before military commissions, whose rules led critics to brand them as kangaroo courts. The two were Feroz Abbasi, 23, from Croydon, south London, the first Briton known to have been incarcerated in Camp Delta, and Moazzam Begg, 35, from Birmingham. Judgment Britain said it had "reservations" about the US commission, where military officers would sit in judgment on charges brought by their government. Conversations between the accused and their military-appointed lawyers were to be monitored and the rules were so biased in favour of the prosecution that some of the US military officers supposed to represent the detainees protested. The attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, flew back and forth between London and Washington trying to broker a deal to end the deadlock over the British detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Talks were also held between the US secretary of state, Colin Powell, and the foreign secretary, Jack Straw. Britain wanted either fair trials which met international standards for the British detainees at Camp Delta, or a return home. The US insisted that any returnees should face trial in Britain, something Lord Goldsmith could not guarantee because there was no certainty that any evidence the US might have could be used in a British court. Yesterday US state department spokesman Richard Boucher stressed the five Britons were to be "transferred" and not released. The US courts have until now refused to intervene, arguing that Guantanamo Bay, a 45-mile stretch of Cuba held by the US, is not American soil and not covered by US laws. Razor wire surrounds Camp Delta, which is floodlit at night. Inside the compound are the huts, which each contain 48 individual cells. Electric blowers battle to cool temperatures which can reach over 43C (110F). Each cell, 8ft by 6ft 8in, is surrounded by mesh, to ensure that the detainees can be seen at all times. Lights burn into the cells through the night. On the floor, a painted white arrow points to Mecca. Whenever they leave their cells the Britons are manacled, such as when they are escorted to a 25ft by 35ft exercise area. Rebellion In Camp Delta the prisoners can exercise two at a time, for half an hour, between three and seven times a week, depending on how well they comply with orders. Some, however, prefer the small acts of rebellion available to them, and one in 10 inmates is deemed "non-compliant". Offences have included throwing water at the guards and stuffing cereal bar wrappers down the toilets. Some of the Britons due to be released have been held in Camp Four, where they are allowed outside for up to 10 hours a day and wear white jumpsuits instead of the notorious orange in Camp Delta. A place in Camp Four is a reward for those the US considers have cooperated with it. But the conditions have taken a toll on at least one of the Britons. After examining Mr Abbasi, a Pentagon-selected psychologist concluded that he "had exhibited withdrawn behaviour suggestive of recurrent depression". He was also reported to have not said a word to British officials during welfare visits, taken by his family as a sign that his mental condition was deteriorating. Mr Begg is believed by his family to have cracked after repeated questioning and confessed to a plot to attack the Houses of Parliament with planes laden with anthrax. His supporters say this is a sign that he will say anything in the hope of getting out. There have been at least 28 suicide attempts among the 680 detainees. The International Committee for the Red Cross, which has limited visits to the detainees, condemned the regime at Camp Delta, saying detainees suffered "extreme stress and anxiety. "The uncertainty these internees face as regards their legal status and their future does have a very adverse impact on their physical and mental wellbeing," said an ICRC spokeswoman, Antonella Notari. "A lot of them are pushed to despair." Officially, the US has given no information about the British detainees. But some guards gave details to the Guardian about the lives the Britons lead. Sergeant David Keefer said: "I'd say they fare better in this environment because the connection is easier for us with them [because of the shared language], and for us to facilitate their needs." He added that they were "helpful, if they are in a good mood", acting as unofficial interpreters. The guards speak no Arabic or Urdu and many inmates speak no English. "They want to talk about football, they want to know the scores, what club is strong or about the Cup." Another guard, Private Jennifer Bartlett, said the Britons were suffering. "Some get angry and do not want anything to do with anyone. Some sit there and talk about their family, tell you about their kids - it helps them cope with it." Their apparently endless detention depresses them, she admits. "It's just the duration of the time they have spent here, not knowing what's going to happen, when they are going home. "They will sit and read a letter from their family, and they are frustrated, sometimes they get down. Sometimes they cry after reading their letters." When they receive them, that is. "Toxinomics" - how conflicts of interest can be damaging 18 February 2004 The latest edition of the Far East Economic Review contains an article that should trouble the Thai voters and that should be an alarm bell for the government. The message may not be heard, the Thai government is not entirely comfortable with criticism; indeed it was not easy to find a copy of this edition of the FEER in Thailand. The FEER highlights the conflict of interest between the government's economic strategy and the interests of the Shinawatra family businesses, the huge business empire that operates mainly in the sales and services for mobile telephony, as well as in property, media, satellites and consumer finance. The family businesses are mainly in the consumer sector and benefit from government policies of cheap credit, low interest rates, a strong baht, pushing consumption and a strong stock market. Including the holding company the group has listed six companies with more expected to follow. A strong stock market is key to Shin's ambitious listings strategy, Thailand's key industries are in exports, manufacturing, agriculture and inbound tourism; these are not Shinawatra businesses. These industries are not helped by the strong baht. Export growth has slowed; household debt has risen too quickly; the stock market is being driven by excessive speculation. No one wants a repeat of the market crisis of 1997 but that is the direction that we may be heading in. These trends should be brought under control. But to do so would take away some of the momentum enjoyed by the Shinawatra companies. There is a clear conflict of interest that needs disinterested economic management. Intimate Interns 15 February 2004 The feathers are starting to fly. The US presidential election is not until November but the gloves are off and the mud slinging has started. It will be a messy nine months. The War President is already trying to explain how come he was not in Vietnam. Interesting how things change. Clinton went to Canada to avoid the draft so the Democrats could hardly play the Vietnam card eight and twelve years ago. Now the Democrats have a genuine battle hardened and decorated hero as their front runner. John Kerry looks and sounds the part. But - does he have a Monica. The story is bigger in Europe than it is in the USA. But it seems a two year relationship was ended last year as Kerry started on the campaign trail. Out of site and out of mind his intern appears to have been banished to Africa, presumably well looked after financially. Her name is Alex Polier; she is 24 and apparently has fled to Kenya to escape the media. Kerry had better come clean quickly on this. If there is dirt to be found the Republicans will find it. They cannot find WMD but they are adept at finding WCD - Weapons of Character Destruction. Bangkok: Asia's Not So Much Fun Anymore City 15 February 2004 There will soon be a national bedtime. We should all be in bed by 10.30pm. There should be no TV after this time; there should be no electricity so that we are not disturbed by VCDs/DVDs or Karaoke. The streets should be policed (they already are judging by the number you see on almost every street corner) to ensure that there are no lights on and close circuit tv should be in all homes so that we can be seen to be in bed on time! It is not quite that bad yet. Although a proposed curfew on teenagers is being rethought. Someone appears to have rather belatedly asked - what about the constitution? It really is not the role of the state to do what any decent parent is supposed to be doing ! The new rules separate the city into approved entertainment zones and the rest. But the entertainment zones are few and far between. There are 3 areas in Bangkok - Patpong, RCA and Ratchadapiseck. It is not clear how far Patpong extends. In the entertainment zones a disco or nightclub has to close by 1am. A hostess bar or pub has to close by 2am. I believe they can all open at 6pm. If you are not in an entertaiment zone; ie the other 95% of Bangkok you may only open between 9pm and midnight. It is not clear what this means for popular hotel nightclubs such as Spasso at the Hyatt or CM2 at the Novotel. It is not clear how this effects hotel lounges? Can they serve drinks after midnight? It is clear that farang friendly places like Nana Plaza will take a big hit. I don't really have too much of a problem with midnight closing. My problem is that this takes away the freedom of choice. Many people work late; they get stuck in BKK's still horrible traffic; they may have a late dinner; they want to go out later and talk, drink or dance or all three at the same time. Either they will have to go to one of the three zones; which presumably will get over crowded and (more) expensive as a result or they will have to buy a bottle and make their own entertainment. And yes sometimes people do want to go out and celebrate and party until late. The government's reasoning is that there has been a marked increase in youth crime and in underage drinking. Closing the bars earlier does not solve this. Enforcing age limits in bars and clubs; proper id checks; not selling drinks to under age kids. That is the solution. And for all the complaints from farangs, tousists and the nightlife industry most Thais that I have asked support the government's measures. For the women they seem to think that their husbands may be home two hours earlier. And for the guys, well they will find away around the new restrictions. Close the bars early and yes some I am convinced will go out of business. There will be people out of work and there will be more bar girls on the streets. Meanwhile SIngapore, previously Asia's dullest city, is now party central with bars and clubs open until 6am. Chicken Flew 11 February 2004 Only in Thailand ! Thai Airlines new low cost carrier was initially announced as SkyAsia. The airline was announced in today's media as "NokAir." 
In a Message from the CEO on their new web site he says that: Pity he missed the obvious puns; like Nok Down Fares! The logo is shown here. Either they missed the whole bird flu scare that continues across South East Asia or they think that they may just get some extra publicity as a result of using this rather crass name and promotional material. Most entertaining of all is their recruitment page for "air hostress" (sic - I guess it is a tough job) which asks for people who want to: "Spread your wings with Nok Air. If you are energetic, living, friendly, service-minded and most importantly , wish to work with us, please click on your interested position and fill out the application form. Be prepared to join the fleet and grow with us –Nok Air , the only airline that makes a journey an incredible experience." I guess it is hard to apply if you are dead!! Maybe the airline slogan could be "Chicken Flew" !!!!
Why Colin Powell and Justin Timberlake both feel a right tit ! 9 February 2004 In his very telling commentary on the deceptions of the US and UK governments (published below) Gary Younge writes in today's Guardian that "it is true that nobody knew for sure before the war if Saddam had WMD. But it is even truer that anyone who claimed to know for sure that Iraq did have them was lying". Frankly that is how people feel. Certain politicians previously widely respected, have clearly lied. They have presented facts and evidence which they must have known were not facts or were not first hand verifiable evidence. Or they simply got too lazy and accepted that what they were told was true was in fact true. But as the headline says, ignorance is no excuse. I would love to know what Colin Powell really thinks. Is he ashamed or angry about his presentation to the UN where "Jabbing the air and slapping the table, he offered "not assertions, but facts" and "evidence, not conjecture"". He must at the very least feel a right tit ! And there is the link to Justin Timberlake! If I say something is a fact then you should reasonably expect that I have verified that fact. You should not expect me to simply report something verbatim. The issues were huge. The import of the decisions that had to be made were huge. And people who should no better were either too lazy or too self serving. It is of course no surprise the the US can investigate Janet Jackson's televised bare breast quicker that they can investigate how it was that poor information took the nation to war. At least Janet Jackson made a clean breast of the issues; more than can be said for the politicians who are covering up more than Ms Jackson ! It is time for people to say enough is enough. The US and UK forced regime change in Iraq. Now the people will have to force regime change in the US and UK. Bush and his henchman should not be re-elected. That will be a strong message that people will not tolerate being misled. Similarly since Blair cannot be trusted again, and since he was either lazy or duplicitous, he cannot be re-elected. The Tories may not be any better; but in a democracy this is the only way for the people to say that they have been mis-governed and that they deserve better. This issue is not going to go away. Not until there are changes and resignations. And that cannot be the civil servants and a few people who did what they were told to do. The buck stops at the top. That's where the pressure came from. It is a shame that this issue will end a number of outstanding careers. But end them it must. Saddam's greatest victor may come after his capture. Tony Blair will resign by the summer. And there will be other casualties. Colin Powell should do the decent thing and retire as well. His political aspirations are history. Bush will survive until the November elections. But John Kerry looks electable and the American people need the courage to make change happen.
America's best friend may be her worst nightmare February 6 2004 One of my friends complains that I do not write enough about events in South Asia. To be honest I am reticent about writing about a region and issues that I know so little about. However, the revelations of the last few days from Pakistan should scare us all. They should also serve as a significant warning to the US and her allies that Iraq was really not the issue and that terrorist access to nuclear technology is the real threat to global sanity. When the UN's top nuclear official describes the trade in nuclear technology as a dangerous supermarket then action is needed. But where there is a demand for arms, and a need for cash, there will always be a supply. Addul Qadeer Khan, is a hero to Pakistanis. He masterminded Pakistan's nuclear programme. He also for years traded nuclear information and equipment to Iran, Libya and North Korea. Mr. Khan after a somber televised confession was pardoned by the Pakistan President, Pervez Musharraf. America's supposed best friend in the war on terror, Pakistan, may prove to be the source of a global nightmare. Lets be frank here. Pakistan has knowingly sold or bartered nuclear weapons-related technology over some 20 years for financial gain in defiance of law, common sense and morality. Mr. Khan did not act alone. It would be impossible to do so. There have been blanket denials of knowledge or complicity form Pakistan's military and civilian leaders. Pardoning Mr. Khan has presumably bought his silence. President Musharraf claims that Mr. Khan's activities were unofficial. Khan now insists that he acted alone reversing earlier claims that he had made. If these comments are true then the incompetence of the authorities in safeguarding Pakistan's nuclear assets is just mind boggling. In the meantime, while Libya and Iran were developing their nuclear weapons programme the US, Britain and Europe turned an apparently blind eye, focused as they were, solely on Iraq. Let the people decide February 5 2004 Finding the scapegoat will be much easier than finding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. The problem is here we go with another navel gazing enquiry. And once more the terms of reference are narrowly stated and once more people who do not get the answer that they want will protest loudly after the event. All this drags on. And frankly it is getting dull. One option for Tony Blair, call a snap election. Let the people decide. Do they want a New Labour government and another five years of Tony Blair? Or do they want a change? And is that change an acceptable alternative. Tony Blair' has now set up a wide ranging inquiry into intelligence on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq but debarred the inquiry from examining the political and diplomatic decision to wage war, and the legal basis for doing so. The terms of reference permit the inquiry to examine the accuracy of the intelligence but not whether the threat was sufficiently big or imminent to justify war. The inquiry will meet in private. Some of the evidence may be published. This is hardly a frank open and transparent review. But it is in part justifiable. The workings of the intelligence gathering community should not be open to public scrutiny; other wise they are just a service not a secret service. But they should be accountable to the elected Parliament who used that information to support a vote calling for war. The Iraq war was a milestone constitutional event, in that the House of Commons was explicitly given, for the first time in British history, the power to decide between war and peace. If parliament now has the power to commit our troops in battle, then it should also have the power to examine the lessons and wisdom of its own decision. Truly it is all a bit of shambles. There is a similar inquiry in the USA. What are the odds that the US and UK will find fault with each other's intelligence. Or on the other hand that both inquiries will contrive to report very similar findings! Tony Blair must pray that someone will stumble across an Iraqi cave stuffed full of anthrax and nuclear warheads. But that is not going to happen. Saddam was a gruesome dictator. We and the people of Iraq are will rid of him. But Tony Blair has lost the people; and he has lost the moral authority to govern. No one will trust him again. Why does he carry on? Because he does not want Iraq to be his downfall. But I think it is time for the people to decide if he is fit to govern. And the Labour Party will have to decide whether he is an electoral asset or a liability.
Pattaya Today February 4, 2004 One of the more entertaining sources of information in Thailand is the Pattaya press. There is a large foreign community in Pattaya enjoying the wide range of entertainment available there together with the cheap lifestyle! The local news is inevitably full of crime and injury. And there is a family sadness and tragedy behind each story. For the outsider what makes it entertaining is the lively manner of the reporting. Some examples for you from the latest edition: the captions are mine; the stories are as written. I guess this one was from Starbucks (think about it !) "A 37 year old Thai man departed this daily grind prematurely after he collided on his motorbike with several vehicles coming in the opposite direction." Mathematically challenged The evils of drink were sadly illustrated in front of the Malee apartment house, soi Bhukaow, where an unprovoked stabbing, or two to be precise, took place. Easy to identify ??? Khun Samor, a 48 year old from Nongprue sub district, reported to police major Tawatchai Krobgratoke that she was riding her bike in Soi Khaothalow, en route to meeting her friend, when four men accosted her. She was told to stop and the despicable villains helped themselves to her purse containing 2,000 baht in cash, a credit card and a fifteen gram weight gold necklace. The group then sped off on their own machines. Unfortunately, the victim was not able to identify helpfully any of the criminals because they took care to hide their visual features behind several hats. However, they were probably in their early twenties and of average build for Thai males. Smart criminals Pattaya Today reported in its last issue (January 16) that Best Inn on soi Bhukaow had suffered the ransacking of 46 out of 66 safety boxes with a loss of more than one million baht in cash and valuables. The reason why the other 20 boxes were left alone is that they were empty. Very definitely dead on arrival ! Witnesses said that the victim was Khun Tong
Tew, a 42 year old baht bus driver. Why journalists should report the news and should not be the news February 4 2004 Much has been written about the Hutton enquiry. What has been written shows the difference between good and dubious journalism. When it comes to reporting the news few do it better than the British. The coverage of the Hutton reports conclusions and reactions to the report was suitably thorough, But journalists rally around each other. Criticise one, and the whole profession is criticised. Some of the press comment and editorialising has been in fantasy land. The media are supposed to report the news. The trouble is they increassingly want to be the news and that is not good enough. Lets see a little praise and some thanks. Hutton did a good job, He conducted his inquiry quickly and with complete transparency. His report is overwhelmingly consistent with the evidence presented to him. The media had already reached its own conclusions and since Hutton did not give them what they wanted they tuned on Hutton calling his report a whitewash! One truism; journalists are not purveyors of truth; whatever they think of themselves. Much of their commentary and reporting is simply prejudice unsupported by facts. Worse still in Britain their appear to be a journalistic contempt towards politicians (and to democracy) and to judges (and the law). The British revel is being cynical. They love to be on the outside throwing bricks at the establishment. That is fashionable. Being part of the establishment is not fashionable. But the establishment has processes, dignity and integrity that the media could learn from. The Economist is not great fan of Blair's government. And although it supported the Iraq war it has consistently called for a review of the evidence of WMD, their editorial last week was spot on. Gilligan's report it said was "typical of much of modern British journalism, twisting or falsifying the supposed news to fit a journalist's opinion about where the truth really lies. Some in the British media have described such journalism as 'brave'. Sloppy or biased would be better words". In a signed article by the Financial Times editor Andrew Gowers, he described this "dreadful misadventure" as a wake-up call for British journalism, and said it "should prompt us to resist the easy, superficial certainties of parti pris opinion and rediscover the virtues of accuracy, context and verification". The threat to modern journalism arises from the media's disrespect for facts, the avoidable failure to be fair, the want of explanation and the persistent desire for melodrama. Time to report the news not to be the news. Time to be accurate and not smug. Time to show a little respect. If you want to be in opposition get elected
|