PeterRS

My friends in China all agree. As for Xi's sabre rattling, I reckon it is more to prop up the hardliners in his government and the loyal Party supporters around the country. It makes for good copy and reasserts China's (make that Xi's) ambition. He can keep the situation in Tibet, Xinjiang and to a large extent in Hong Kong pretty much out of the media in China. But even in China there is absolutely no way an army of censors could keep news of an invasion of Taiwan with hundreds of thousands killed from his own people, the more so when he would have massacred fellow Chinese.

But how often do we have to be told that that argument holds no water in international law? Control of Taiwan was given to mainland China. Period! Almost every country in the world now agrees that there is but one China. That the Chinese government changed and became communist has nothing to do with it. Governments change all the time but that rarely affects their status in international law. That the communists beat Chiang fair and square should have the same result - no matter what the Taiwan islanders have wanted for a few decades and most of the rest of the world would prefer. Chiang Kai-shek was a fool in addition to being a gangster. His aim was always to marshal his forces on Taiwan so that eventually he would reconquer the mainland. I assume he reckoned that the USA would assist him. With his powerful and extremely persuasive wife Soong Mei-ling being a very popular and powerful figure in the USA, had he tried to do that in the 1950s, perhaps he just might have been successful, the more so after Mao's frightful campaigns Let a Hundred Flowers Boom and The Great Leap Forward when tens of millions of Chinese died. But he did not. What held him back, I do not know. But following Nixon's visit to China and the abandonment of the two China policy, it was Chiang's son, Chiang Ching-kuo, who accepted reality that he had to get rid of Martial law (1987) and do a great deal more than his father to develop Taiwan. The Taiwan situation is one of the longest-lasting outcomes of the Japanese Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, the Second World War and the Cold War combined. It is an outcome absolutely no one ever anticipated.

I find some of the comments in this thread mystifying. I don't know how often I have to write this but the legal position of Taiwan is actually pretty clear. As a result of the Cairo Conference with Churchill and Roosevelt during World War 2, agreement was reached that all countries invaded by Japan during its expansionist years would be returned to the countries which had in effect ruled them immediately beforehand. Like it or not, virtually all of Taiwan was ruled by Beijing and had been so for around 200 years The wording of the Declaration states ""all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, including Manchuria, Formosa, and the Pescadores, shall be restored to the Republic of China" (mainland China then being named prior to the revolution The Republic of China). Could that be more clear? At that time, of course, the gangster and murderer Chiang Kai Shek was the ruler of China. And so it was to Chiang and his Kuomintang Party that all Japanese occupied territories in China were returned. No-one, least of all the Americans, ever thought that Chiang and Mao would split after the war and that Chiang would be soundly beaten and flee to Taiwan. The accusatory "Who lost China?" was a refrain heard for years in Washington after 1949. Naturally the USA wanted out of the agreement it had formerly made. And so it summoned another Conference in San Francisco in 1951. The US wanted Chiang's newly declared Republic to represent China. The UK and others objected. They wanted Mao's government as the legitimate government of China. The result was that neither side was represented. The US then attempted to get out of its Cairo commitment but failed to do so. The delegates agreed that the legal position of Taiwan would remain in limbo to be determined at a later date. Since there has so far been no further legal determination and it remains uncertain if the declaration made at that Conference has any validity, whether we like or not - and most do not - in international law mainland China retains the rightful government of Taiwan. Of course, since 1951 events have moved on at great pace. China is now a world power. Taiwan has established democracy and a thriving economy. But the USA and the UN has also recognised mainland China as the legitimate ruler of all China. More recently, China has all but broken its agreement enshrined in the UN over its actions in Hong Kong. Beijing will certainly have noted that no other country has done anything about it, although the UK has promised to resettle a large number of British National Overseas passport holders - a rather strange document handed out to any Chinese in Hong Kong who wanted it prior to 1997. No other country seems to have done anything but make a small fuss. China is now too big to go against it for long. I agree, for the recent events in Hong Kong have definitely changed the equation. China knows it can do what it pleases in what it and international law regards as its territory. Could war erupt? Taiwan has defence forces (and a lot of extremely cute young guys who have been through the mandatory national service) but anyone who thinks they could stand up to the forces Beijing has at its disposal are in some fantasy land. They would be quickly wiped out. Against that, would Beijing wish to govern an island knowing that those whom it did not kill hate it. Taiwanese have now a taste for making up their own minds. They will not as easily be taken in by mind control as the Tibetans and the Uighyrs. Then there are Biden's latest foreign policy announcements. In the event of a seeming invasion, would the US come to Taiwan's aid, the more so given the legal situation? Who knows? But i'll put money on 'No'! It could build up its naval and air assets in the Taiwan Strait as a show of force, but would it actually use them? To do so would almost certainly risk a major war that could easily escalate and involve other countries. My good friends in Taiwan all would prefer independence. But to a man they certainly do not want any kind of war. So hopefully the stalemate resulting from the 1951 Conference can continue. This may mean Taiwan being a little less hostlle to China - as used to be the case in the first decade of this century. As I see it, the only way Taiwan can gain independence is if China collapses from within. And Xi Jinping is certainly not going to allow that to happen.

What a load a total b/s! I have lived in Bangkok for 20 years and have never had any transport problem with taxi drivers other than a couple with dodgy meters form the airport. The BTS and MRT are extremely safe! What are the new traffic rules for tourists that make it difficult to be part of the public transport system? I have never heard of any unless it is wearing a mask. And which parts of the city are highly dangerous for tourists? Never heard of any apart perhaps from gambling dens which tourists would never find. As for Bangkok being at risk of tsunamis? Funny, Bangkok has never suffered from a tsunami and is too far from the sea for this to be a potential risk. Earthquakes? Bangkok is not in an earthquake zone. There are no records of any earthquake in or near the city. I believe Chiang Mai might be close to a fault line but not Bangkok. The only time I recall the effect of any earthquake was the one off Indonesia 1,500 kms away which triggered the massive 2004 tsunami..

I wonder if they are so concerned about their dreadful image in the country that others mocking them by wearing part uniforms in sex videos may be too close to the truth.

I did know - and still know - friends of John Williams and I did know one friend of William Pleeth's son, one reason I added his father's story. I admit, though, that I have never quizzed any one of them about the sad death of Jacqueline du Pré. Although I had heard the rumours of her death having been hastened, I just assumed that were they true - and I repeat I have not the faintest idea if it is true or not - it was of no business of mine. The poor lady was clearly close to death and suffering badly. The only fact that concerned me was that one who lit up the world of music for a desperately short time had finally been released from her pain. What annoyed me about your initial post was your comment about Ms. du Pré's family which was in fact totally inaccurate and that the 'confession' in the autobiography might just have been inserted to help the publisher to sell the book. As if there is not enough controversy and gossip elsewhere in the book without making up a total fiction! Unfortunately, even her husband comes out of the tale without much credit, apart from getting his mother to come over from Israel for long periods. It is true he moved to Paris to become Chief Conductor of the Orchestre de Paris and therefore to be closer to London. But there he met and had an intense affair with the young Russian pianist Elena Bashkirova with whom he had two sons, both born before du Pré's death. So he had much more reason to be in Paris than looking after his sick wife in London. Only after du Pré died, though, did they marry. I know precious little about MS and have no idea what condition Ms. du Pré was in in the days immediately prior to her death. From the autobiography, Ms. Branch clearly knew her and was clearly a friend of some description. Equally, she had clearly visited the house. Yet in the Daily Mail article, Cynthia Friend neither confirms nor denies this. She also does not confirm when du Pré might have been able to say a few words. But as Daniel Barenboim points out, a man who more than anyone might perhaps wish her death to be hastened (although I absolutely do not believe this), the story is "unverifiable". Conspiracy theorists might suggest he could perhaps have been more emphatic by saying he absolutely did not believe it and considered it a stupid fiction! "Unverifiable" sounds a somewhat strange response! This all happened almost 35 years ago. In the death certificate, knowing her condition and that she was going to die in a few weeks, would her doctor have considered that there might have been a drug in her system which hastened her death? Had he done so, would he not have insisted on an autopsy? We cannot know. So, yes, there are two sides to the story and neither is fully believable. All we can do is listen anew to Jacqueline du Pré's recordings and marvel that such an extraordinary talent was with us if only for the briefest of periods. And that although her family treated her badly, her friends in the world of music adored her - as did the public. Let's just remember her for her music. The Elgar Concerto is stunning and arguably her greatest achievement but Elgar is not to everyone's taste, so here is a lighter, lusher Haydn Concerto with her husband Daniel Barenboim conducting the English Chamber Orchestra.

With respect, that is nonsense! I'm not sure where you get your information. Is there a website with the detail? I can only comment from what i have read in the reviews and articles regarding the autobiography AND the fact that the story of Ms. du Pré's death not being by natural causes is not new. We have to remember very clearly that her family was not at all caring for her, despite your claim. That was total fiction. Her sister Hilary and her husband were Jesus worshippers and lived in a pseudo-religious Sixties commune. They never forgave Jackie for converting to Judaism when she married the Argentinian/Jewish piano virtuoso, Daniel Barenboim. In fact, they were horrified. And they never let her forget that God would not forgive her! Hilary wrote a book "A Genius in the Family" in which she portrayed herself as an intense and loving sibling. She virtually portrays herself as a sort of Virgin Mary. Yet musicians who visited Jackie regularly, like the virtuoso Australian guitarist John Williams, totally reject that description, describing Hilary as a "nutty" woman who never cared for her sister, who abandoned her despite claiming that she was with her throughout her illness. Williams stated in a 1999 Observer article that her sister and brother were nowhere near her to support her. He adds "Two of her great friends, Cynthia Friend and Diana Nupern, who also died young, used to visit her every day." Cynthia Friend was actually with her when she died. Williams adds - "This stuff by Hilary is - well, it's all woohoo." Cynthia Friend writes - 'I saw her every day, just about. I used to sit and feed her by the end. I rarely saw her brother or sister - once, twice perhaps. I was an only child myself, and I always felt Jackie had no family either. 'They endlessly told her it was God's punishment. She used to ask me if that could be true. It's a bit sick really. 'At the end, the doctor said her death was imminent - it could be two hours, two days, a week. They didn't come. I don't understand that. There were a few of us there, and they didn't come. They came when she was dead. There was, says Friend, one member of the family who was amazing to Jackie - Barenboim's mother, Aida. 'When Daniel was away, touring or whatever, he would call her in Israel. One phone call and she'd drop everything: teaching commitments, husband, home. She'd come, for a month, six weeks. She always used to say to me, in that Israeli-Argentine accent of hers: "She has all this family, and where are they?" She could never understand it.' A few days ago, Friend read a magazine report that Hilary said that at the end Du Pré's so-called 'celebrity friends' had abandoned her. 'I felt like vomiting when I read that. We never deserted her. At the end, it got more and more difficult, but we didn't desert her. Her diary was full of people who came to be with her. Another article makes clear that not one of her family were with her the day she died. One who was was the cellist William Pleeth, the son of her beloved childhood teacher. Although she was by then unconscious, he had heard about people still being able to hear in such a state. So he put on the gramophone her superb recording of the Schumann Cello Concerto. It was during that recording that life slipped from her body. So I for one take what her family claimed as virtual nonsense. I agree with John Williams. They virtually abandoned her. They would have had no clue who visited and what a visitor might or might not have done. Miriam Margolyes' story had nothing to do with a made-up sensation to help sell a book. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/jan/24/theobserver.uknews1

She says in the book that she really enjoys them - and let the cat out of the bag by saying guests get £10,000 for each appearance!

I have no idea how Cathay still exists! The quarantine regulations in Hong Kong have been so severe for such a long time its business has clearly been decimated. I see it has just announced that for the fourth quarter it will only be operating 13% of its pre-covid passenger capacity. Thanks to its scheduling and excellent service (e.g. five daily JFK flights and five to London), it used to make a lot of its profit from first and business passengers on its many long haul routes. Much of that will have vanished. Pre covid it tried to raise some additional revenue by adding extra economy seats on its long haul 777s - from 9 across to 10 across. Having flown one of those aircraft, although thankfully only short haul, I would not be happy sitting in such cramped conditions on a New York or London flight. I remember during the SARS epidemic, it was quick off the mark by sending quite a number of its planes to Australia and parked them in some desert area until business picked up again. I guess quite a lot of its fleet is presently parked down there. Like Singapore Airlines, Cathay's biggest problem is that it has no domestic market. Every flight is international (assuming you count mainland China as international). Once Hong Kong finally opens up again, I expect front end travel will also pick up quickly. But since it already has HK Express, I simply cannot understand the rationale in opening up yet another LCC. Why not simply expand HK Express?

Well he can prosecute quite a few of us for writing about the continuing disappearance over so many years of the Red Bull heir for murdering one of his own cops own by mowing him down whilst speeding around 200kph on Sukhumvit with alcohol and drugs in his system and then fleeing justice. Start charging real criminals, Pol. Lt. Gen., before you go after those who offend your sense of morality. And you can put me in jail for a night for saying that, if you wish.

THAI has been unable to sell most of its A340s for well over a decade, ever since 2008 when it gave up its daily non-stop JFK route for which they were purchased. With no buyer for 13 years, I wonder how it is going to offload other outdated aircraft. Does any carrier still have plans now for the 747-400s? Only the -800 series with the slightly longer upper deck seems to be flying and it did not get many orders.

You may not know the name but no doubt you have seen her, either on television on cinema screens. She was a stalwart in the "Blackadder" tv series, played Professor Sprout in the "Harry Potter" movies, regularly appears in the UK on Graham Norton's show and more recently internationally as one of a group of pensioners visiting india and Japan in a series "The Real Marigold Hotel" based on the movie "The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel" and its sequel about retirees in an Indian hotel. Or in more serious vein in Martin Scorsese's movie "The Age of Innocence" and as the Nurse in Baz Luhrmann's version of "Romeo and Juliet" with Leonardo DiCaprio as Romeo. Now aged 80, openly lesbian since her early 20s and an LGBT activist, Miriam Margoyles has written her autobiography. One critic wrote, "Reliably outrageous and entertaining . . . a riotous memoir packed with jaw-dropping anecdotes." Another, "the heartbreaking emotional honesty of the book quite took my breath away." This is far from the usual rather stilted life story of a public figure. Margolyes lays it all out exactly as it happened, warts (of which there are many) and all. The book is all about sex, religion, money and politics with a little bit of early cock-sucking thrown in. Celebrity means nothing to her. After meeting Leonardo DiCaprio, she remembers the "dank unwashed" smell of his body. At Cambridge University she found the famous Footlights Review, that cradle of so many future professional comedians and actors, did not allow women. She reserves particular scorn for John Cleese who, she claims, "bullied and ridiculed her at 19. I'd not met studied cruelty like that before." Even today, 60 years later, she cannot forgive nor forget. Introducing herself on set to Stephen Fry, she simply said she was "the fat Jewish lesbian they have to have in this kind of film." Meeting her interviewer in her garden in South London, she calls over to the handsome gardener, "Marcos, do up your flies, there's a young lady here." Margolyes lives close to the daughter of famed actor Dame Judi Dench. During the lockdown, said Dame Judi, "She'd sit on her steps and have a cheering conversation with anyone passing by. I can think of no person that fits the description 'larger than life' as well as Miriam." The autobiography also gives away a very serious secret. For two years she went to therapy. Her therapist, Margaret Branch, remained a close friend. One day she wanted to talk about another patient, no longer alive. Anyone interested in classical music in the 1960s will know that one of the world's most famous young cellists was the extraordinary Jacqueline du Pré. She was in demand all over the world. Even today her recording of the Elgar Cello Concerto with Sir John Barbirolli is regarded as the gold standard for that work. Yet this English rose with so much to live for was forced to retire aged only 28 with the onset of multiple sclerosis. Her life then descended rapidly as the disease took hold until she died 14 years later in 1987 after being bedridden for years. In her memoir Margolyes reveals that du Pré had asked Branch to help her die. Unknown to the world until now, she did so. Margolyes recalls the conversation, the slow retelling, of how Branch had taken a syringe and “the liquid” and let herself into du Pré’s house when her staff had a day off. “I was trained during the war,” Branch told Margolyes. “If you want to help someone to die, or murder them without a trace, you inject them above their hairline. So, of course, I kissed her and I injected her…… And nobody ever knew it was me.” There is a pause. “A lot of people might ask, ‘Why tell that story? It isn’t yours,’” Margolyes says. “But I felt that it was such an important story about a very great artist it should be known, a kind of a public duty. I think it’s wonderful. Heroic, actually.” Naturally some of her autobiography concentrates on her partner whom she first met in 1968. Oddly, perhaps, they have never lived together. Heather lived in Australia for much of their relationship and is now based in Amsterdam. But they meet frequently for long periods and are still clearly very much in love. In her long life she has few regrets. As an only child, one was coming out to her mother about her sexuality. “Ian McKellen doesn’t agree with me,” she adds. “We often have discussions about this, because he feels that you should tell people who you are and they will eventually adapt. But,” she chuckles darkly, “he doesn’t know Jews.” "This Much Is True" by Miriam Margolyes is published in the UK by John Murray Press. https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/sep/19/miriam-margolyes-writing-my-memoir-was-terrifying-its-quite-revealing

You said you'd bottom! Bummer!

On my only visit I also stayed with a couple of gay friends with a home there. But i have another unrelated reason for liking the city. As part of a round the world ticket I had flown in from LAX and then on to SFO. The airline code for Palm Springs is PPS. When I got my monthly mileage statement I was amazed to discover that I had many thousands of miles for what is just a 100 mile trip. Checking in more detail, I found that American Airlines had credited me with mileage to DPS. DPS is Denpasar Bali! I'm the first to complain when mileage is under credited. Did I call American about the over credit? I'm not stupid! LOL Like @TotallyOz, I have visited all the top ten cities. Much as I love New Zealand which I visited twice for extensive trips, Wellington is too windy and too wet for my liking. I'd need to be in Auckland. Thanks to friends, I have spent many happy visits to Sydney which a few years ago would have been my first choice. But the climate issues and the dreadful annual bush fires would put me off now. So I'd opt now for the lovely city of Stockholm.

No doubt because it was where Liberace had his home 😲

The Philippines has a tendency to elect as Presidents people who are famous and near hopeless. Joseph Estrada was a popular actor who ran for President and won in 1998. He ended up being impeached and behind bars! Yet he was still elected Mayor of Manila for 2 terms from 2013 to 20191 The present incumbent Duterte was exceedingly popular as Mayor of the southern city of Davao. This despite Davao having the highest murder rate, the second highest rape rate and the fourth highest rate of all crimes in the country. He also ran a vigilante Death Squad which murdered 1,400 men, women and children as alleged criminals. His Presidential term has been clouded by accusations of extra judicial killings during his war on drugs. His comments on human rights have ben considered internationally as deeply offensive, provocative and threatening. During his campaign he outraged Australians with his comments about a missionary who had been gang raped and murdered. He claimed that as Mayor he should have had the right to be first in the rape queue! Yet the people of the country elected this foul man to the highest office, helping him see off a challenge from the son of the murdering, thieving Ferdinand Marcos by 263,000 votes. The Philippines really seem to pay little attention to the political credentials of their candidates. Now Duterte has announced that, as he is barred from a second term, he will run as Vice President for the elections to be held next year. It is even thought that Duterte's daughter may be on the ticket for President. Now, though, there is another famous name on the horizon. Manny Pacquiao is a world famous boxer. He is a senator in the Philippines parliament. He is also well known for his extremely homophobic comments. 5 years ago he stated that people in same sex relationships were "worse than animals." “Do you see animals mating with the same sex? Animals are better because they can distinguish male from female. If men mate with men and women mate with women they are worse than animals.” The outcry led to his doubling down on the remarks by referring to the Bible before eventually he apologised. Nike immediately withdrew his endorsement contract. He remains an outspoken advocate against the LGBT community. Whether he will win the election or not is way to early to tell. He is currently trailing in the polls, but electioneering has not started yet. And as a famous celebrity, I will not put money on his not being elected. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/feb/17/manny-pacquiao-gay-comments-nike-boxing

It seems the number of world's "best" lists just keeps growing. and whether or not you agree with them is partly up to personal experience. Every year since 2015 the Economist Intelligence Unit has compiled its world's Safest Cities list. This ranks 60 world cities on the basis of health security, infrastructure, personal security, digital security and, new this year, environmental security. I guess with international travel so limited over the last year, there were unlikely to be many changes. After all, six of the cities - Amsterdam, Tokyo, Melbourne, Toronto, Singapore and Sydney have featured in every list since it started. Tokyo, Singapore and Osaka have regularly featured in the top three. The surprise this year, though, is the city heading the list which is as follows- Copenhagen (up from 8th last year) Toronto Singapore Sydney Tokyo Amsterdam Wellington, New Zealand Hong Kong and Melbourne (joint 8th) Stockholm Eleventh place was also a tie between Stockholm and New York. "One key factor that makes Copenhagen such a safe city is its low crime rate, currently at its lowest level in more than a decade," Lars Weiss, lord mayor of Copenhagen, says in the report. "Copenhagen is also characterized by great social cohesion and a relatively narrow wealth gap. It is a mixed city where both the cleaning assistant and the CEO meet each other at the local supermarket and have their kids in the same school. "This is one of the very cornerstones of Danish culture, and it contributes greatly to the high levels of trust and safety that we benefit from." https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/the-worlds-safest-city-2021-revealed/index.html

I am sometimes accused (maybe too strong a word - perhaps 'considered' is more appropriate) as one who bashes the USA. Well, let me be the first to hail what I consider a stunning achievement. That ElonMusk's SpaceX not only reached space, not only flew for three days in orbits considerably higher than the Space Station and the Hubble Space Telescope, not only successfully returned to earth but was manned by four virtual strangers with no space experience is an absolute marvel.

@Gaybutton makes a persuasive case. I just do not see it happening. Either the prudes will get their way and, once they have cleaned up all the mess from the rains, start yet again trying to attract the family tourists or Pattaya will revert more to what it was like before the bars appeared - i.e. prior to the Vietnam War. Never especially keen on Pattaya as a place to stay even for a holiday, I did visit a few times, usually with friends who wanted to see the nightlife. I enjoyed some of the bars, especially those offering more sleazy entertainment of a type that used to be common in Bangkok but had all but petered out. No doubt demand will create its own supply - up to the limits imposed by the authorities. What those limits will be, I doubt if any of us has a clue.

I am delighted to say I had never heard of this lady prior to this thread and I have no desire ever to hear more of her.

We're obviously more or less on the same page. I abhor what China has been doing to the Uigyurs, its posturing against Taiwan (even though the legal status of Taiwan is very murky and it seems China does indeed have a legitimate claim as a result of agreements made by Churchill, Roosevelt and Chiang about returning all Japan's wartime conquests to the countries which governed them beforehand) and especially Hong Kong. In Hong Kong it seems to have broken international treaties and agreements that are lodged with the United Nations. Britain, the other party to those agreements, has done virtually nothing to stop China. Like many, I always thought that China would go all out in an attempt to make Deng's one-country-two-systems work and be seen to work. Had that happened, I suspect it could have been the only way Taiwan might eventually have considered a similar arrangement. That is now dead and only war will get Taiwan back into Beijing's grasp. Hopefully the present statement will just continue ad infinitum. As for Iran, I was extremely fortunate to visit when I did. Had I waited even a few months, I think the international situation would have made it too difficult. Lastly, the Tiananmen massacre - or as many historians refer to it, the Tiananmen "incident" - was utterly appalling. I would in no way do anything but condemn those who made it happen. Yet, I recommend everyone to read much more about it because it was not a long thought through cut-and-dried means to end the demonstrations. Very sadly it was a confluence of events that blew up relatively quickly. It started with just one seemingly insignificant event, the death of the ousted reformer General Secretary of the Party Hu Yao-bang in April that year. Thereafter it led to small protests about living conditions in Beijing's universities.As the protests increased, within the leadership there was an internal battle between the reformers whom Deng had placed in plower and the old guard led by the vile Prime Minister Li Peng. Whatever the background, though, the result was a stain that peole still only whisper about within China. But let's not forget that other countries have shot down their own students in cold blood simply for demonstrating. Does anyone remember Kent State University and the protests against the Vietnam War when National Guard troopers fired live rounds directly at student demonstrators? This is now called the Kent State massacre. Admittedly the scale was vastly smaller than Tiananmen Square but four innocent students were murdered and nine wounded, one permanently paralysed. And why do we today openly talk about the Tiananmen massacre when so few in Thailand talk about the Thammasat student massacre in 1976? This from TIME magazine. "With thousands of students under siege, authorities opened fire onto the campus with M-16s, recoilless rifles and grenades. For several hours, these forces — later joined by vigilantes — shot, beat, raped and murdered unarmed students, some as they tried to either flee or surrender. The chaos was used to justify a military coup later that same day. "Official figures put the death toll at 46, with 167 wounded and more than 3,000 students arrested. The death toll is disputed to this day, with survivors putting it at more like 100." Yet outside Thailand this is regarded as a peaceful country. If China is condemned for shooting its own students, why are Thailand and the United States not similarly condemned? And why does the world keep turning its back on the deadly unprovoked rampage of school shootings in the USA? There are mad people everywhere, not just in China. https://time.com/4519367/thailand-bangkok-october-6-1976-thammasat-massacre-students-joshua-wong/

Sorry this is a bit late. Those receiving the AstraZeneca vaccines in Bangkok hospitals are given a 12 week period between the two vaccinations.

My mileage and my views do vary to a certain extent. Perhaps one reason might be that I have travelled expensively. I have already mentioned the advances in China since first visit in 1980 to my most recent visit to Beijing pre-covid. As also mentioned, I believe you have to separate the people from the governments. The same was true when i was visiting Manila several times during the Marcos years in the early 1980s. He was a murdering, kleptomaniac dictator through and through but the average Filipino paid little attention. In the same time frame I was in Seoul at least a dozen times during martial law. Had I been out in the street before the midnight curfew, I could have been shot. But life for most Koreans did not reflect their leaders. Similarly I was in Taipei which did not get rid of martial law until 1987. It seemed to affect few Taiwanese who were always extremely friendly and open. I was in Moscow and St. Petersburg towards the end of the communist years. Those times were indeed oppressive and the people I met seemed less than welcoming. Yet I returned to both cities in 2010 and 2013 respectively and found massive changes. Especially in St. Petersburg, everyone was much more open and happy to come up and chat to strangers, even just when we were on a tram. Yet I absolutely dislike Putin and his regime. Most recently I was in Iran for a couple of weeks. It is a fabulous country and the people were extraordinarily friendly to this westerner, despite all the sanctions the west has imposed on them. Interestingly, everyone I spoke to on the streets, in the bazaars and hotels seemed to loathe their regime and were quite open about the vast corruption of the leadership. Once again I believe you must separate the people from regimes. The one country wild horses would not drag me to is North Korea for pretty obvious reasons.

A lot of countries are in a mess and there is nothing wrong with judging them. But I do believe it helps if that judgement is made after knowing something about the country they are trashing, its history, society, economic development etc. Having first visited China in September 1980 and over many dozens of future visits, including some extensive ones for work, I think it is wrong, as I have stated somewhere else on this forum recently, to judge any country not in the west by western standards. I don't believe the Being government is seen as assholes by its own people. Other Asian countries have gladly accepted China's financial largesse and the huge number of tourists it sent out pre-covid and the many more who will eventually travel if covid ever gets under control. We may thoroughly dislike, even loathe, its leadership for the way it conducts itself internationally. But that is not a reason for trashing an entire country, in my view. I disliked Trump to the point of utter loathing and I still fail to understand why Americans could even consider voting for him. That the majority of Republican Congressmen and Senators regard him as some sort of saviour after all his lies, his bullying and goodness knows what else is something I find totally mad. I think Boris Johnson is a total buffoon who should never have got within a million miles of the British Prime Ministership. I have almost nothing good to say about the government of Thailand, and little more about that of Japan. These, though, are not reasons for calling their countries assholes IMHO.

I had no idea that Mao's poetry was required reading in schools and I can find no reference to this. Frankly, experts agree that Mao was anything but a great poet. I like the description of his literary attempts by an eminent British translator of Chinese literature, "not as bad as Hitler's paintings but not as good as Churchill's!". But it has since been discovered that Mao actually stole some of his Cultural Revolution poems from the poet Chen Mingyuan. Chen later refused to deny that he was the author in an edition of the Beijing Review in 1986. When he earlier discovered Mao's theft of his work, he wrote to Mao's right hand man, the much respected Chou En-lai. Chou said Chen should not be punished for speaking out. But that did not happen, Chen endured a dozen years of misery that included imprisonment and four years of hard labour. Like many in those years, he attempted suicide. Your mention of poetry sparkes a memory. One of the foremost poets in Chinese arts and literature in the first half of the century was Guo Moruo. He was even called China's Goethe. In his famous Book of Poems published in 1920, he proved to be a passionate champion of creativity and individualism. Although from a wealthy family, he eventually sided with the Mao's communists. He was appointed Head of Propaganda. After the success of the Revolution, he was given various senior Party posts. But many of Mao's contemporaries felt his Party credentials were not sufficient and criticised him. Mao shielded him. "His merits outweigh his demerits," he is alleged to have said . During the Cultural Revolution, crowds started to mass outside his house. He bent with the wind and started writing poetry praising Mao and his dreadful wife Jiang Qing. Even so, two of his sons were murdered. Once the carnage of that dreadful period was finally over, by 1978, he returned to his former lifestyle and attempted through his poetry to revert to his former style. In his eulogy after he died, Deng Xiao-ping lauded Guo's "infinite loyalty". Yet as so often happened, the Cultural Revolution had virtually devoured one of its own. Fortunately Guo remains once again revered in China and his home in Beijing is now a Museum.