Gaybutton

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

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

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

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

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

More like to dis-prove them.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

bump

bump

bump

bump

Friday, October 10 Opening Rates: US Dollar: 34.23 Euro: 46.32 British Pound: 58.14 Australian Dollar: 22.69 Canadian Dollar: 29.425 _____ Closing Rates: US Dollar: 34.17 Euro: 46.25 British Pound: 57.725 Australian Dollar: 22.4725 Canadian Dollar: 29.3325 Since there has not been highly significant exchange rate changes since the surge that got me to start this thread, after I report today's closing rates, this is where I'm going to discontinue reporting the rates. If I see the rates making significant movement, I'll start the daily reports again, but on a new thread. In the meantime, I get my information from the Bank of Ayudhya web site. I find that site to be the most generally accurate regarding the rates you actually receive when exchanging money in Thailand and they report updated rates several times each day. I advise you to use the rates Bank of Ayudhya reports rather than other web sites. Many web sites report the offshore, or some other type of exchange rate, and often people end up with an unpleasant surprise when they exchange money or pull money at an ATM if they were relying on those rate reports. Those of you who wish to keep up with the current rates can do so at: http://www.krungsri.com/eng/exchange01.aspx

At the time the official line was saying 40. Whether that's still what they want is anybody's guess now. For several months, long before all of the political hysteria began, the prediction was the exchange rate would be 35 to the US dollar by the end of the year. Given the average movement since the crisis began, it could still happen that way. Again, your guess is as good as anybody's. There's no telling what's going to end up happening, but I would have no objection at all if it gets into the 40's again. I predicted a baht crash two years ago. I hasn't happened and in all honesty I don't know what's keeping it from crashing. As I've said many times, I know virtually nothing about economics, but I do know what makes sense to me. The fact that the baht is still holding relatively strong despite everything that has happened over the past couple years goes beyond my understanding. I still think the baht will crash. I just hope the US dollar doesn't crash right along with it.

If I am in town I'm always available to help people new to Pattaya get started. On Wednesdays, if you're here in time, a group of us go for dinner at the Olé restaurant at 7pm, and it's very close to Two Guys. It's very easy walking distance. I'll be happy to pick you up at Two Guys if you wish to join us, although I'm having some car trouble. If the car ends up in the shop, we'll see that you get there. If you can make it, we'll all be happy to help you. Several people who have lived in Pattaya for years will be there and we'll be able to help you with everything you want to know. If you're interested, send an Email to me at gaybutton@gmail.com and I'll reply with my phone number.

Web Surfers Face Dangerous New Threat: 'Clickjacking' Frederick Lane, newsfactor.com Internet and Web browser security experts are sounding the alarm about a new type of malicious attack called "clickjacking," a technique that can be used to dupe Web surfers into revealing confidential information while clicking on seemingly innocuous Web pages. Among other things, a clickjacking attack can be used to take control of a computer's Webcam and microphone without the knowledge of the user. Clickjacking has been identified as a vulnerability for the Adobe Flash player, as well as for every major browser, including Firefox, Internet Explorer, Opera, Safari and even the newly released Google Chrome. "It is a very serious problem," said Giorgio Maone, the author of a widely praised free Firefox extension called NoScript, which blocks potentially malicious scripts from running in the Firefox browser. "Clickjacking is a very simple attack to build, and now that the details are out, any script kid can try it successfully," Maone warned. "There's no estimate to the number of trap sites, and it's unlikely that we will see any credible report about the number of sites using this technique, because there are literally infinite ways to implement such an attack, therefore no signature-based scanning can detect it automatically." Unauthorized Access to Information The growing severity of the clickjacking problem was identified by Robert Hansen, CEO of SecTheory, and Jeremiah Grossman, CTO of WhiteHat Security. The two were scheduled to speak publicly about their discovery last month at the Open Web Application Security Project NYC AppSec conference in New York, but postponed their talk in order to give Adobe and browser companies a chance to come up with a solution. Reacting quickly to the announcement, Adobe released a security advisory Tuesday, describing the threat as "critical" and instructing users on how to turn off Flash access to cameras and microphones. "We have just posted a Security Advisory for Flash Player," wrote David Lenoe, Adobe's security program manager, on the Adobe security blog, "in response to recently published reports of a 'clickjacking' issue in multiple Web browsers that could allow an attacker to lure a Web browser user into unknowingly clicking on a link or dialog. This potential 'clickjacking' browser issue affects Adobe Flash Player's microphone and camera access dialog." Lenoe said a patch for Flash would be ready by the end of October. Unfortunately, as Hansen and other researchers have pointed out repeatedly, Flash clickjacking is only one of the variants of this problem. In a lengthy blog posting about the issue, Hansen said that "there are multiple variants of clickjacking. Some of it requires cross-domain access, some don't. Some overlay entire pages over a page, some use iframes to get you to click on one spot. Some require JavaScript, some don't. Some variants use CSRF to preload data in forms, some don't. Clickjacking does not cover any one of these use cases, but rather all of them." A Structural Problem of the Web Hansen warned that it will be challenging to come up with a comprehensive solution to prevent the clickjack threat because of the nature of the code that underlies the Internet. Maone agreed. "This problem comes from features which are integral to the modern Web as we know it," he said, "and especially from the ability of Web pages to embed arbitrary content from different sites, or to host little applications (applets) through plug-ins like Adobe Flash, Java or Microsoft Silverlight." Maone predicted that a general browser fix won't be developed any time soon, since the real solution lies in developing a general consensus about changing existing Web standards in the various Internet standardization groups. ____________________ You'll find the information for the Flash Player workaround here: http://www.adobe.com/support/security/advi.../apsa08-08.html

The following appears in the BANGKOK POST: _____ THAI Plans More Cutbacks BOONSONG KOSITCHOTETHANA Thai Airways International is moving to cut back flights, especially on regional routes, in line with the sharp drop in passenger demand due to the political turmoil and the global financial crisis. ''The situation has deteriorated from bad to worse, well beyond our expectation. [it] is becoming more critical for us to reassess our frequencies,'' executive vice-president Pandit Chanapai said. The extent of the cuts has yet to be worked out and THAI may take steps such as merging flights to suit passenger numbers to contain losses, he said. THAI's cabin factor in September dropped more than it expected and the deepening political strife is making conditions worse. The airline filled just 70% of its seats in the third quarter. Countries in Asia are far more sensitive to bad news than the long-haul market from which THAI saw smaller declines.''What is terrible about the current political crisis is in its open-ended nature. Unlike 9/11, Sars and the tsunami, we don't when it will end,'' Mr Pandit said. For the first half of this year, THAI posted a loss of 7.04 billion baht.

Thursday, October 9 Opening Rates: US Dollar: 34.27 Euro: 46.50 British Pound: 58.79 Australian Dollar: 22.70 Canadian Dollar: 30.265 _____ Closing Rates: US Dollar: 34.13 Euro: 46.865 British Pound: 59.155 Australian Dollar: 23.7575 Canadian Dollar: 30.305