Like every Thai in the Kingdom, I'm extremely delighted and excited about this auspicious occasion. Nevertheless, I'm saddened at the same time that the authorities saw the need to hide the reality of Thailand.

I have always believed that street vendors are part of our culture and make Thailand colourful, unique and interesting. I don't feel in any way that they make the streets dirty and less desirable to walk, because the locals and tourists that roam the streets are often there intentionally as customers.

In addition, these vendors usually have low incomes and I don't see why anyone should have the authority to tell them not to do business for a week just to make the streets look good for visiting dignitaries, who are probably not going to pass these small streets anyway. Personally, I think the dignitaries may even appreciate the lively sights of the shopping streets with people waving at them etc. Just imagine how much money these vendors will lose from not being able to conduct business for a week. This is not considerate, this is not compromising, this is not Buddhist.

The solution is simple:

1. Only enforce this "rule" in really necessary places like Sanam Luang, where the vendors are prominent, and on streets that the authorities are sure the dignitaries' entourages will pass.

2. Provide the vendors with exact times of when the entourages will pass (they are too general at the moment).

3. If possible, give them alternative venues to conduct business.

I strongly feel that the society is going on a dangerous path if it is ashamed of its own culture and unable to accept its own reality. We are all Thais, we all pay taxes and I think we all have the right to do whatever we wish as long as it is within the law.

If we proceed on this path, then Thailand may become "wonderfully clean" and yet plain, like Singapore.

A Thai Citizen

Bangkok

---------------------------------

Japan is not alone in showing double standards in Burma

 Re: "Japan's lacklustre policy on Burma", Editorial, June 3.

Japan's real interests in Burma are no secret. They are purely economical. Let's look at some publicly available details:

Japan, as a competitor of the United States and the European Union, is interested in Burma as one of the most resource-rich countries in Southeast Asia. That is why Japan ranks among the top investors (Singapore, US, France, Britain) in Burma.

Burma's economic potential is doubtless enormous: minerals (oil, gas, wolfram, coal, gold, silver), timber, fish and last but not least the huge potential of hydropower (Salween River). Low labour costs will benefit Burma as a future investment destination.

Human-rights abuses and labour conditions are always of minor importance for political as well as economic decision-makers, if there is no pressure by non-government organisations. This is the case in Japan.

If Japan is criticised for its inconsistent policy towards Burma's military regime, we have to also condemn the double-tongued policy of the publicly boycott-minded governments in Washington, London, Paris and elsewhere.

Interesting to note that the US, an outspoken proponent of democracy in Third World countries, is home of two of the big business players in Burma currently: Unocal and Halliburton.

Shlomo Katzenstein

Bangkok

--------------------------------

What's the latest on the probe into Phra Supoj's murder?

 You have been working overtime keeping us all abreast of the progress, or obfuscation, in the investigation of the murder of former Thai Rak Thai MP Kobkul Nopamornbodee. Thanks for putting the search for the murderer on page one. It will keep up the pressure to find the culprits.

But what about the case of Buddhist monk Phra Supoj Suvacano, who was brutally murdered in Chiang Mai on June 16 last year?

Despite a plea by Phramaha Boonchuay Sirindharo, executive secretary of Northern Development Monks Network, for "the mass media of all kinds to closely follow the progress of this case and regularly inform the public of the facts as they emerge", the case is now as cold in the media as poor Phra Supoj himself.

How about turning your spotlight on Amphoe Fang and the progress, or lack of it, in the investigation of the murder of Phra Supoj Suvacano?

John Francis Lee

Chiang Rai

----------------------------------

Follow fashion if you must, but don't pretend it matters

 Re: "Vogue's grand vamp", Trends, June 1.

Once upon a time, many people in the world went about their daily lives blissfully and unashamedly naked. Thanks largely to missionaries, these "primitive" people (who, in addition to seeing their populations decimated by venereal diseases, influenza, smallpox and tuberculosis introduced courtesy of the missionaries and against which they had no natural immunity), were enlightened as to the shamefulness of their nakedness by indoctrination through the teachings of the Bible. The women can now be seen trussed up in painful, ill-fitting bras and the men sporting shorts to cover up their "unmentionables". Such is the price of progress.

Now there's a new missionary on the scene; actually, has been for some time. Vogue magazine editor Anna Wintour sports oversized black sunglasses in the photograph accompanying the article, giving her the appearance of some highly toxic, dehydrated insect with a bad wig undergoing electric-shock therapy. So now we know what her idea of "fashionable" is. Appearing with her in the photograph is Donny Trump (fashion credo: "If it's expensive and gaudy, I'll buy it"), who is pointing something out to her with his finger. Perhaps they were out shopping for wigs?

This new-age missionary was not in the jungles of Africa or South America, but rather the concrete jungle of New York. And her mission is not religious conversion (although it could be argued that for her, fashion is a religion), rather, to promote the opening of an exhibition of the history of British Fashion at New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art. The opening was well-attended by A-list celebrities, who patiently waited in line for a photo opportunity with Wintour, much like the Cargo Cultists of Papua New Guinea, who believed the Western explorers who flew their planes into the region were gods or their ancestor's ghosts, and worshipped them as such.

I have always been fascinated by the fashion industry and those involved. The likes of Wintour, on the selling end, are easy to understand; they're in it for the money and would promote potato sacks as fashionable if they thought they could get away with it (considering the mentality of their clients, they probably could). It's just a question of good marketing strategy.

I have always admired Thailand's working class for many reasons, not least of which is their complete disinterest in fashion, even though this may be due solely to economic restraints. Mostly, all they can afford is a simple ensemble of a T-shirt, shorts and slippers, but they manage to wear these without too much concern about what they look like, which in my eyes makes them more beautiful than some emaciated walking dressmaker's dummy wearing a US$10,000 evening gown any day.

Most sensible, down-to-earth people realise that the fashion industry is just another frivolous pursuit of the world's wealthy elite and that the likes of Wintour are a waste of space, and as such do their best to ignore it.

I would never have written this letter but for one thing Wintour said in the article: "I wish the British government would get more involved in fashion and turn up at some of the shows or have people to Downing Street." Considering the huge profits made from this multi-billion dollar industry, does Wintour seriously think it should be subsidised by the taxpayer?

James White

Bangkok

-------------------------------------

Despite tall claims, Internet providers are not up to speed

 From the drastic difference between domestic and international link speeds on the Internet, one has to conclude that CAT Telecom is still restricting Thailand's access to the world.

Their incompetence or stinginess is injurious to the health of Thailand. Why does CAT exist anyway? There is no need for it whatsoever. It is an enormous overhead that limits Thailand, rather than leverages it, in the world community and economy. Time to eliminate it. Let those who get fat off it get fat doing something else.

That said, even the domestic speeds with True ADSL are nearly 25 per cent below the paid-for speed. Should one conclude that True is not fulfilling its part of the bargain? Should True reduce their charges by the same percentage to acknowledge that? What about truth in advertising or meeting contractual commitments? Perhaps the Consumer Protection Board should investigate.

Internet person

Seattle

---------------------------------

Foreigners hold no monopoly on bad driving habits

 Re: "Blue diplomatic number plates seem to be licence to break traffic rules", Letters, May 29.

To assume automatically that blue plates and left-side steering makes the driver American is unreasonable and blatant prejudice. He is probably right, though. Perhaps the driver was practising for a Thai driving test.

Bill Cymbalsky

Bangkok