The report also infers that the cause of the daily terrorism occurring in the South is due to resentment over these alleged 22 forced disappearances.

The report says these 22 forced disappearances were committed in order to intimidate Muslims but does not state why Thailand would want to do this when Muslims living elsewhere in the country never describe themselves as feeling intimidated, but are rather fully Thai.

If, as the report also says, terrorists feel intimidated as a result of 22 forced disappearances, why are they so boldly escalating their daily killings? Surely someone who is intimidated is not emboldened. In fact, if anyone feels threatened it must be Buddhists, ethnic Thais and Chinese who are targeted each day simply because of the colour of their skin or their religion. Does anyone really believe that the 22 alleged forced disappearances are more of a cause for a population to feel intimidated than the 2000 murders? The general impression I get reading any Human Rights Watch report is that they try to portray Islamic terrorists and their supporters as victims while ignoring the real victims. This report, as with most Human Rights Watch reports dealing with countries like Thailand, which are friendly toward the United States and global trade, has a distinctly political agenda that aligns itself with violent Islam's hatred of the West and free trade. That our local press gives Human Rights Watch reports any credence at all is a sad commentary on the present state of journalism in the country.

Lek

Krabi

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

Will for change in deep South needs to come from its citizens

The problem in the deep South is really a complex and historical issue. It can only be solved from within, and I mean within by the very people themselves.

If the people in the South don't help themselves, no matter how many troops or what level of assistance they receive, it won't help. If there is no will on the part of the people who are affected, then nothing can work.

Just think of how there was a will to oust Thaksin - it can be done. It didn't take the whole of Thailand to do that, just a section of the population of Bangkok city and people with the will to make the change. If all other measures seem to fail then maybe it is about time that the South is given some autonomy - not made into an autonomous state, but autonomy to administer their own police and military volunteer units to help one another.

Beelee

Bangkok

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

War-torn region now requires a hard-handed approach

Re: "Soft approach in South failing", News, March 19.

It appears that a very firm hand is needed to deal effectively with the criminals before the political and social atmosphere is sufficient to support and sustain non-military methods.

The situation in the southern provinces is escalating towards more brutality. I believe everyone can agree with that assessment. On that basis, now would be the time to apply that firm hand. The situation will get worse before it will get better. Criminals only think about committing crimes. They do not think about what is good for other people and they generally cannot be reasoned with. There is no justifiable reason for the murders, the destruction (burning down schools?) and terrorising people.

The entire country is faced with corrupt police. Yet, there are no other provinces where people practice self-delusion to commit the types of crimes being committed in Yala, Pattani and Narathiwat. The only effective methods for dealing with those types of criminals are either putting them in prison or killing them. Putting it bluntly may not be comfortable to some people. Then again, facing reality does make some people uncomfortable as well.

Big Brother

Bangkok

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

Allowing Pojaman to take out funds contrary to coup's goals

Re: "Pojaman's funds released", News, March 20. Something I do not quite understand. The ex-prime minister's wife has been granted permission to take Bt400 million from Thailand to invest in property in London.

The coup against the ex-premier took place on the issues of corruption and abuse of power. One of the main issues continues to be tax evasion on the Temasek-Shin deal. Yet the Army administration has granted his wife permission to take out Bt400 million from the country, thereby diminishing the amounts left within the country in case they decide to freeze and seize. Beats me.

The Nation reports that: "Pojaman submitted her request last month and the central bank has asked for opinions from all related agencies - the Assets Examination Committee and the National Counter Corruption Commission - which have handled several cases concerning the Shinawatra family's assets."

Did all of these agencies grant permission? Beats me.

Clearly my knowledge of the intricacies and legalities of politics is shamefully limited. Yet, at a minimum I expect even a perfect fool like myself to see the logic of the actions of any administration - if they were logical in the first place.

Help me someone.

Markus

Bangkok

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

Harsh sentences and vigilance needed to stop corruption

Re: "Ex-minister Watana faces bribe charges", News, March 20.

Surprise, surprise! The Assets Examination Committee (AEC) has accused Watana Muangsook of taking B82 million in kickbacks in connection with the Ua Arthorn housing project. So much for ex-premier Thaksin weeping for the poor who voted him into office.

Heartiest congratulations to the AEC for doing a fine job. Now, the Cabinet and judicial system must aim not only for a fair and speedy trial, but, if a guilty verdict is delivered, there must be punishment harsh enough to deter future crooks. We, the people, must not let these crooks get away. Keep pressuring the government of the day to deny bail, lest the guilty flee, and hear their appeals quickly.

But prevention is much better than a cure. To prevent corruption we must change our mindsets and demand only candidates whom we trust, both in terms of honesty and capability. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "In a declining state of public morals, men will be so blinded to their true interests as to put the incapable and unworthy at the helm. It is therefore vain to complain of the follies or crimes of a government. We must lay our hands on our own hearts and say, 'Here is the sin that makes the public sin'."

Whether the next government steals from us is, first and foremost, up to you, dear reader, and me.

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok

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

Making Buddhism the official religion would be hypocritical

Re: "Groups hand in demands", News, March 20. Stating in the constitution that Buddhism is national religion may put Thailand in an awkward position. For example, we have the death penalty. We kill animals and eat their flesh. We produce and sell booze. We hold beauty contests where women in scanty outfits seductively glide on the catwalk. We even have an annual transvestite beauty contest! We condone prostitution, hidden under the roofs of so-called massage parlours and gentlemen nightclubs.

With all those activities going on, should we hypocritically declare that Buddhism is our national religion? I think we should just be tacit about this issue. There is an old saying that goes, "if you want to be obscure, be obscure clearly".  

Somsak Pola

Samut Prakan

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

Buddha's teachings offer a way of life, not a religious faith

Make no mistake about it, Buddhism, like Hinduism, Shintoism or Confucianism, is not a religion and to ask whether it should be made a national religion verges on ignorance.

To practise Buddhism as a way of life is to adopt moderation. Thais have always adopted the Buddha's way. That's why we want to choose self-sufficiency.

But watch out - see the progress of countries like Vietnam, China and India. If we compare ourselves with them, where do we stand?

While we espouse Buddhism, let us, as a country, move with the times. If we have to globalise, let's do it. We either sail forward or we go backwards.

Web Reader

Bangkok

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

Drug companies' profits come at expense of world's poorest

Re: "Activists push for global boycott", News, March 20

Drug companies face two forms of expenditure, research and development of new drugs, profits for their shareholders. The first is legitimate - the profits are often excessive.

Now that this is becoming a global issue it needs a global solution. Perhaps an internationally-agreed upon cap on profits, or guaranteed discounts to poorer countries.

Epidemics do not respect national borders and the drug industry must be made to accept that helping a Third-World country also helps their own countries.

Ian

Bangkok