In any case, I was not aware of the illegal structure that was set up by my real estate agent and certified legal adviser. So logically applying the apparent standards of the SEC to insider trading and the recent case of fraud by a licensed representative of SCB Securities, I should have no problem legally maintaining ownership of my beachfront home. Alas, perhaps if I had bought several homes over the years and thus established a pattern of unintended behaviour, then the authorities might be more understanding. In any case, I apologise and I never lied or misrepresented my actions to any legal authority. Can I keep my assets?

Repentant Farang

Bangkok

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

Ex-PM's dealings show ease of foreign ownership overseas

Would Thaksin invest millions in a football club if he could not have full control of his investment? Would he accept a 49-per-cent shareholding? Similarly, would any Thai person want to invest overseas if they could not have full control over their investment or good legal protection, or if they could only hold 49 per cent?

Thaksin has rightly insisted on vetting the accounts of the club. Surely they have also insisted on vetting the sources of his money, and how it was "spirited" out of Thailand. If they accept his investment without doing their "due diligence", can they be held liable for any negligence in receiving funds which are not "clean"? Also, if Thaksin has this kind of money available overseas, why did the Bank of Thailand authorise a further Bt400 million for his wife to take out to buy a property in London.

And there is another point. There is no discrimination against foreigners buying property in the UK where they can live and be close to their investment(s). Why isn't there a similar provision here in Thailand?

B Gordon

Bangkok

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

Long-term effects of flouting patents need consideration

Re: "New drug war throws up innocent casualties", Opinion, May 9.

What is missing from this opinion piece is the long-term effects of stealing the drug companies' inventions - they stop making new drugs.

With viruses, continual evolution of drug-resistant forms is the norm. When the drugs Thais stole no longer work, no new drugs will be in the pipeline because it becomes unprofitable for the drug companies to research, invent and test. They quit and move on to other products.

 So the question of the morality of saving a few now, becomes overwhelmed by the future numbers who suffer as a result of activist scare tactics.

 If poor souls have Aids in Thailand now, and can't afford drugs, appeal to charities such as Bill Gates' foundation or the resources of the Thaksin family to purchase the drugs for them. Do it the right way. Activists with self-righteous demands to steal and copycat are giving Thais a black eye.

How much would it actually cost for Thailand to buy the drugs, and save its international reputation? Then it becomes just a matter of fundraising. What's your reputation worth?

Even if Ken Adelman is paid by Thaksin, his argument in the Washington Times was basically correct.

Will Knight

Orange County, California

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

Police near dumpsite face several dangers from methane

Thank you for showcasing articles on workplace health and safety. The Nation's edition of May 4 highlighted the illnesses resulting from situating a police station next to a dump site ("Police suffer at station beside dump", News). While the symbolism of this location might have struck some as deserving, the policeman in the photo appeared to be wearing a disposable dust mask for what is defined as a vapour risk. The mask he is wearing may be a great bit of theatre, but I am not sure it would do much for his health.

Methane, a major by-product of the sort of rot one gets in these places, is highly explosive, as many coalminers in China have found, so unless Thailand wants to be the first country to have a free-form orbiting police station, it might be wise to move. And of course there are all the ongoing risks from biological hazards, such as the bugs that love to thrive in decomposing matter and the vermin that also enjoy such an environment.

I would suggest that the police hire a well-trained health and safety officer who can advise on appropriate measures.

Melody Kemp

Member of the Safety Institute of Australia

Vientiane

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

Apec structures an unsightly addition to Chao Phya's banks

Re: "Building it better", News, May 9. I read with interest this article about the state of contemporary architecture in Thailand and in particular the comment by Sinn Phonghanyudh, president of the Association of Siamese Architects, that "if an architecture student walks from Chulalongkorn University to Siam Square and doesn't feel anything needs improving, he shouldn't become an architect".

 While I don't recall anything particularly jarring or incongruous about the view on that route, this is "post-modern" Bangkok, so I am prepared to concede it is probably so. What I would like to remind readers of are some of the many sights to surprise if not delight the unwary architectural observer on the Chao Phya River in Bangkok. Specifically, the grotesque historical appendages tacked on to the otherwise inoffensively neo-classical Apec building [for the 2003 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation leaders' summit] just south of the Royal Thai Navy headquarters are both a real eyesore and yet another example of Thaksin's sorry legacy.

 Furthermore, just to the north one can see the second of the pair of Apec observation buildings, which now blocks the view of an aesthetically pleasing fort wall of considerable historical interest, as well as the spreading boughs of the fine old tree that seems to have kept it company over the years. This is not to mention how they marginalise the presence and stature of the wonderful old lighthouse on the point. 

Frank Lee

Nonthaburi

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

Belief that labour can't coexist with capitalism is outdated

Re: "'Coup was setback for labour movement", News, May 7.

In this interview Somyot Pruksakasem insinuated that labour and the capitalist system are enemies. This opinion doesn't bode well for future labour relations in Thailand. This is setting back the clock to the English industrial revolution without taking into account the evolution in labour relations in the last 150 years.

I believe there is no one so ignorant to deny that the capitalist system has brought unprecedented economic growth, never seen before in world history. I grant that economic growth doesn't equal happiness, but as Abraham Maslow pointed out, without food, a roof above your head and security, one can't begin to consider happiness. Thanks to economic growth, the modern state is able to guarantee people the basics of life as has never before been seen.

The law and the unions dulled the too-sharp edges of pure capitalism, the form of which doesn't exist anymore. Social security nets and doling out a fair share of the profits to the workforce are common concepts in entrepreneurial thinking, and even environmental issues are considered regularly. Western Europe or the Scandinavian states are prime examples of cooperation between labour and capitalism working.

We are all dependent on productive companies and services, just as they are dependent on the workforce or capitalists. This realisation of mutual dependency has resulted in the common good. To pose labour and the capitalist system as enemies is not only unnecessarily provocative, but also untrue.

Egon

Bangkok

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

Alternative-energy interests push global warming agenda

Re: "Global-warming deniers twist science for selfish ends", Letters, May 6.

When I studied for my degree I learned a lot about research and the supporting materials required to make a case in a paper. While there are opposing views found in many subjects, there are also recognised experts in any field.

 The field of climatology is no exception and the majority of the best of these are telling us that the current global warming scare is not supported by science. Yes, average temperatures have risen where they are being measured, in cities but not in the atmosphere itself. Yes, ice is falling off the western edge of Antarctica, but why aren't the same people explaining that the ice is thickening on the eastern side. The Hockey Stick graph has finally been removed from the reports because science showed that it had ignored significant climatic events of the last 2000 years.

 Please don't let Thailand get caught up in the hype, because it has more to do with money and power than facts. The alternate-energy companies want to sell us their power generators, carbon credits are just another form of money, and it is easy to conclude that developed nations want undeveloped nations to stay that way.

 If you are going to get a heart operation do you go and see a doctor or a dentist? Yes, there are some similarities between the two and some of the subjects they studied were the same, but one is a specialist in the field and the other isn't. Many of the people we see on these global warming panels and conferences are the same; they have some related knowledge but the experts are either not there or not supporting them.

 Why then is the world listening to lawyers, physicists, actors, administrators, corporate heads and others and not to those who have specialised in the field? Thailand can lead the way here and follow the science and the facts instead of the emotional appeals based on at best fuzzy science. If we are going to get caught up in it, then let us admit that it is for the money and not the science.

Krisidah S

Bangkok

Send us your views in an instant E-mail your opinion, with 'Letters to the Editor' in the subject box, to: letters@nationgroup.com