BelgianBoy Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 And if they would ever close a discussion because they can't 'win' it you can come complain to me. As far as I know this has never happened, nor do I think it likely it will.This was one of the main reasons behind the move to anonymous moderation. You will never be in discussion with a moderator anymore, just with another member. KS, Hum... that is a contradixio in terminis, now its the mod behind the member that closes the thread down. BB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 >>>Some wanted to be rescued, others did not.<<< and that was always my basic point in the cambodia debate. how can a sextourist identify which girl is enslaved, and which is there out of her own will, in the same location, when there is no clear separation between the systems. of course i talk about the discerning sextourist, not the one who doesn't care either way. is it "sanuk" to frequent locations that do have both of those systems in operation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khunsanuk Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 Hi, Fly: And just because we can't tell we should therefore ban any discussion on the subject? Sounds a bit harsh to me. Anyway, I think (hope?) I have made my point clear and am going off line now. Please keep this civil if you still want to continue this discussion (need I ask? ) BB: "Hum... that is a contradixio in terminis, now its the mod behind the member that closes the thread down." In the years you were a Mod do you recall even one incident in which a Moderator used his powers to close a thread for personal reasons? I don't, as I know they would have to answer to me for it. Sanuk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khun_Kong Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 "Aarti Kapoor, a legal adviser to Afesip, acknowledges that dozens of the girls genuinely wanted to return to the brothel; shame, drug addiction and a desperate need for money keep many in the sex trade. But dozens of others, she says, wanted to stay in the shelter but were forced back anyway." I'm just going to see if there are any other interpretations of this article. How about a desperate need for food? How about a greedy desire for more money than is actually needed? Drug addiction? Like our soi 19 farang, unless they were held down and forcibly injected, that's their own doing. So, of 83, "dozens" wanted to return. Not up to us to question why or tell them what's best for them. How many dozens wanted to return, maybe 4? of the original 7? Leaves 3 dozen who wanted to stay in the shelter. Of those who wanted to stay in the shelter/not return to the brothel, I wonder what percent would have chosen "not return to the brothel" if they did NOT have the option of staying in the shelter, with food, clothes, roof, bed, etc., at no cost. Maybe 2-2.5 dozen. Leaves a handful who genuinely wish to ... to what? The article was not clear what they wanted to do. Shit, there are a lotta white guys in BKK who might choose the shelter over their current situation. Could there possibly be any other interpretations in addition to the "evil, Cambodian sex-slave kings"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo_bill Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 " contradictio " please , we are not in Portugal . ...................... Executive moderator 1 , stretch limo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelgianBoy Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 khunsanuk said:BB: "Hum... that is a contradixio in terminis, now its the mod behind the member that closes the thread down." In the years you were a Mod do you recall even one incident in which a Moderator used his powers to close a thread for personal reasons? I don't, as I know they would have to answer to me for it. Indeed correct, but that is not the point. I fear that *now* a mod can close a thread if he loses an argument as a member..... Plus mods have deleted posts the last 2 weeks without valid any reason at all, other than their personal attitude towards certain posters. No rules broken, no flames at all, just very personal moderation IMO Only *that* is my point..... But we disgress from the topic at hand, more info available per PM if you so want.... BB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelgianBoy Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 buffalo_bill said:" contradictio " please , we are not in Portugal . Is that like "positive contribution" perhaps ? BB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.. Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 This happened in early December. Good to see that the NYT are right on top of things. Basically, this seems to be another funding scam by the NGO (like that "kidnapped" Swedish tsunami survivor boy). It was a typical massage parlour with the fishbowl. All reports I have gotten from those who live in Phnom Penh indicate that none of these gals were underage (at least this place was not known for that kind of thing) and that underage are still readily available in nearby famous brothel villages so why doesn't the NGO go there and stop it? Here is a press release about this mess from the Cambodian gummint: STATEMENT OF THE SPOKESMAN OF THE MINISTRY OF INTERIOR Date: 13 December 2004 STATEMENT OF THE SPOKEAMAN OF THE MINISTRY OF INTERIOR On the second week of December 2004, there were some newspapers including the statement of the spokesman of the US Department of State announced that on 08 December 2004 armed assailants abducted 90 women and children under the care of NGO Agir Pour les Femmes En Situations Precaires (AFESIP) in Phnom Penh. For that reason, the Spokesman of the Ministry of Interior would like to make clear to the national and international public on the fact of the matter as follows: 1. According to AFESIP's law suit dated 25 September 2004 and after the specialized police was ordered to investigate the matter, 20 policemen of Anti-Human Trafficking and Expatriate Person Protection department joint by Municipal Court prosecutor Seam Sok Aun and 3 AFESIP observers with search warrant rescued 83 women from Chhai Hour Hotel II on 07 December 2004 at 1545 hour and arrested 8 suspects on charge of running prostitution. 2. On 08 December 2004 at 1230 hour, reportedly armed assailants abducted 83 women under the care of AFESIP. According to their accounts, Chief Ms. Son Kamaryan of the legal affairs department and Chief Phi Sophon of shelter department of AFESIP explained that after taking care of the 83 women during 07 to 08 December 2004, there were reactions from those women and their families, husbands, relatives and parents for their home return, subsequently resulting commotion and gate breaking for their escape. So there was no abduction of those women by armed assailants. 3. On 10 December 2004, a law suit was filed by the staff, workers and all those women filed at the Phnom Penh municipal police; and on 11 December 2004 at 8:30 a. m., they organized a peaceful protest in front of the US Embassy against AFESIP to seek justice and reparation for their honor and reputation. 4. To search for the truth and nothing but the truth, the Royal Government of Cambodia will establish an inter-ministerial committee, to include the representatives of the Foreign Missions and the national and international non-governmental organizations as observers, to witness, to further investigate and to personally interview those women. Phnom Penh, 12 December 2004 The Spokesman of the Ministry of Interior Here is what the NGOs are really up to. The most telling is: "(IJT) for the years 2001-2002 spent a whopping $3,248,381 paying themselves salaries and employee benefits, while a mere $1,254 went to their Good Samaritan Expense, and $9,280 went to the child prostitutes victims aftercare expense." They have their boy in the White House and it's feeding frenzy time for all that juicy US taxpayer money! You can easily verify this because IJT are cheeky enough to post these financials on their website. They have no shame! This makes me highly suspicious of any other NGOs (such as AFESIP) in the same game as well. Cheers, SD NOTE THAT JUST BECAUSE I AM CONDEMNING SOME NGOs DOES NOT MEAN I CONDONE UNDERAGE SEX WORKERS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 >>>STATEMENT OF THE SPOKESMAN OF THE MINISTRY OF INTERIOR<<<< now, i haven't been at the scene, but might that have been similar statements like our thai spokesmen? the ones who have stated that all the killings during the drugwar were inter gang silencing killings, and that of course such evil things like deathsquads could never happen in that land of smile here... of course in the modern land of democracy and happiness that cambodia is, wrong stetements would never be made by the honest ants of the government, god forbid! anyhow, yes, i agree, there are more than a few overzealous NGOs around, some even crossing the borderline into the criminal. these do more harm to the issue than use. does that mean though that indentured and underaged prostitution in cambodia are not endemic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted January 18, 2005 Report Share Posted January 18, 2005 Some of you guys are amazing. One biased and very out of date article in the Herald Tribune (I thought Kristof wrote for the NYT) and you've got the Pnom Penh sex scene figured out. Are you sitting in trailers in Oklahoma? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.