|
Journalists Working for the Yellow Slave Trade
Hahn Chin
Reports
The leading English-language
daily newspaper in Thailand, the Bangkok Post, printed an article in its features section, called Outlook,
on May 5, 2004 to publicize a local “non-governmental organization” (“NGO”) that is headquartered
in Bangkok, called End Child Prostitution, Child Pornography and Trafficking in Children for Sexual Purposes, better known
by the acronym, ECPAT.
This NGO was
created about 16 years ago by Thais. It was called End Child Prostitution in Asian Tourism and known by the same acronym.
Initially, ECPAT, or its promoters, sought to blame foreign tourists for the most abhorrent aspects of the yellow slave trade
- pedophilia and child prostitution. But given the fact that 95% of pedophiles in Thailand are local Thais, the
name of the NGO was unrealistic and it was eventually compelled to change it.
Otherwise, ECPAT was created for cosmetic purposes.
ECPAT remained
a virtually unknown NGO that did little more than peddle literature about itself and pedophilia through the offices of
the International Catholic Child Bureau (ICCB), a worldwide organization based in Geneva, Switzerland, and send representatives
to meetings and conventions.
In Thailand,
the police work hand in glove with slavers. ECPAT is staffed by "volunteers" who, for the most part, come from marginal social and
economical backgrounds and pursue a marginal existence. Thus, ECPAT representatives often steadfastly deny any police complicity
in the trade and refuse to consider complaints involving local trafficking cases.
Other ex-patriates
in Thailand who work for NGOs in child protection use
their connections to cover their own complicity
in the trade.
Not wanting to
disturb the yellow slave trade, representatives of the NGOs like to claim that they require evidence of sexual exploitation
of a victim of kidnappers and traffickers before considering the case.
Thai police,
prosecutors and judges and welfare and labor officials in Thailand are notoriously corrupt and complicit in the traffic and
exploitation of children for many purposes, including sex. They refuse to consider or investigate complaints. Often, they
refer complainants to ECPAT or other NGOs in Bangkok, like the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) or the Center
for the Protection of Children’s Rights (CPCR), or to the politician, Paveena Hongsakula, or to foreign embassies.
ECPAT personnel
turn the relatives of victims away. They tell them to go back to the police. They insist that they cannot consider requests
for help without evidence of sexual exploitation for commercial purposes of the missing child beforehand.
ECPAT is just
one organization that colludes with traffickers and complicit officials. CPCR is another. Paveena Honsakula is another. The
Thai Red Cross Society is another.
These persons
and organizations, or their sponsors, pay journalists and publishers to publicize them. I spotted one such article, about
ECPAT, in the features section, Outlook, of the Bangkok Post in early May 2004.
Thus, I complained
about the obnoxious behavior of the police and ECPAT personnel toward the relatives of victims of traffickers in a letter
to the editors in the newspaper's letters' section, Postbag, on May 5 of last year, 2004.
The Bangkok
Post ran a letter in reply, signed “ECPAT International”, on May 15, 2004 that attacked me (and relatives
of victims of traffickers who complained about the run-around that they were given by Thai police and ECPAT personnel) with
insults, insinuations and defamation (copy attached).
In an attempt
to defend their vulgar behavior and intimidate complainants, ECPAT personnel resorted to defamation and innuendo. In their letter to the Editors, they insinuated that
I - and the relatives of victims - opposed efforts to protect children; they
called us criminals and demanded our condemnation.
The ECPAT letter
could not go unanswered.
I wrote back
to the Bangkok Post. I added something that I had omitted from my first letter, on May 8 - that ECPAT personnel are familiar with the con-game
run by inept and corrupt policemen and conspire with them to obstruct and delay the rescue of kidnapped and trafficked children.
They tell the victims' relatives that only the police can help them, but they refuse to assist them in contacting the
police. They refuse to urge the police to cooperate.
Any organization,
like ECPAT, that refuses to remind the local police of its duty
and abets its misconduct, especially in cases of kidnapping and trafficking in children, should be shut down. Complaints that expose such reprehensible behavior by ECPAT personnel or other NGOs should be encouraged, not condemned.
The letter to
the editors, signed ECPAT International, in Postbag on May 15, 2004 is an example of the typically rude and
insulting conduct of ECPAT personnel toward the relatives of missing, kidnapped and trafficked children, who have been sent
to them.
The editor of
Outlook, Sunitsuda Ekkachai, is a pseudo-communist Thai woman of early middle age who writes naïve, simple-minded
drivel of the kind that often finds its way in American high school newspapers. She prizes her contacts with NGOs that claim
a concern for children. Thus, she frequently prints articles about local NGOs that are notorious for their complicity
in the traffic in women and children. Over the years, this section has played up gangsters in government and NGOs like Paveena
Honsakula, Sanphasit Koompraphant (CPCR), Wallop _________ (Foundation for Better Life for Children), Surasak Sudtharom (police), Vitit Muntharbhorn (Chulalongkhorn University), Trakul WinnitnaIwappak and
Wanchai Rootanawong (Attorney General’s Office), and others as reform-minded individuals tring to save women and children
from traffickers and procurers.
The editor of
Postbag, Kanjana Spindler, excluded my reply from publication. She probably had conflicts of interests, perhaps stemming
from some business arrangement with ECPAT or other NGOs, or she had perverse personal reasons.
Ms. Sunitsuda
and Ms. Kanjana work hand in glove with traffickers. Ms. Kanjana retired late last year. The sooner Ms. Sunitsuda is
gone the better it will be for all.
--------------
Editor's
note: The above was written in early 2005.
-
- - - - - -
- - - - -
The
Letter the Bangkok Post Refused to Publish:
On the Negative Purpose and Conduct of ECPAT
To the editors:
A letter to the editors,
signed “ECPAT International”, in Postbag on May 15 is an example of the typically rude and insulting conduct
of ECPAT personnel toward the relatives of missing, kidnapped and trafficked children, who have been sent to them by the police.
Thai
policemen who are reluctant to consider complaints about missing or kidnapped children - or children
trafficked abroad - give relatives of the victims the run-around. One ploy is to send them to a local
non-governmental organization (NGO) called ECPAT, with assurances that ECPAT will help them. (ECPAT is an acronym for End
Child Prostitution, Child Pornography and Trafficking in Children for Sexual Purposes, originally End Child Prostitution in
Asian Tourism.) ECPAT personnel turn the relatives away. They tell them to go back to the police. They insist that they cannot
consider requests for help without evidence of “sexual exploitation for commercial purposes” of the missing child
beforehand.
I complained about this obnoxious behavior of ECPAT personnel in a letter to the editors in Postbag
on May 8.
In an attempt to defend their vulgar behavior and intimidate complainants, ECPAT personnel resorted
to defamation and innuendo. In their letter to the editors, they insinuated that I - and the
relatives of victims - opposed efforts to protect children; they called us criminals and demanded
our condemnation.
I should have added in my letter on May 8 that ECPAT personnel are familiar with the con game
run by inept and corrupt policemen and collude with them to obstruct and delay the rescue of kidnapped and trafficked children.
They tell the victims’ relatives that only the police can help them, but they refuse to help them contact the police
or urge the police to cooperate.
Such behavior, especially by an organization that claims to have valuable contacts
with the police, is shameful and indefensible.
There is no crime more heinous than the kidnapping of a child.
Any organization, like ECPAT, that refuses to remind
the local police of its duty and abets its misconduct, especially in cases of kidnapping and trafficking in children, should
be shut down. Complaints that expose this reprehensible behavior of ECPAT personnel should be encouraged, not condemned.
Signed:
Hahn Chin
38-39 Sukhumvit Road, Soi 23
Bangkok
10110
E-mail: watchdog2004a@hotmail.com ; watchdog2004a@yahoo.com
-------------------------
The following message, which was not intended
for publication, was sent to the editors of the Bangkok Post
several times:
To the editors of the Bangkok Post:
The letter of ECPAT International that you published on May 15
insulted me - and the families of kidnapped and trafficked children - and
must not go unanswered.
To be fair, the Post should publish my reply (below).
Please publish my letter in its entirety, without editing.
I am interested solely in the public good, in particular the
improvement of police services and scrutiny of "non-government organizations".
In fact, my letter understated the extent of misconduct by ECPAT
personnel. I am prepared to back up my statements with witnesses, copies of letters and e-mail messages, and transcripts of
telephone conversations.
Respectfully,
Hahn Chin
| Outlook section, Bangkok Post, May 5, 2004 |
|
| Letters, Bangkok Post, May 8 and 15, 2004 |
|
|
Visitor's Comments
Visitors' comments
that were posted in 2004 were lost when this site was hacked in mid-2005. However, an effort will be made to recover the comments
and post them again.
The following is a comment
from Pomchai Krua-tho in Bangkok, August 3, 2005:
I refer to an article in
the Home section of the Bangkok Post on August 2, 2005, with the
heading "Child protection enforcement 'weak'".
The author of the article,
Anjira Assavononda, was assigned to report on "a forum on media and child rights violations" that was arranged by an organization
in Bangkok, the Center for the Protection of Children's Rights (also known by its acronym,
CPCR).
According to the article,
at the forum the head of the public dissemination team of the child, youth and family projects for the National Health Foundation,
Thininob Komolmimi, complained that implementation of the Child Protection Act that went into effect in Thailand last year was lagging.
The Child Protection Act
requires each province in Thailand to set up a provincial child protection committee that is to supervise child
protection in the province; the committees are to be chaired by the provincial governor and composed of government officials
from relevant agencies.
Ms. Thininob complained
that some provincial governors and local government administrative offices ignored the requirement and that some of the child
protection committees had never met.
Ms. Thininob asked the
press to urge enforcement of the each article of the Child Protection Act.
Ms. Thininob complained
also that too often the press exploited abused children by sensationalizing child abuse cases.
The reporter, Ms. Anjira,
also quoted and cited comments by the director of CPCR, Sanphasit Koomphrapant, about the media and child protection.
While the comments by Ms.
Thininob might have been valid, CPCR is not the proper venue for a forum about child protection. The article looked like another
excuse to publicize CPCR and Sanphasit, both long considered dead and wholly irrelevant to child protection and children's
rights by sincere child rights advocates, especially in Bangkok.
For more than 15 years,
people sincerely concerned with child protection in Bangkok (there are only a few) and the world over have complained that
Sanphasit and the persons he employed at CPCR did no more than talk about themselves and the work that they were supposed
to do but never actually carried out. One example of this intransigence and ineffectualness was an organization, called Child
Rights Asia Net, that Sanphasit created with a local lawyer, Vitit Muntharbhorn, in the early 1990s; the organization was
highly touted but did absolutely nothing. Vitit ignored every complaint sent to him and Sanphasit’s employees dumped
every case referred to them.
In fact, CPCR, like many
corrupt child protection agencies, serves as a front for pedophiles and traffickers in children. Almost all complaints referred
to CPCR over the past 15 years have been ignored. In many cases, CPCR staff conspired with pedophiles and traffickers who
were the objects of the complaints. CPCR personnel have circulated countless reports, defending pedophiles and traffickers
in children, which can be used as evidence against them.
Every single case that
CPCR ever considered should be investigated. The children concerned, if still alive, should be found and questioned. Previous
and current CPCR personnel should be tracked down, rounded up, prosecuted and sent to prison.
Further, the journalists
and editors who have conspired with CPCR in pedophile and child trafficking cases should also be prosecuted.
Complaints about the negligence
of provincial governors and welfare offices, many of whom are complicit in the traffic in women and children, made from fronts
long notorious for serving the purposes of such deviants seldom accomplish anything.
Pomchai Krua-tho
Bangkok
Ed. Note: The Bangkok Post published Mr. Pomchai’s comments above in part as a letter
to the editor in its Postbag section on August 12, 2005.
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------
Comment by Rudolph Ignacio of Bangkok, August 14, 2005:
I read the letter of Pomchai
Kua-tho in the Bangkok Post on August 12. I wrote a letter to the Bangkok Post in response to Mr. Pomchai's comments, which
I would like to share with visitors to this website.
The letter is as follows:
I would like to congratulate the editors for finally showing the spine to print comments critical of the Center for
the Protection of Children's Rights (CPCR) in Bangkok and its director, Sanphasit Koompraphant. Such criticism is long overdue.
Hopefully, the editors will not use the letter as an excuse to laud false praise upon an unworthy organization in an attempt
to defend it.
Since its appearance about two decades ago, CPCR has led a long charade of despicable phonies
who pretend to be concerned about the safety and welfare of children. The truth is that CPCR deliberately ignored many urgent
cases and tried to cover up with false excuses and false reports. CPCR personnel conspired with government officials, especially
the police, in the defense of pedophiles and in the traffic in women and children.
When the press publicized
CPCR, it actually committed more harm than good. More criticism of CPCR and other non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that
serve as fronts for pedophiles and procurers is required. The press should continue to publish comments like Mr. Pomchai's.
Rudolph
Ignacio
Bangkok
_______________________
Comment by
Samakh Siphonphat of Bangkok, August 8, 2005:
Dear Mr. Hahn,
There has been absolutely
no follow-up by Thailand's media of a government proposal for a government lottery from which the proceeds
would assist victims of traffickers in women and children.
Three months ago, on May
13, an English-language daily newspaper in Thailand, The Nation, reported that the Thai foreign ministry had announced
that a projected 18-month campaign by a deputy prime minister, Surakiart Sathirathai, for the post of United Nations secretary
general, which will be vacant at the end of next year, would cost the Thai taxpayers at least Baht 100 million ($2.5 million).
The greater Thai public,
journalists and government officials have long maintained that Surakiart has no chance of getting the top UN job and that
any government funds spent in Surakiart's pursuit of it would be wasted.
Shortly afterward, an official
of the Thai Prime Minister's office, Jakrapob Penkair, complained to another English-language newspaper, the Bangkok Post,
that the figure of Baht 100 million was outrageous.
Two weeks later, on May
26, Jakrapob announced that the government was seeking the same amount, Baht 100 million, to start a lottery to raise funds
for the victims of traffickers in women and children.
The project was to be supervised
by a human trafficking prevention and suppression committee chaired by Surakiart.
In every capital city of
the world, Thai foreign ministry officials are notorious for their cowardliness and acquiescence to local officials who traffic
Thai women and children for pedophilia and prostitution. It's an old story. In fact, many Thai officials abroad actually conspire
with local officials in trafficking Thai women and children and will say anything to cover up the fate of victims.
The most conspicuous Thai
officials who are complicit in the illicit trade are in government offices that are responsible for the protection of Thai
women and children, particularly in the police, attorney general's office, judiciary, prime minister's office, foreign ministry,
and labor & welfare ministry.
Thai ambassadors and consular
officials abroad and Thai foreign ministry officials in Bangkok, among them Surakiart,
have covered up the fate of the victims with false reports and denied any wrong-doing. Often, they conspire with local police
and judicial officials to harass and intimidate relatives of victims and other witnesses.
The UN Human Rights Commission
was to confront representatives of the Thai attorney general's office, justice ministry, and foreign ministry at its office
in Geneva, Switzerland last month over reported human rights abuses in Thailand and the disappearances of Thais.
But Thai officials bribed
UN officials to ignore complaints from the public about Thai women and children who were trafficked abroad and disappeared.
Indeed, the current UN
High Commissioner for Human Rights and her two predecessors ignored at least 50 documented cases of Thai women and children
who were trafficked abroad (beyond Southeast Asia) for pedophilia or prostitution and disappeared in the past ten years. This
is largely because officials of national governments and so-called “non-governmental organizations” (“NGOs”)
were complicit. Indeed, dozens of persons in the Bangkok offices of “NGOs”, like the UN International Labor Organization
(ILO) and the UN Children's Fund (UNICEF), use their positions to traffic in women and children.
Precisely because the UN
Human Rights Commission is often an accessory to human rights violations, the UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, and the American
president, George W. Bush, want to abolish it.
It appears that the Baht
100 million earmarked for a government lottery start-up - and the lottery proceeds - are to be used to finance Surakiart's trips about the world to solicit support for his doomed bid
for the top UN post.
No doubt, some of the money
will be dispersed through bribes to UN officials to ignore cases of human rights violations by Thai officials.
At this moment, Surakiart
is overseas lobbying foreign leaders for their support of his campaign for the top UN post. During the recent annual meeting
of Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in Laos, which the American secretary of state refused to attend because
ASEAN has been dragging its feet in joining universal condemnation of the hated Burmese military dictatorship, Surakiart suddenly
flew to Burma to offer the Thai government’s backing of the junta in exchange for the latter’s support of his
bid for the top UN post. This is hardly the sort of behavior appropriate for a UN secretary general. Surakiart claimed that
he was going to Burma to discuss trafficking in humans with the Burmese junta leader, General Than
Shwe. In his meeting with Surakiart, Than Shwe reportedly expressed concern about the large number of Burmese women trafficked
to Thailand for prostitution.
Nobody at the Bangkok
Post or The Nation seems interested in my remarks.
Samakh Siphonphat, Bangkok; email: samakhthai2005@yahoo.com |
|
|
---------------------------
Comment by John Wesley Hardin, Kanchanaburi, August 28, 2005:
The attorney general of Thailand should be a member of the prime minister’s
cabinet.
A new attorney general, to replace the present attorney general, Kampree Koacherern, who retires next
month, was selected by a 15-member State Attorney Commission (SAC), which included government officials from outside the attorney
general's office, on August 23.
The commission selected Patchara Yutidhammarong, a deputy attorney general, from
four deputy attorney generals. Beginning with the most senior deputy, the commission accepted the first one to receive a majority
yes or no vote.
Two members of the selection commission, Prapan Naiwakowit and Chaikasem Nitisiri, were also
deputy attorney generals and vying for the top job. They abstained from the voting. Only 11 members of the commission voted.
Prapan, who was expected to get the post, and Chaikasem ranked ahead of Patchara in seniority but were rejected
by the commission. The commission did not bother to consider the fourth candidate after choosing Patchara.
This
method of selecting the country's prosecuting attorney might do for a small group of attorneys and closely interested parties,
but it is not appropriate in today's Thailand.
The attorney general’s office operates even more independently
than the judiciary.
Too many lawyers without a proper basic education or an understanding of the fundamental
facts of life have languished in the attorney general's office for years. They have outdated and unsuitable views about the
world and the judicial process. They use the attorney general's office to protect criminal ventures, particularly those conducted
by government officials, and victimize innocent people. This applies especially to the evil yellow slave trade
- the procurement of Thai women and children for illicit labor and prostitution abroad. Prapan Naiwakowit is one
such lawyer and bureaucrat. Opart Vorapart, Trakul Winnitnaiwappak and Wanchai Rootanawong are three others, to name a few.
They depend on cronies in the government and traffickers (or their agents, posing as non-governmental organizations and journalists),
for their jobs and reputations.
Attorney generals have grown rich through corruption and have locked onto
numerous high government posts that they kept well beyond their retirement. The attorney general's office is the most corrupt
government office in the country.
The post of attorney general requires knowledge and experience that most career
government bureaucrats and lawyers in Thailand lack.
A political appointee, whatever his shortcomings, should
be better suited for the position of attorney general than a career bureaucrat of late middle age who knows or cares little
about the world beyond his office desk and serves only the interests of old cronies and corrupt government officials.
Therefore,
the post of attorney general should be made a cabinet post. The attorney general should be appointed by the prime minister.
The appointment should be subject to the approval of two-thirds of one or both houses of the legislature. This would allow
for some much-needed transparency in the judicial system - and closer public scrutiny.
John
Wesley Hardin, Kanchanaburi
---------------
Comment by Suthin Jiratiwath, September 10, 2005
Dear Sir:
I read a comment on this website by John Hardin, who recommended that the Attorney General of Thailand should
be a member of the Prime Minister's cabinet.
Some would like the Attorney General to replace the Minister of Justice, a cabinet member, as head of
the Ministry of Justice. The Ministry of Justice would function like the Justice Department in the United States, under the
Attorney General.
In Thailand, the Attorney General's office is a branch of the Ministry of Justice, under the Minister of Justice.
In actual practice, however, the Attorney General's office in Thailand operates independently of the Ministry of Justice,
which has little real power to compell the Attorney General to do anything. In a showdown between the Minister of Justice
and Attorney General, the Attorney General holds sway. I recall a confrontation several years ago between Kanit
na Nakon, the Attorney General, and Chalerm Yoobamrung, Minister of Justice. The Attorney General had his way and made
the Minister of Justice look meek and irrelevant.
Mr. Hardin's recommendation, therefore, makes sense: the post of Minister of Justice should be terminated and the Attorney
General should head the Ministry of Justice.
Suthin Jiratiwath
Bangkok
-------------------------------------------------
Comment from Somsak Damnak, Bangkok, October 15, 2005:
Dear Mr. Hahn,
Regarding the mail that was hacked from this website earliert his year, I recall that there was one letter that complained
that several reporters and editors at the Bangkok Post opposed exposing Thai government officials and so-called non-governmental
organizations ("NGOs") who were complicit in the pedophile rings and the traffic in children. The Post employees named were:
Songpol Kaopatumtip, editor of Perspective, the features section of the Sunday edition; Surpradit Kanwanich, a staff
reporter who works mostly for Perspective; Pichai Chuensuksawadi, editor-in-chief; and Veera Prateepchaikul, an editor.
Somsak Damnak, Bangkok
---------------------------------
A comment by Surin Chanarakh of Bangkok, November 18, 2005:
Generally, the editor and columnist at the Bangkok Post, Sanitsuda Ekkachai, prefers to write about popular
issues that she considers "safe" subjects. These are subjects that have been described in great detail already by countless
reporters, activists, and tourists. Such bandwagon topics include include the plight of refugees from neighboring countries,
Thais without official papers, oppressed minorities, slum dwellers, orphans, squatters, etc.
While these topics are urgent matters that require immediate exposure, the woman is a cheap crook. She writes about popular
social issues to give herself an air of legitimacy as a liberal journalist so that she can perform dirty work for corrupt
officials of government and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) by writing false tributes to them.
Over the years, many people have brought urgent problems, some of them closely related to the above-mentioned issues,
to the Bangkok Post. Often, they have been directed to Ms. Sanitsuda. But she was not interested. She gave them the
runaround. She referred them to government offices or agencies, where her friends were employed, that did absolutely nothing
or tried to dissuade them from complaining or defended the corrupt officials.
In particular, Ms. Sanitsuda likes to ignore the plight of individual missing children who were the victims of pedophiles
and traffickers and complicit officials.
Surin Chanarakh
Bangkok
---------------------------------
What Happened to Baht 100 Million Taken from Public Revenue by Jakrapob
Penkair?
A Comment by Samakh Siphonphat of Bangkok, December 30, 2005:
There has been absolutely no follow-up by Thailand's media of a government proposal
last May for a government lottery from which proceeds would go to assist victims of traffickers in women and children.
On May 13, 2005, The Nation reported that the Thai foreign ministry had
announced that a projected 18-month campaign by a deputy prime minister, Surakiart Sathirathai, for the post of United Nations
secretary general that will be vacant at the end of next year, would cost Thai taxpayers at least Baht 100 million ($2.5 million).
The point was that Surakiart's bid for the top UN post was generally considered a lost cause and a waste of money.
Shortly afterward, an official of the prime minister's office, Jakrapob Penkair, protested in
the Bangkok Post that the figure of Baht 100 million was "outrageous".
Two weeks later, on May 26, 2005, the same official, Jakrapob announced that the
government was seeking the same amount, Baht 100 million, to start a lottery to raise funds for the victims of traffickers
in women and children. The project was to be supervised by a human trafficking prevention and suppression committee chaired
by Surakiart.
What happened to the lottery proposal?
What happened to the human trafficking prevention and suppression committee?
How is Surakiart financing his trips about the world to solicit support for his
bid for the top UN post?
Samakh Siphonphat, Bangkok;
----------------------------
Declare Ralph Boyce Persona Non Grata
Comment by Frank Rolf, January 4, 2008
Finally, after three long, unpleasant years, Bangkok is free of a big nuisance. Ralph Leo ("Skip") Boyce Junior is gone!
His tour as American Ambassador to Thailand ended with the old year.
Boyce, as ambassador, tried to get the Thai government
to remove or reduce bans on advertising of alcohol and tobacco products. He tried also to get the Thai government to stop
producing desperately needed American anti-AIDs drugs without license. While Washington, D. C., condemned the oppressive Burmese
military dictatorship, Boyce, alone among foreign envoys in Thailand, refused to criticize the Burmese generals; instead he
ducked questions, gave meaningless answers and deferred lamely to the collaborator Thai government, as if he were in the pay
of the Burmese generals or expected his next posting to be Burma.
Good riddance to bad rubbish! Let's hope that's the
last of him.
Before he was ambassador, Boyce, as Acting Chief of Mission in Bangkok in the mid-1990s, conspired with
Central Intelligence Agency operatives at the embassy in an international pedophile and prostitution ring.
Thailand
should declare Boyce persona non grata.
At least, we won't have Boyce's cornball jazz band concerts, which,
by the way, were paid for with State Department funds. Let's get a real jazz musician instead!
Editor: The above letter was posted on the On-line webboard forum of The Nation,
an English-language daily newspaper in Bangkok, in early January 2008. It was deleted after several days, probably at the
request of Boyce.
--------------------------
|