Re: "DSI: Grounds to charge GT200 distributors" (BP, Sept 28).
Whilst it is not inappropriate that some businesses connected with the import and distribution of the GT200, which certainly points reliably to gross incompetence, to fraud, and perhaps to corruption, have been found guilty and that others will be tried, some of the official responses manifest a disturbing recklessness.
An army officer holds a G200 bomb detector.
When Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwon insists that "the devices had been tested and found working at the time of purchase," this is tantamount to an admission of gross incompetence by the authorities who were responsible for and accepted that testing. A half-competent high school student in a STEM programme could have designed a double-blind test that would have proven the devices worthless. Gross incompetence is the least awful possibility that is plausible.
Even more reckless is the statement by a member of the anti-corruption commission, who loftily intones that the expensive pieces of worthless plastic with a cheap antenna are as valuable as a Buddhist amulet, that "the equipment, even though it may not be efficient, has a high morale value." This defence of the indefencible by an official from the anti-corruption commission surely deserves the loan of a gold Rolex, since relying on "the equipment" would seem to have posed an actual threat to national security, not to mention reckless endangerment of the lives of conscript soldiers on the ground who blindly relied on it based on nothing more than the unfounded word of their superior officers. This must also appear suspiciously like dereliction of duty to exercise proper oversight -- the sort of failure that led to former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra being sentenced to prison. Or are some held to a different standard, one infallibly determined by the devotees of those magical GT200s?
Felix Qui
Spying is not development
The new army chief, Gen Apirat Kongsompong, patriotically stated the army has "leading roles in solving major problems affecting national security and order" and also had a role in national development.
Last year's defence spending passed 6 billion dollars while the education budget was cut by almost 5%. In terms of bang for the buck, both were a total waste of money, though one might question spending any money at all on an army who views its duty as being to periodically overthrow the elected government.
As far as participating in developing the nation goes, one might ask exactly what sort of contributions 6 billion dollars realised recently? Paying to imprison people seeking to elect their government is not nation-building at its finest. Spying on citizen's online activities and censorship is not "development", unless it is a very, very large prison that is being built. Blimps, bomb detectors, subs and aircraft carriers -- what development one might ask?
Perhaps it would be better to have a national guard rather than a full-blown military in Thailand? At least one could justify the reasons for it.
Michael Setter
Caesar's wife
Re: "Desperate democrats" (PostBag, Sept 28).
Clara Holzer's letter claiming that Dr Ford's claim against Judge Kavanaugh was "without evidence" conveniently ignored the fact that she first reported the attack six years ago to her analyst, showing it had nothing to do with a Democratic conspiracy.
Also, the other person Dr Ford claims was present, Mr Judge, was inexplicably not subpoenaed to give evidence.
There are certainly arguments that a drunken act as a teenager should not preclude an individual from a position 36 years later. However, few people outside of the politically divided USA doubted her testament. In which case Judge Kavanaugh may have committed perjury. He also launched a vitriolic attack on the Democrats.
Should a Supreme Court judge be appointed who considers one party his sworn enemy?
This process was about his suitability, not whether he is innocent or guilty. Whether he is actually guilty of misconduct or not, the bar for becoming a Supreme Court judge should be set at least as high as Caesar's wife.
Phil Cox
No place for insults
Re: "Fireworks coming" (PostBag, Sept 29).
Keith Barlow's insulting screed has no place in responsible political discourse. An American presidential election is a binary choice; voters choose the least bad candidate, and a vote for one candidate isn't necessarily an endorsement of their worst features. Attributing a list of character flaws to Trump supporters is both inappropriate and reckless.
If Mr Barlow wishes to advance his agenda, he should try to see things from the viewpoint of his political opponents so he can persuade them instead of insulting them. Letters like Mr Barlow's are counterproductive because they reinforce division and entrench polarisation. We have enough of that already, both in the United States and in Thailand.
Jeff Gepner
Contact: Bangkok Post Building
136 Na Ranong Road Klong Toey, Bangkok 10110
fax: +02 6164000 Email:
All letter writers must provide full name and address.
All published correspondence is subject to editing at our discretion.
