I didn't read it like that at all. My opinion hasn't changed one iota from when I first read Charles' article. My opinion then, as is now, the embassy should help destitute British nationals as per it's published guidelines. The story behind the two is of no relevance whatsoever, not to me anyway. I think I will start a thread on embassy's discretionary policy though. I will just copy and paste an unanswered post I made on the other site and see what the reaction is.General Mackevili wrote:My take:UKJ wrote:Cliffs on the Brit Embassy thread please? I'm not going to read 100 pages.
1. Khmer Times published a non-story.
2. Khmer Times almost immediately realizes it's a non-story and deletes it.
3. Scobie seems to think he's uncovered the biggest story in the history of Cambodia and spends next 100 pages wondering why NOT A SINGLE NEWS OUTLET WILL COVER THE STORY, LoL.
The fact that NOBODY will cover the story at all whatsoever should have told him something by page 3, LoL.
I have not changed. What I notice is that when I take the Filipino Blackjack scammers to task, or the fake Laotian/Khmer beggar, even though I don't really "know" what they are up to, nobody accuses me of having changed or making untoward assumptions. But when when I fail to support a couple of white westerners with a weaker story than Wild Turkey Man, the bleeding hearts get all up in arms. Odd that. I haven't even expressed an opinion about whether they are entitled to/deserving of help from the embassy, and have said almost nothing about the singlet twins themselves. I have simply not been supportive of the attacks on the embassy, or of the veracity of their story, and have questioned whether the bleeding heart approach to "helping" them actually amounts to help (e.g. I don't think it's a good idea to give a jonesing druggy a hand full of cash on the promise he'll do the right thing with it, if that's what the situation was at the embassy.) More interestingly, when I make a substantive point such as the post above regarding "knowledge" and what that justifies, it is not met with reason or counter-argument, but ad hominem ("you've changed") and pedantics ("telling usage of the moniker 'singlet twins' which betrays your own interests.") This resort to fallacy and rhetoric indicates to me the weakness of the bleeding heart position, that perhaps it can't be supported by reason. (Just as an aside, I picked up the term 'Singlets twins' from their first and primary supporter Charles Dashwood in his front page article on 440. It's not my creation. It's in the first paragraph.)vladimir wrote:LTO, that post of yours would pass the acid test (and I don't mean LSD, lol) if it were not for the very telling usage of the moniker 'singlet twins' which betrays your own interests/point of view in this case.LTO wrote:What I have always found kind of interesting about that was, in so far as it is true that people didn't "know" the truth of the story, they similarly don't know what the embassy knows, the basis for their decisions, whether they responded appropriately, or even what exactly they have actually done, yet the embassy is faulted by many for not doing the right thing. If one cannot comment on the singlet twins due to a supposed 'lack of knowledge,' surely they can't comment on the embassy's actions either. If one is part of the "we don't know" crowd, all that can really be said is to list an infinite number of possible scenarios that may have occured and how the singlets/embassy were right or wrong in each, or just say nothing at all.vladimir wrote:...My biggest beef was the lack of response to their plight by the embassy, and the 'flush them down the toilet' crowd's complete lack of sympathy; wait, it 's not even that bad, they couldn't just not have sympathy, or ignore it, they had to attack them and treat them as guilty of scamming...
AND THIS WITHOUT ANYONE ACTUALLY KNOWING THE TRUE STORY...
You've changed. I hope you find it in you to change back, and tell the crew to go fuck themselves.
To repeat, just in brief, the little bit of opinion I have expressed about the worthiness of these two to receive the help of strangers: in the allocation of time and money I or any of us have for charity and people in need in Cambodia, I would be giving it to street kids and hungry mothers and child support organizations long before I'd give it to these two. That is not to detract from the decision of CD or SCC to put their time and money into the singlets. What pulls at their heart strings, what they see as worthy and where they want to put their resources is completely up to them. But for me, in light of the fact that resources are limited, and this is Cambodia where real need doesn't mean hitting a harsh end to your holiday, there are about 9,000,000 people in line ahead of them.
"Kafka is 'outdone' in our country, the new fatherland of Angkor" - Norodom Sihanouk
- General Mackevili
- The General
- Posts: 17264
- Joined: Tue May 06, 2014 5:24 pm
- Reputation: 2203
- Location: The Kingdom
To be fair, I didn't hardly read it, as it looked like nonsense from the start.juansweetpotato wrote:
I didn't read it like that at all.
It just seemed like a story that became LESS verified every time someone looked into it.
I personally think everyone on that thread got the wool pulled over their eyes, especially Scobie.
Are we really supposed to believe that a "journalist" and "film maker" that was so involved with the story was never able to get a second picture of the 2 gentlemen? PLEEEEEAAAAAAAAASE!
I also think that using this particular "story" that can't even be verified one iota to condemn the British Embassy is beyond ridiculous, to say the least.
"Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh."
Have a story or an anonymous news tip for CEO? Need advertising? CONTACT ME
Cambodia Expats Online is the most popular community in the country. JOIN TODAY
Follow CEO on social media:
I know it's not a competition, but -I- got a domain named after me...frank lee bent wrote:LOL, I don't even post there, and i got a mention from one of the owners.
Fixed that for you.EdinWigan wrote:ill-educated twats
Condolences Joon. Mrs S and I send hugs.Joon wrote:Or maybe Joon's father died right after KNY and she was dealing with a load of personal crap and family drama over the last two weeks and suddenly engaging or moderating the petty bickering on a forum felt extremely trivial.
Hmmmmm..... who are the barbarians in this story? Hint - its not the Cambodians.
Some of you need to look in the mirror and ask yourself " What will become of me WHEN I fall?" Because a significant % of you will fall. Who will give a fuk? Perhaps nobody, because you left a toxic legacy and had no compassion for any one else when YOU were on top of the world.
And contrary to popular belief - THIS has been my 1st drunken rant in a LONG time.
Respect to you who deserve it ( and you know who you are)
And fuk you cunts that don't deserve it ( you know too)
https://cambodiaexpatsonline.com/topic4784.htmlStroppyChops wrote:Is there a gap in the narrative here somewhere? Please don't refer me to links OTOF - but who's Nick, and where on CEO is the backstory?
- Similar Topics
- Last post