OPINION

Airline anecdotes

Re: "Why 'Fly Thai'?" (PostBag, May 31).

I, too, used to fly Thai Airways whenever I could, but now avoid them.

However, unfortunate meal experiences aren't confined to THAI.

On a Silk Air flight from Balikpapan, I was seated right at the rear of the aircraft and wasn't served until we had already began our descent to Singapore. The stewardess apologised that they only had chicken left and not the fish I ordered.

I told her not to worry and that I'd get something when we landed.

On an SIA flight from Seoul to Bangkok, I was served my meal. After a while a steward walked past and inquired if the food was OK. I replied that I'd ordered salmon, not chicken.

Profusely apologetic he removed the plate and some time later brought the aforementioned salmon.

After a while, he passed by again and again asked if everything was alright. I replied that he'd removed my cutlery with the first dish! As he was about to scurry off back to the galley, I told him not to worry as the food was cold now.

Five minutes later he returned, full of apologies and offered me a free meal out with the crew that night in Bangkok at a venue of my choice. I replied that I had a connecting flight to Hat Yai, probably to his relief! Would this happen on a THAI flight?

A last anecdote. An Air Asia stewardess on a Singapore-Bangkok flight once admonished me for finishing off my half-eaten sandwich before take-off!

I'm somewhat inured to strange travelling experiences now, though.

It might be useful at this moment to distinguish between a Thai Buddhist wat and a cult. A traditional wat allows everyone to come and go freely, offers instruction in the Buddha's teachings and serves as a place to practise meditation. It is a charitable institution.

A cult on the other hand respects only the cult leaders word above all others, even the law of the land. It disseminates the cult leaders' teaching and demands strict conformity and complete obedience from its adherents. It is also a money-making business.

Using these criteria should make it quite simple to determine just what sort of an organisation Wat Dhammakaya really is and the proper course of action to be taken.

In defence of the use of pseudonyms by many PostBag contributors, I'd like to point out that some of the most well-known authors such as Agatha Christie, CS Lewis, Washington Irving, Benjamin Franklin, Isaac Asimov and quite a few others wrote under pseudonyms.

While many PostBag contributors might not be famous or world-famous personalities or writers, if it's good enough for the well known, then it should be okay for the rest of us.

Besides, who knows who is lurking behind some monikers, perhaps even the "Boss" himself.

Re: "Dept starts relocating tigers from temple", (BP, May 31).

Nobody knows, even animal activists, where those tigers would be more loved and happy between the temple and the breeding centres.

With support from visitors, the temple can take care of those animals, while the state-owned breeding centres are run with tax money.

Are we obliged to support more than a hundred tigers and other animals?

Can the centre guarantee better conditions compared to the temple?