scammed in Cambodia by a hooker
zig...@rock.com
Editor;
I'm asking that you post this letter to aid other travelers to
Cambodia. Last week a friend and myself were traveling to Sihanoukville
via Koh Kong and as I have done many times before we booked a hotel for
the night. We then set out for dinner and a few drinks. As we had one
of the travel guides from the border (tall guy with small beard spoke
better English than myself), he picked us up at the hotel after dinner
and took us to the famed Chicken Ranch so we could fine some company.
We then returned to the hotel and I had a problem with the girl, so
I sent her on her way. About 1 hour later there was a knock at my door;
there was my tour guide saying we had to go to the police station or
they would come here and arrest me, as a compliant was made against me
by the girl.
Upon arrival I was told that the girl had said I made her take
drugs and that I beat her up. Of course there were no marks and no
drugs. Then it hit me: sounds like a set-up. Of course she was crying
and putting on quite a show. I told them that this was just not true
and to go ahead and lock me up. But no, they wanted to settle this now,
tonight. Again I said go to hxxl.
This went on for 2 hours. The starting price was 1000 U.S Dollars
and I was told by the tour guide in the company of the police that if I
didn't pay I would never be seen again. At that point I became
worried, having lived here in Thailand for 6 years I have heard some
bad stories. After another hour we had the price down to 200 dollars
and then we settled for 150 dollars. I was then free to go after I put
my fingerprint on a piece of paper and gave them my name.
I would advise you to stay away from Koh Kong and Cambodia in the
future. This was my 15th trip to Cambodia.
Sign me,
Dumb In Pattaya
Heathcote
everything you get.
<zig...@rock.com> wrote in message
news:1169845602....@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com...
Bryan
<snipped here and there...>
> We then returned to the hotel and I had a problem with the girl, so
> I sent her on her way. About 1 hour later there was a knock at my door;
> there was my tour guide saying we had to go to the police station or
> they would come here and arrest me, as a compliant was made against me
> by the girl.
All I have to say is, that's what you get when you pay for sex.
I'm not a religious person - but I do have moral standards, and paying for
sex is immoral.
The "victimless crime" is never victimless, and is a crime (whether it's
illegal there or not)...
Bryan
hstamm
Immoral?
At depends on the standard each person sets for him self but blackmail
and extortion are definitely not moral either.
INMHO
Regards
Helmut
Alfred Molon
> All I have to say is, that's what you get when you pay for sex.
>
> I'm not a religious person - but I do have moral standards, and paying for
> sex is immoral.
>
> The "victimless crime" is never victimless, and is a crime (whether it's
> illegal there or not)...
I've never paid for sex either, but IMHO prostitution is just another
service like many (of course only if the person providing the service
freely chooses to do so and is old enough). There is nothing "immoral"
in paying for sex.
--
Alfred Molon
http://www.molon.de - Photos of Asia, Africa and Europe
@thailandmail.co.uk agudbuk
Agudbuk
Heathcote
"Alfred Molon" <REMOVEalf...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.202c83fe9...@news.supernews.com...
Alfred Molon
> You just lost all of your credibility.
Why are you so upset?
orang37
prepared neurotoxinal fugu fish sushi wrote :
"You just lost all of your credibility."
I have never heard of a hooker demanding or accepting credibility as
payment, even in Cambodia.
~o:37;
Bryan
"Alfred Molon" <REMOVEalf...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.202c83fe9...@news.supernews.com...
>
>> All I have to say is, that's what you get when you pay for sex.
>>
>> I'm not a religious person - but I do have moral standards, and paying
>> for
>> sex is immoral.
>>
>> The "victimless crime" is never victimless, and is a crime (whether it's
>> illegal there or not)...
>
> I've never paid for sex either, but IMHO prostitution is just another
> service like many (of course only if the person providing the service
> freely chooses to do so and is old enough). There is nothing "immoral"
> in paying for sex.
Read my reply to "sarp"...
maxwell
> "Alfred Molon" wrote ...
> > >, Bryan says...
> >> All I have to say is, that's what you get when you pay for sex.
> >> I'm not a religious person - but I do have moral standards, and paying
for sex is immoral.
> >> The "victimless crime" is never victimless, and is a crime (whether
it's
> >> illegal there or not)...
> > I've never paid for sex either, but IMHO prostitution is just another
service like many (of course only if the person providing the service freely
chooses to do so and is old enough).
NOTE the stipulation, Bryan: only if the person providing the service freely
chooses to do so and is old enough.
Do women ('old enough') have the rights of their OWN bodies?
> >There is nothing "immoral" in paying for sex.
>
> Read my reply to "sarp"...
Was that something fundamentally different than what you wrote above?
1. "that's what you get ((i.e., robbed)) when you pay for sex."
Either you claim that the act of paying for sex is inherently a robbery of
the client (this seems unlikely--but please do tell) OR that getting robbed
is an inherent consequence of contracting for sex.
How might THAT be?
2. "I do have moral standards, and paying for sex is immoral"
That's your opinion: for one person to contract with another, for the one to
do something with their body that benefits the other, in exchange for
payment (the quid pro quo), is not to YOUR liking--AND you call this
'immoral.'
SURELY there needs to be some rationale for this opinion ('immoral' acts
must have some harmful component(s), no?), but you don't provide that, or do
you?
Is the rationale to be found in:
3. "The "victimless crime" is never victimless, and is a crime (whether it's
illegal there or not)..." ??
You say there's a victimization.
So, either a woman (or man) is victimized if she (or he) sells her body for
sex (as contrasted with, say, doing the washing up or running the office?),
OR, the client is victimized by paying money to enjoy what he (or she) would
not otherwise enjoy of the other--or BOTH?
Now how might THAT be?
Oh, and whether or not there's a prosecutable crime on the books wherever
the prostitution occurs, there is nevertheless a crime taking place, you
say?
OTHER than your oh-so-declarative opinion, WHERE is the 'crime'?
Is a crime to pay for something that one wishes to buy that is freely
offered for sale, or is it 'inherently' a crime for women to contract out
their OWN bodies for sex?
While it's apparent you figure your opinion to be significant enough to
declare what the contractors and contractees of sexual services 'should' do,
and are in fact engaged in perpetrating (i.e., victimization, criminality,
immorality), in FACT the only things we know with some certainty about a
transaction of prostitution is that one person is selling and one person is
buying, and both are engaged in some contact of their bodies intended to
pleasure the one, and earn payment for the other.
OTHER than THAT free market transaction, ALL the rest needs some explaining,
else it has no more weight than to declare that it is 'wrong' to do labor on
the ceremonial day of the week, or 'wrong' not to wear a certain hat on
one's head--just arbitrary dogma.
YOU say there are victims INHERENT to the act of contracting for sex, yet
make no showing.
Very well.
Is it 'okay' in your moral world if a woman freely gives her body to another
person?
If so, then for her to receive payment-- is THAT 'immoral' ?
-maxwell