Tweet of the Day: Gordon Ramsay Promotes Cass Beer
Gordon Ramsay appearing in Cass beer commercials-INSIDE Korea JoongAng Daily https://t.co/lWmCk1tGLU
— ZenKimchi (@ZenKimchi) September 17, 2017
Gordon Ramsay appearing in Cass beer commercials-INSIDE Korea JoongAng Daily https://t.co/lWmCk1tGLU
— ZenKimchi (@ZenKimchi) September 17, 2017
Wow, he has hit rock bottom I guess…
I can see it. Cass was one of my favorites when I was in Korea, many years ago. 😎
Eh, I enjoyed a tall boy or two after a long bike ride, but I wouldn’t really call it a great beer.
What I liked about it was that you could grab a couple out of the fridge, pay for them, then plop down at the sidewalk table and knock them back. Try that in the States, and you get the cops called on you for public consumption or some other “all up in your business” law.
Cass is probably the finest beer ever made.
It has a complex multi-layered flavor with a bold start and a smooth finish.
It is simply your unrefined palate that knows no better… obviously.
I drank Cass for a long time, but ended up switching to Max. Seemed to have a better, richer flavor.
I did enjoy drinking outside the convenient stores. Some places have a relaxing atmosphere or nice views. Nice alternative to a dark, smoky bar. Korean culture does have a lot of cool parts to it.
I’ve never had a Cass beer but it sounds like something CH would make a limerick about. LOL
There once was a beer name Cass
which I might suggest give a pass.
It is in your mind
I’ll say it tastes like behind
but that would be rather crass.
It was always a mystery to me why and how the Japanese could have such lovely beer and the best Koreans could do was OB and Crown. I would never drink Crown, not even for free, not even if paid to. My preferred tipple was maggeolli, in the right place. Until 1980-something it was illegal to make 100% rice maggeolli, and in a lot of places it would be made with wheat or corn flour, or rarely acorns. Monumental hangovers.
China used to have a few city breweries with decent beer, but they were all largely bought out by INBEV-SAB-AB, and they all started to make close copies of HITE/CASS. It is actually hard to find 3.2 beer, as most of then have alcohol content of around 2.7%. I and several friends have empirical evidence that it is physically impossible to get drunk on 2.7; hypernatremia, yes, intoxication, no.
Burma is having a golden age of beer, with Heineken, Carlsberg, Tiger, and Kirin brewing here, and not bad local brands (Myanmar, Mandalay, Dagon). The foreign brewers sell downscale versions brewed with more rice, Yoma and Regal 7.
The market here for real alkies is in above-strength beers, Andaman and ABC Stout running at 12%.
As a result, Burmese are drinking a hell of a lot more than I can remember. The upper classes go in from decent scotches, while the rest drink rum (rummies from different places tell me local run is quite good) or rice whiskies.
Burma is a rather hate-filled place right now… And it will result in problems for expats. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErgcRFgjswI
12 percent beer?!?
Wow, that’s like wine-level strength.
Hope they don’t serve it in pints.
“Burma is a rather hate-filled place right now… And it will result in problems for expats.”
Finally… a nation knows how to properly take care of an Islamic infestation.
There hasn’t been this much efficiency since the “nits make lice” mentality of the Indian fighters.
The world is doubling down on the “Religion of Peace” lie when it starts claiming Buddhist are the enemy of mankind.
CH forgets the Buddhist on Buddhist (and cop) violence in Seoul not too long ago… They were tossing fire bombs at each other and the cops.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/buddhist-monks-riot-injures-40-1188655.html
I am not saying “Buddhist[s] are the enemy of mankind”; but all Trump did was try to hold up immigration from a few countries for 90 days and he was “literally Adolf H”. These folks in Burma are killing women and children. Or doesn’t that count any more?
Still, it might be about beer….
Heh…
Without falling into the No True Scotsman trap, I would suggest the fundemental teachings of Buddhism compared to the fundemental teachings of Islam speak for themselves.
The latest flare up in 1000 years of Buddhist-inspired anti-Muslim violence in Burma is likely unfortunate for everyone involved.
Aung San Suu Kyi said that the media was misrepresenting a few things in the coverage and now people want to revoke her Nobel Peace Prize.
I have no doubt that some bad things have been done to some Rohingya Muslims who didn’t deserve it in Myanmar, but why doesn’t Bangladesh want these people in their country either? Wouldn’t Bangladesh be a much better fit for them?
The “rohingya” thing is more complicated than I have the time to explain. How the Burmese are handling it is markedly different with Trump having been elected than it might have been with Clinton.
Bertil Lintner is a journalist who follows Burma (and sometimes NK). See his good piece at http://www.atimes.com/article/truth-behind-myanmars-rohingya-insurgency/
That having been said, 99% of ethnic Burmese Buddhists, racism aside, believe that these people are illegal aliens from Bangladesh (I agree) -and not members of a (real) Arabic creole group called Rohingya.
The analogy to use would be if Mexicans came across the border, then claimed to be Navajo or Apache indians.
Even if some of these people have been here a few generations, how is it that half a million of them somehow have -zero- Burmese government-issued documents? Why do none of them speak Rohingya (a real language spoken by just a handful of native speakers), -but the Chittagong dialect of Bengali?
As for immigration, Burmese law from the 1940’s is pretty clear, and still applies today: full citizenship is not granted until a family has passed at least 4 generations in Burma.
So Aung San Suu Kyi and the rest of her party are correct in telling foreign governments and the UN to piss up a rope whenever they are criticized over what is happening in Rakhine state. How can the US say shit when it has a de facto Muslim ban, is getting ready to chuck out 800,000 DACA kids, and has had no significant immigration reform in decades?
Thanks for the brief rundown, Bob. Good to hear from someone on the ground who doesn’t have to go through layer upon layer of editorialization and narrative.
I take issue with a couple things you said :
de facto Muslim ban. Did Trump set out to ban Muslims, or did he set out to ban people from countries having violent civil wars or track records of exporting terrorism, and several majority Muslim nations just happened to exclusively fit those parameters? Funny how that works out.
Extra credit: What country was the latest church shooter originally from?
DACA kids. Most of these “kids” are in their 20’s or 30’s. I know it isn’t their fault they are here, but it isn’t my fault either. If Trump manages a deal to fund the wall, I would be okay with them staying.
Immigration reform. People throw that phrase around, but often don’t specify what exactly is wrong with the laws in place. I tend to think we let in too many legal AND illegal immigrants and any attempt at reform would undoubtedly end up raising the quotas once the people who own congress have their interests met.
But I agree with you on principle. The U.S. doesn’t get to dictate morals to every other nation. We might strongly urge that women and children aren’t raped or murdered, but Myanmar or Burma or whatever the hell they go by these days should have the ultimate say on who is allowed to live within their borders just as other nations should be able to.
johnnyboy, Trump himself has referred to this thing as a muslim ban. It’s what he promised his base, in no uncertain terms. By saying so he shot holes in the arguments his lawyers were making when it was challenged in district courts and injunctions were issued. And of course the majority of 9/11 attackers were from Saudi, but it was not on the list of countries banned (neither was Egypt or Jordan), which puts the muslim ban into an even more questionable light.
The bulk of the Bengalis came into Burma during the 1971 East-West Pakistan war, before what is now Bangladesh split away and formed its own country. 11 million refugees went into India, prompting Indira Gandhi to send in the Indian Army to sort things out. At least 2 million refugees came into Burma, and not all left; the Burmese tried several times to push them back.
The current flap started when the Burmese had had enough, and from 1978-1992 conducted a series of scorched earth campaigns to push these people back. The UNHCR got wind of it and then the thing has been a pain in the ass every since.
I just came back down from Magway division, adjacent to Rakhine. The division is solidly Buddhist, and every town and village has a big sign on roads leading in saying plainly “ABSOLUTELY NO INDIANS/MUSLIMS ALLOWED TO ENTER TOWN LIMITS. THIS MEANS YOU!”
Sounds more like Pyongyang Bob… again…
BB:“And of course the majority of 9/11 attackers were from Saudi, but it was not on the list of countries banned (neither was Egypt or Jordan), which puts the muslim ban into an even more questionable light.”
The suspension applied to countries that Congress had restricted use of the Visa Waiver Program for nationals of, and aliens recently present in, (A) Iraq or Syria, (B) any country designated by the Secretary of State as a state sponsor of terrorism (currently Iran, Syria, and Sudan), and (C) any other country designated as a country of concern by the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence. These countries were essentially the same as the former president’s list of “countries of concern” for travel purposes. And (unsurprisingly) the same as the government of Canada’s list of “concern countries” (with the exception of Iran).
So I don’t see why or how it is so “questionable”.
@Burma Bob, I never would have imagined a posting about Gordon Ramsay and Cass beer would lead to such an interesting discussion about the Rohingya issue in Burma. The article link was very informative and it looks like the Wahibists have found another area of the world to push their radicalism.
“…Saudi, but it was not on the list of countries banned (neither was Egypt or Jordan), which puts the muslim ban into an even more questionable light.”
I agree.
Questionable indeed.
What the hell kind of Muslim Ban allows Muslims?