Jump to content

rick44

Member
  • Posts

    57
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by rick44

  1. I interviewed the "Chief Dogcatcher" (or City Veterinarian), Mr. Suraphong Wongsutthawart, in 2016, and then again in 2018.

     

    I referred to other tourist places in Thailand, where they seem to be attacking this problem more forcefully. I asked him if the authorities could not do anything about the problem, how about hiring private firms? He advised against that.

     

    He told me that people who start feeding dogs are legally considered their owners and are responsible for taking care of the dogs.

     

    Strangely, when I called the office last week, based on a problem in my soi, some veterinarian told me that this is not the case. I guess I'll have to follow up on that...

     

    Reading material (for Scandinavians... or users of Google Translate):

     

    https://www.thailandstidende.com/component/k2/item/2870-si-fra-om-loshundene

     

    https://www.thailandstidende.com/component/k2/item/3625-stadig-flere-loshunder-i-byen

    • Haha 1
  2. One more victim. Any updates?

     

    I couple I know just returned to Thailand and realized they had been defrauded by this same assistant bank manager. Anyone here know how this case is progressing? Are the victims using lawyers to go after the bank? Send PM if you don't want to respond to the topic. The name of the bank, branch and assistant manager is published in other media, by the way.

  3. There has been no announcement of which provinces will become dark red, in addition to the current ten. The articles in certain expat media are based on a misunderstanding in the English version of the Presser on Friday. I follow both the Thai and English versions, so I know. The Chonburi PR post from Tuesday (which I am unable to locate) will say nothing about the Central Government's classification of zones, because it is before the facts. Scandinavians (or people with Google Translate) can read about this here https://www.thailandstidende.com/component/k2/item/4447-feil-informasjon-om-kategorisering-av-provinser

    • Like 1
    • Confused 4
    • Haha 1
  4. 26 minutes ago, Crossy said:

     

    You get that sometimes if a site's going to the government block page (expired security certificate).

     

    It's still working for me on TOT fibre, northern BKK.

    It says "expired security certificate" but in reality the site is blocked by Thai authorities, I'm guessing. Still not working in Eastern, Isan where I am at the moment. Interesting that it works in BKK

  5. The last two days, I'm being refused access to GoFundMe.com via my TOT line. The laptop displays the page from the lovely "Ministry of Digital Economy and Society" saying "The content has been suspended due to it's illegal acts..." My mobile displays "your connection is not private".

     

    So I tried AIS 4G, and was able access the site without problems....

     

    Anyone else experienced this?

     

    Has one of the world's largest crowdfunding sites done something to upset a Thai bureaucrat?

    mdes.jpg

  6. 26 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

    I have not seen one. Immigration posted it in English on their website so that one can be considered official.

    Thanks. Yes, noticed it was on their site. Cannot find a Thai version, which is strange... Not in their News section either. And the English language is as usual lousy, so God only knows what kind of misinterpretations have entered the English version...

  7. Here is some research done by Thailand's Scandinavian magazine – this time presented in English:

     

    "7 Dangerous Days" no more dangerous than rest of year

     

    The average number of daily road deaths during Songkran's "7 Dangerous Days" is 50 – based on government data for the last 10 years. The number of people who die on the roads in Thailand on an average day is somewhere between 39 and 66, depending on if you believe the government or the World Health Organization (WHO). So why the biannual hype?

     

    http://www.thailandstidende.com/component/k2/item/3261-7-dangerous-days-no-more-dangerous-than-rest-of-year

  8. The article in question was not a Pulitzer-winning article and the only thing closely related is the writer lifted one paragraph from the Reuters article. Reuters response to this has been to say their article was fair and balanced (include responses from Thai Police, Navy and they have not been accused of libel. The Reuters Article (award winning) can be found at http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/17/us-myanmar-exodus-specialreport-idUSBRE96G02520130717

    Important facts are missing form this story so far.

    I suppose the original article in Phuketwan has been unpublished.

    But you're saying that it included one paragraph from Reuters. Then the rest presumably was Phuketwan's own reporting. So, was it the Reuters paragraph or Phuketwan's own reporting that resulted in the law suit?

×
×
  • Create New...