richard_smith237

When making these statements its important to clarify some information to avoid misinformation. How was your Bank Opened: - Using your Passport ? IF so, you will (usually) need your Passport for 'at counter transactions'.... I Have accounts at SCB (opened with Passport), KTB, and BKK Banks (opened with Pink ID). For SCB 'at counter transactions'.... I need my Passport. For KTB, and BKK 'at counter transactions'.... My Pink ID or my Passport will work. However, recently at SCB - when paying into my Wifes account - no ID was requested which surprised me - usually Banks are total ID freaks and we can'd do anything without a form of ID, even when its handing over money !!!! It seems like the Manager of that branch might be a tool. I've had an issue before at SCB when my passport was at the Embassy for some reason... I had an Old Passport (clipped) and an Embassy Letter (notairising my ID). The manager wouldnt accept it. I had him call head office, I spoke with them on the phone, they said it was fine. The manager still wouldn't accept it (loss of face perhaps). I went two blocks down the road and carried out my transaction with my 'clipped Passport' without any issues at all. Its been my experience that some 'weaker' bank managers are snowflakes and somewhat fearful of anything close to colouring outside the lines - 'cannot' becomes the default response.

My accounts were opened with the Pink ID card - (but actual names on Bank Book, in English - its just the number) no issues there using Pink ID to deal with tellers at the branches. I wonder if they'd accept my Passport though (kind of reverse issue). Of note: I recently paid money into my Wife's account: Teller did not ask for any ID... Just paid into her account numbers (at SCB in BKK) - this surprised me as they usually ask for ID for everything, maybe a mistake, or maybe times are evolving.

RIP and all that... But the curve was not dangerous... the driver was - this was in the middle of the day, in the dry. Kwildo will come along and blame anything else but the driver..... the road engineering, blame no armco-barrier, blame road surfaces.... etc... But the driver for whatever reasons, made a huge error, using his phone ? speeding ? fell asleep etc... he failed to navigate a bend in the road... not a dangerous curve. Roll on pages of lectures - that any criticism of the driver here is racist and we dont understand safety.

I quite agree with your judgement, both on moral and scientific grounds, particularly in light of the conspicuous absence of clear, unequivocal evidence to support any single origin theory conclusively. I also freely acknowledge the presence of my own bias. From the moment I discovered that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was located in the very city where the initial outbreak occurred, I was struck by what appeared to be an extraordinary coincidence - one too significant to overlook. That singular fact alone inclined me towards the lab-leak hypothesis. In the time since, I have sought out credible evidence that might challenge or invalidate this perspective. I have yet to encounter sources, or information robust enough to dispel the plausibility of a lab-related origin. Conversely, the zoonotic spillover theory, though not impossible, continues to strike me as less convincing -especially in the context of the failure to identify a definitive animal intermediary, despite exhaustive international investigations. As such, my scepticism endures not out of dogma, but because no alternative explanation has, to date, provided a more compelling account.

Arguable, often debated, often announced as on measure, then another when a different police chief comes into power, then there are individual provincial requirements based on what 'that specific' police chief requires, if he's bothered to consider the issue in the first place. My point is - the Passport issue (whether to carry it) is far greater than a 'reverse' name situation on your driving license... ... showing concern for the irrelevant, and disregard for something considered more important. You used the 'Checking in with your Driving License' in a 'what if scenario' easily countered by carrying a passport... Its not a challenging conundrum.

I did it many times with my previous license, no issues whatsoever You miss my point... I check-in for domestic flights with my Pink-ID (or Driving licence)... but I do not travel to another province without my passport.... as that 'could' cause issue IF for any reason the Police want to see your passport. If you are comfortable doing so - then thats fine.... But then I'd argue such a relaxed character may also not be concerned with the minor idiosyncrasies of a given-name and surname being reversed....

Perhaps a little short-sighted... Given the rules in Thailand on being able to provide Government Issued ID (that can prove your immigration status) within a 'reasonable time frame' - travelling on any domestic flight without your passport would be a little short-sighted...

Well, it is an issue because it may cause confusion. When you present your driver's license say at an airport, how do they know what is your first name and last name? Its not an issue - even at airports. I've had tickets with the first and last name reversed (International flights)... BUT - in an extremely pedantic hypothetical world, he'd use his passport not his Driving License as check-in ID.

It doesn't matter, its still your Driving licence, your Photo, your DOB, your Passport Number, your Nationality etc... This is 100% a non-issue.

IF thats your best attempt at a put down... Whats wrong with being gay ??? are you a prejudice bigot ??? ... I'm surprised you still have internet access... weren't you caught running amok in the fields of Buriram upsetting the livestock ?

Apologies for putting part of your comment in bold - but a comment I made in 2021 reflects specifically this point.

And with this comment, the poster reveals not only his intellectual void but also the true aim of this thread – to provoke, bait, and invite ridicule. It lays bare the mental mediocrity and pathetically juvenile mindset of those who actively seek out to trigger this kind of hollow interaction.

You are a Richard expert An HIV treatment drug: Efavirenz is an NNRTI (Non-Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors) - it apparently has terrible side effects... .....Vivid or disturbing dreams, Insomnia, Anxiety, Depression, Dizziness, Confusion, Irritability, Psychosis... Explains rather a lot... eh Rock Hudson Harrisfan !!!....

You must be overwhelmingly happy for the development of antiretroviral drugs then... although clearly you are no rock-star !!!

Go ahead - in the interests of discussion - list the 'facts' supporting zoonotic drift... I'm prepared to discuss each point without need to dismiss it as 'snippets of information' or 'stringing together cherry picked information'... . (without rambling)... China is holding back information from WIV, as such the LabLeak theory cannot be verified. Meanwhile all the information is available regarding the zoonotic drift theory, and that still cannot be verified. While both Theories are unproven and thus remain theoretically plausible, I 'believe' one theory to be far more plausible than the other, particularly given the information being held back. Another critical dimension here is the highly political nature of the issue - this is a geopolitical powder keg. Framing the pandemic as a natural occurrence is far more palatable diplomatically than confronting the possibility that it stemmed from a preventable error by a single nation, especially when that error devastated global economies and lives. The implications of unequivocal proof pointing to a lab origin would be seismic -triggering not just blame, but potential demands for accountability, reparations, and a complete re-evaluation of global biosecurity. It’s no surprise, then, that many find it more convenient to lean on ambiguity.

Its not an alarmist post.... its just more delusional bumf from someone who's lost his pigeon...

Making a 'list of facts' is not stringing together 'cherry picked information' and suppling my own interpretation, its simply listing facts outlined in verified documentation which support that the Lab Leak theory cannot be discounted. I agree - there is no unequivocal proof either way (and there never will while China holds back the data of the work carried out on Corona Viruses back in 2019)... So, technically, I agree both scenarios remain a possibility - though I personally, 'believe' the Lab-Leak Theory to be more plausible based on the sources that present both sides of the theory. Additionally, it was you who introduced the CIA into this discussion - not me. Attributing that claim to my argument is a textbook example of gaslighting. It's a common but flawed rhetorical tactic to misrepresent your opponent’s position, then dismantle the distortion to bolster your own case. It’s transparent, intellectually dishonest, and does nothing to advance an serious discussion. Here is my quote: In 2021, U.S. intelligence agencies reported moderate confidence in the lab leak theory https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-58361211?utm_source=chatgpt.com In 2021, the U.S. intelligence community released a declassified report assessing the origins of COVID-19. The report concluded that the intelligence community was divided on the most likely origin of the virus, with both natural exposure to an infected animal and a laboratory-associated incident considered plausible hypotheses. Specifically, one intelligence agency assessed with moderate confidence that the first human infection was most likely the result of a laboratory-associated incident, probably involving experimentation, animal handling, or sampling by the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Four other agencies and the National Intelligence Council assessed with low confidence that the initial infection was most likely caused by natural exposure to an animal infected with the virus or a close progenitor virus. Three agencies remained unable to coalesce around either explanation without additional information. The report emphasised that China's cooperation would likely be needed to reach a more definitive conclusion. Why is China not cooperating ???? So, on one hand you are arguing with the 'facts' that I've presented which support the LabLeak theory, then with the other you argue that both the Lab-leak and Natural Outbreak theories remain unproven... Thus, by your own omission - the Lab-leak theory, remains plausible. Still want to argue from the fence ???

This is going to upset the 'anti-EV-ers' !!! Check with the Wife or Mistress first...

You're just as bad as Malcy... wanting to give a Thai Pric a good shake.... 🇹🇭🍆👌 He's always going on about that stuff...

I think thats a lot of the issue many of us have with such beurocratic interactions and often interactions in general, experiences vary from province to province, often even from officer to officer... Then we fall under the assumption or misunderstanding that 'these are the hard rules'... Or better still, 'someone wasn't dressed respectfully etc'.... ... A lack of clearly documented coherent consistency across provinces, from office to office, and offerer to officer would go a long way to saving us a lot of time and effort and also, debate. I fully expect my next driving license renewal to go swimmingly, it always has - yet I'm mentally prepared for the.... "cannot, you need a notarised photocopy of an imprint of your right-foot, verified by the DLT head-office, along with an affirmation of freedom to drive from your embassy" .... of course thats the exaggerated version and far from close to any resonable reality... but we see the minor variations already, and we've all been tripped up by something ' not being he same as it was last time' enough times....

There were only a very select few labs in the world in a category capable to study viral diseases like covid so no its not surprising. But when you're guessing without facts anything is possible in your mind That’s precisely my point, Dan O: - Only a very select few laboratories worldwide are equipped to conduct high-level research on coronaviruses. - Dr Shi Zhengli is recognised as one of the world’s foremost virologists and a leading authority on coronaviruses. - At the time in question, Dr Shi was actively engaged in coronavirus research. - The Chinese authorities, specifically the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), withheld or refused to release relevant research documentation. - WIV is located just a few miles from the outbreak’s original epicentre in Wuhan. - U.S. State Department cables from 2018 flagged safety concerns at the WIV. - Researchers at WIV were reportedly hospitalised with COVID-like symptoms in late 2019. - The virus contains a furin cleavage site, which is unusual in natural SARS-like coronaviruses. - China destroyed early virus samples and censored data related to the outbreak. - Whistleblower doctors in Wuhan were reprimanded or disappeared. - The Chinese military began collaborating with WIV before the pandemic. - No intermediate animal host has ever been identified, despite years of global searching. WIV was conducting gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses. - In 2021, U.S. intelligence agencies reported moderate confidence in the lab leak theory. - The “natural origin” theory is still entirely unproven, with no concrete zoonotic source. - WIV removed its online virus database in 2019 and has not restored access. These are not speculative musings - they are established facts that have no been guessed at. This isn’t a matter of entertaining vague possibilities in my mind, your accusation of such underscores a flawed critical approach by you towards to my comments. It could be argued that the LabLeak theory is a logical assessment based on clear, verifiable information. Feel free to fact-check any of the above information yourself.

This has been floated, put into action, cancelled, re-started etc.. I'm not sure how many times. Ultimately - the answer you are always likely to receive is: its a 5 hr drive.... just drive. A few threads here.. https://aseannow.com/topic/981949-updated-new-schedule-for-pattaya-hua-hin-ferry-starting-20-may-2017/ https://aseannow.com/topic/1206141-exclusive-pattaya-hua-hin-ferry-service-scrapped-indefinitely-uncertainty-over-future-of-hua-hin-flights/ https://aseannow.com/topic/1280393-hua-hin-to-pattaya-ferry/ https://aseannow.com/topic/1314421-pattaya-hua-hin-ferry/

And props to you for making that conscious decision... For I see many old men who may never father their children into their teens, and I quite agree, thats unfair for any potential child....

Let’s flip the scenario for a moment. Imagine I marry, give up my career to stay at home and raise children as a 'stay at home dad', dedicating my time, energy, and identity to building a stable, loving household while my successful wife climbs the professional ladder. Then, years later, she decides to leave. Where does that leave me? That’s not just emotional upheaval - it’s economic devastation. The career path I sacrificed is gone, my earning power diminished, and I’m left picking up the pieces of a life I helped build, now shut out from the rewards of it. Suddenly, that "piece of paper" you are scoffing at doesn’t seem so meaningless after all. In my own case, my wife gave up her career to become a full-time mother. It wasn’t a decision made lightly, nor unilaterally. I travel often for work, and it was important to both of us that there be a steady presence at home - that she be the anchor a home. That choice, though made with love and purpose, came at great cost to her professionally. It altered her trajectory. And that’s precisely why the marriage contract matters: it’s not just romantic symbolism, it’s a mutual promise - a commitment to protect one another when life demands such sacrifices. Now, if there are no children involved, no careers disrupted, no relocations, no significant compromises – then yes, I can understand the argument that marriage may feel redundant, just a ceremonial gesture, a piece of paper. In such cases, the stakes are lower and the consequences fewer. The truth is, we both rolled the dice - and we won. No smugness, no gloating - just quiet gratitude. If for whatever reason, either of us had to roll the dice again, we had to do it all over again, I’m confident the outcome would be similar. That said, I’m not blind to the fact that it could just as easily have gone another way. Luck, timing, and character all play their part. And of course, your argument that choosing well is simply a matter of foresight, as if we all possess a crystal ball is valid. The suggestion that one can always predict outcomes with absolute certainty obviously falls flat - especially in the context of a thread where options being discussed include bar girls and partners far removed from our own socio-economic, educational, or cultural world. In many of these scenarios, the odds of misalignment are higher. Many of those relationships are, by their nature, built on shaky foundations - differences in values, life goals, or expectations. And it’s no surprise when they fail. Yet, even then, gems can be found among the gravel. Not everyone outside your familiar world is a risk - and not everyone within it is a guarantee. Marriage, like any meaningful commitment, involves a leap of faith. But it also demands discernment, self-awareness, and a willingness to face uncomfortable truths about oneself and one's choices. When it fails, it’s not always because marriage is broken - it’s often because the people in it were either mismatched, misguided, or unprepared.

I understand where you're coming from – it's easy to see marriage as a broken institution when so many stories we hear are filled with pain, betrayal, or disappointment. The headlines, the anecdotes, the bitterness of others can paint a grim picture. But those are just snapshots – not the whole landscape. As for me, I wouldn’t say I dodged a bullet, and neither did my wife. Nor did my parents, my sisters, or nearly all of my close friends – save perhaps two exceptions. We didn’t get lucky. We simply chose well. We entered into relationships where mutual respect, care, and emotional maturity are foundational, not optional. There are no bullets to dodge when both people recognise that a relationship isn’t a battlefield and neither of them is carrying a loaded gun. It's not a game of survival, but a partnership built on understanding, not fear. Of course, that’s not always the case. People do make poor choices – sometimes repeatedly – and when they do, it's far more a reflection on the chooser than on the concept of marriage itself. The system isn’t broken simply because some people walk into it ill-prepared, misguided, or emotionally unequipped. And yes, people grow, change, evolve – sometimes in painful, divergent ways. That’s the part that truly breaks hearts. But that's not a flaw in the system; it’s a reality of life. The legal structures around marriage can certainly exacerbate the fallout when things go wrong, and there’s a case to be made for reform in how we manage endings. But let’s not confuse a flawed legal framework or poor individual choices with the failure of the idea itself. Marriage, when entered into with wisdom, honesty, and intention, isn’t broken. It’s simply misused at times - often by those who rush in blindly, or who fail to take responsibility for their own part in its unraveling. And yes, many of those voices are loud on this forum, quick to declare they’ve “dodged a bullet” as if cynicism is a badge of honour. There’s one particular poster who comes to mind – a man who relentlessly blames everyone but himself for his wife leaving him. His misogyny is so deeply entrenched, so casually worn, that one can’t help but wonder why any woman would have stayed with him in the first place. The irony seems entirely lost on him. It’s not the institution that’s failed these people – it’s often their own choices, attitudes, or refusal to self-reflect. Marriage isn’t inherently flawed. But it does demand maturity, accountability, and a genuine regard for the person you choose to walk beside.