khunjeff

Either this is very poor reporting, or Khun Kerati is a very confused man.

Same - mine reached its all-time high one week ago.

Please see my posts above. The FAA does not evaluate individual foreign airlines, and Thai Airways was not banned. Thailand was downgraded to Category 2, which had the effect of preventing TG and other Thai carriers from operating flights to the US (which they had no plan to do anyway). "The Federal Aviation Administration announced Tuesday that it was downgrading Thailand’s aviation safety rating to Category 2 because the country did not comply with international standards. "The decision means Thai airlines will be banned from opening new routes to the United States or expanding existing ones." https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/thailand-aviation-safety-faa/index.html

"The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has lifted a “significant safety concern” that it imposed against Thailand in 2015 because of concerns about the inadequate safety oversight of Thai-registered air carriers. "ICAO’s action two years ago was followed by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration International Aviation Safety Assessment Program’s downgrading of Thailand to Category II status, which has limited operations by Thai carriers to and from U.S. airports. "According to ICAO, a significant safety concern does not necessarily indicate a particular safety deficiency involving air navigation service providers, aircraft operators or airports, “but rather indicates that the State is not providing sufficient safety oversight to ensure the effective implementation of applicable ICAO Standards."” https://flightsafety.org/thailand-red-flag/

I don't know anything about the UK CAA, but neither ICAO nor the US FAA red flags individual airlines. Thailand, not Thai Airways, received the red flag from those organizations due to insufficient government safety oversight.

Having to post a 7x21cm poster that is provided free of charge will "burn vendors' profits"? Uh huh...

The question is, how did the methanol get into the booze at all, if they were supposedly just watering down ethyl alcohol and reselling it? Or did they buy denatured ethanol instead of food grade?

For the retail sector, "local businesses" pretty much means CP and Central, since they have a virtual duopoly. Do they really need protection? And by the way, if you go into a grocery store in Guangzhou, the eggs will usually be from CP farms in China. So Thai investment in China = good, but Chinese investment in Thailand = bad?

Can we please drop the "allegedly"? Yes, I know his legal culpability has yet to be determined in a court of law, but the facts of what he did that night are no longer in dispute by anyone.

This makes very little sense. People who want to work illegally will find a way to do so without much problem, and real tourists will have a holiday and go home. Most countries allow foreigners to stay 90 days or more, and yet don't have a plague of tourists driving buses.

She entered on a fiancee visa, but didn't apply to adjust status after marrying you? In any case, you're correct that if she doesn't want to live in the US or get US citizenship, then becoming a permanent resident is more trouble than it's worth. She should just apply for a regular tourist visa if she only wants to make short visits there. (During her visa interview, she should make certain the officer understands that you live in Thailand, not the US - that will greatly increase her chance of success.)

One thing I've always found fascinating is that an effective way to treat methanol poisoning is to administer ethanol: "Ethanol, the active ingredient in alcoholic beverages, acts as a competitive inhibitor by more effectively binding and saturating the alcohol dehydrogenase enzyme in the liver, thus blocking the binding of methanol. Methanol is excreted by the kidneys without being converted into the very toxic metabolites formaldehyde and formic acid." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methanol_toxicity

From the vague phrasing in the article, my guess is that Apple was not officially selling the phone in Thailand, and so it hadn't been registered with Thai telecom authorities (which I think is technically required, but often ignored by resellers). It looks like they were just piling on charges to be sure he would be convicted of something.

Thank you - that article makes a lot more sense than the OP.

Silly me, I thought the Cabinet was chosen by the PM and the ruling coalition, not by retired ex-convict grandfathers.

Just to be clear, "yaa dong" is not synonymous with "illegal liquor" - it's just medicinal herbs and wood macerated in alcohol of any type. The great majority of yaa dong sellers use commercially produced lao khao to make their product, since it's cheap, reliable, and easily available. "Illegal liquor" would normally mean "lao theuan", which is usually translated as "bootleg alcohol". It's distilled at home or by unlicensed manufacturers, and though it can actually taste better than lao khao, there's always the risk that poor production methods could lead to methanol contamination. Like other people who have posted, I've never heard of anyone in Thailand intentionally adding methanol to liquor that's meant for drinking, unless it's done with the specific intent to harm people.

I know you're joking, but that's actually one of the first things that occurred to me. These self-propelled suitcases are basically novelty items for riding around airports and shopping malls. Do they really have enough battery power to go more than a couple of km, especially on a much rougher surface than they're designed for? And for that matter, the wheels are small, and intended to be used on smooth floors - riding on a Thai highway must have been a very uncomfortable experience!

Let me get this straight. These are Thai restaurants abroad, owned by Thais, with Thai staff, serving food imported from Thailand. OH MY GOD, they're just taking money from local restaurateurs!! (Sounds kind of stupid when the restaurants are Thai instead of Chinese, doesn't it?)

Those are still handled at Immigration Zone 2, next to Visa on Arrival. Premium class passengers were kicked out of that zone last year, and shunted over towards the Thai Citizens queue. The article is saying that First and Business class pax can no longer use that "new" queue, though elderly and disabled apparently still can. It's honestly rather strange that this is happening, especially with no announcement having been made (that I'm aware of). Premium pax can still use Fast Track on departure, so the idea hasn't gone away, and airlines were paying for the service anyway. I have to wonder whether this is just a temporary change during a renovation project or something (that has been very poorly communicated).

No. As the linked article mentions, "There is also a Diplomats/Officials lane, which includes access for travelers with an APEC Business Travel Card and certain Thai Visa holders such as those issued by the Board of Investment."

The concept of the zero dollar tour is that you sell a package for less than the actual cost of the airline ticket and hotel room, and then make the money back by taking the passengers to shops selling wildly overpriced cr@p and browbeating them into buying. China and destination countries have been fighting these tours because they create an unpleasant and sometimes threatening experience for the participants, and ruin their opinion of the country being visited. Only in Thailand is the concern not about tourists being cheated, but only about the fact that local travel-related companies feel that they're not getting their share of the loot. Contrary to the travel industry claims that are spewed out in these identical articles that now come out every week, the zero dollar companies are not undercutting prices in order to drive local agencies out of business. Their business model is completely different, and they couldn't care less what legitimate companies are doing or charging - they just want to keep using low prices to pull in suckers who can then be milked at ripoff shops. And as for the claim that no money goes to Thailand, did these companies bring their own land from China, and their own hotels to put on that land, and their own beds to put in those hotels? Did they bring their own gasoline to fuel their buses? Did they bring all their own food? (And who cares if they did - do you know any Thai who has traveled overseas without a suitcase filled with Mama noodles?) If the problem is that foreigners own businesses illegally through nominees, then arrest the nominees and go after the officials who let the businesses be registered. If the problem is that Chinese products have been imported illegally, then go after the corrupt or incompetent Customs officials who let that happen. But those are separate issues from zero dollar tours. And if everything has been done legally, then there's nothing to see here. Despite what local companies seem to think, they do not have some god-given right to extract cash from every foreign visitor. If a Frenchman comes to Bangkok on Air France, stays at the Sofitel, and only eats imported snails and foie gras at French restaurants during his stay, has he somehow taken money from the pockets of Thais?

They didn't realize that scamming is an occupation reserved for Thais 😁 We see this in many of these reports, but it seems very strange. Why would Koreans enter illegally, when it's so easy to come in properly? Or is this just poor reporting, and they are actually overstays?

I don't quite follow this. This is park land, or railroad land? Or does the railroad somehow own land inside the park?

...and this incident shows that judges unfortunately have exactly the same ethical standards as MPs, senators, and ministers 😕

Fair point, but I think most people who only ever fly on commercial jet airliners would consider anything littler than an ATR-72 to be "small" - so the headline effectively communicates to them that this wasn't, let's say, the Airbus or Boeing that they immediately think of when they hear the words "air crash".