placnx

Actually my friend is staying at the hotel next door. Would a hotel also provide a TM30?

A friend is coming to visit Chiangmai soon, and he plans to get a 30-day extension on the day his visa-exempt permission to stay expires. So does he have to start the process before 8:30AM? Can it be all done on the last day of permitted stay? What documents need to be submitted or shown beyond the TM7 and passport?

I was thinking about getting telemedicine from Boston in Thailand. During the pandemic the situation was looser, so doctors there could handle their patients when they were out of Massachusetts, but now only doctors who are licensed in the state where the patient is located can deliver service. For example, some snow birds can get to connect with Boston doctors who are also licensed in FL. It's problematical for a US pharmacy to honor a Thai prescription, especially when branded medicines may have different names or not even be available or approved. In the US there is the reciprocity concept between states, but not some other country AFAIK.

To deter similar behavior of Trumpers in the next election.

They just need a Cultural Revolution. Does this kind of thinking persist in Taiwan?

The excuse of the soldier who killed them was that he felt afraid. Who isn't afraid in war? Same excuse used by people who killed under "Stand Your Ground" laws in the US. This is too easy a way to escape punishment.

It seems as though the Thais were hoodwinked back when the border agreement with the French was negotiated. It doesn't make sense that Cambodia would be allocated a tidbit at the top of an escarpment. After all, Thailand has many Khmer monuments, including at least one other on the border, so the heritage issue is not a reason for topographical considerations to be overridden. The ICJ decision sounds political. It was 1962, i.e. Cold War, and the lawyer for Cambodia was Dean Acheson, a recently retired US Secretary of State. Thailand had White & Case, a prominent US law firm. My father used them, too, in the 1960s. He had around 7 litigations with the US government, and that one was the only case that he lost.

This sounds like a Putin screed. The only apartheid in question is that practiced by successive Israeli governments on Palestinians.

Hard core pro-Israel Christians are Trump supporters. Pro-Hamas are a negligible number in the US. Biden is definitely not pandering to them, since he is still supporting the campaign to eliminate.

Biden is complicit in war crimes by supplying weapons for the indiscriminate bombing, but that's the least of his problems. He is alienating the young people and Arab Americans in key states whom he needs to be reelected. That suits Netanyahu fine, since then he can get Trump back in little over a year's time, so prolonging the war is in Netanyahu's interest. Biden fell into a trap. The poster you cite was editing Biden's comment to be more truthful, in that Israel has already lost the world's sympathy for 10/7, with 3/4 of UNGA voting for ceasefire this past week. The poster was not taking Biden's comment at face value.

Surely not Thailand. Maybe you are talking about Darkest Amerika.

Let's not get into the Mavi Marmara incident from 2010. The relevant border control issue is that Israel's conrol of what/who goes in or out of Gaza mwans that is is the occupying power, i.e. Gaza is an open air prison.

UN Watch is biased, and Bennis is too. They have opinions. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.

I was replying to the history lesson given by Morch. It is legitimate for Morch and me to explain the background to 10/7.

Forum readers should be alerted to the bias of UN Watch. As for Phyllis Bennis, here are links about her: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phyllis_Bennis https://ips-dc.org/ips-authors/phyllis-bennis/

Removing Hamas and Orthodox/Nationalist Jews from power would be a good start. An authentic two-state solution is necessary to end the cycle of violence.

Instead of criticizing indiscriminate bombing, Biden is now getting louder about making the operation precisely targeted. Meanwhile Netanyahu et al continue to predict that their operation will go on for months. Reportedly, Biden is blocking the order for 10000+ rifles, due to fear that they will be used by settlers to kill more Palestinians. US fears a explosion on the West Bank.

There was UNGA resolution 194 which called for the implementation of international law, by which the then 750,000 Palestinians expelled from 1948 Israel could return to their homes. This was the stumbling block that lasted for years. Back in those days, the Palestinians were under Jordan's and Egypt's control. We could say that they were pawns in geopolitics. Not until 1967 could the Palestinians be visible, but their issue was subordinate to Israel's occupation of the Sinai. The Palestinians had no responsibility for the 1967 war. They were just the victims. BTW In 1967 Nasser would have backed down, but then Israel staged a surprise attack in destoying the Egyptian airforce. Tragically King Hussein got Jordan involved in response. The problem with previous peace proposals including Camp David 2000 and its aftermath was that the Palestinians were not offered a state with true sovereignty, plus there were then already 100,000 settlers, with Israel demanding the rights to territory to accomodate natural population growth. Israel should be required to take back all the 700,000 settlers (including East Jerusalem). If any remained they can only be secular people who are not a threat to the peace and who will accept Palestinian nationality, living under Palestinian law.

In answer to you whataboutism citing Germany, when Poland joined the EU, lawsuits from Germans started over their lost property when East Prussia was taken over by Poland.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Watch: The American journalist and political activist Phyllis Bennis described UN Watch as a "small Geneva-based right-wing organisation" that is "hardly known outside of UN headquarters".[67] She stressed that "undermining and delegitimising" Richard Falk through "scurrilous accusations" has been an "obsession of UN Watch" when he became Special Rapporteur.[67] Agence France-Presse has described UN Watch both as "a lobby group with strong ties to Israel"[12] and as a group which "champion[s] human rights worldwide".[68] The Economist has described UN Watch as a "pro-Israeli monitor". Looking at the unwatch link shows the obvious obsession with countering legitimate criticism of Israel.

The Lebanese reference Phoenicians, and the Egyptians are very conscious of their ancient culture going back to the pre-dynastic period 8000 years ago. Iran similarly celebrates its ancient roots. As for Iraq, Syria, and Turkey. you may be right, even though Iraq is the so-called Cradle of Civilization.

My experience with a Granuloma, a pearl-shaped bulb beside tear duct. For that a doc in American Hospital and their lab could not identify the pathogen after two samplings, so he told me: "One day you're well, the next day you're not. I can cauterize it for you. I said "No thanks". After that I went to MEEI in Boston. After a bunch of students interviewing me for a while, the doc taking photos, they said that they would call me back for treatment. A month later they put a very thin metal tube in the tear duct and irrigated it with saline - not sure if any antibiotic was in the liquid. After that I had to take two different antibiotic drops for 10 days. They also could not definitely identify the pathogen, but thought that it was probably Actinomyces. This had lasted about a year, and every morning I had an unbelieveable stream of greenish gloop running down my face. For the more usual problem such as a stye or meibomian cyst, the doc may want to squeeze out the oil, then give you antibiotic drops (Vigamox) and doxycycline 100 mg caps twice a day for a week or so. Anyway, you should definitely see an eye doctor, but if they suggest an operation or procedure such as cauterizing, maybe you need a second opinion.

They are not the same in the sense that they are not morally equivalent. Zionism had this idea of a "land without people for a people without land". This is a false premise. It's implementation meant ethnic cleansing from 1947 until today.

These are just some people who were rounded up to be interrogated. On the BBC it showed them afterwards being transported in a truck, still without their clothes. It's a propaganda video purporting to show "terrorists".

I don't think that I have ever linked to a BBC video, so please let us know what post you are referring to. I did not link to the BBC video this time either. I saw it on a recent BBC report.