somchai jones

The most inane, tormenting dirge you can imagine!

I'm on the phone to my bank and on the dreaded - 'please hold.......' function.

The only positive thing about it (if we're trying to be positive) is that it's in my laft ear only!

Mabe a shallow point here, but nevertheless a true one (in the effect it has on me personally).

I posted in a thread recently that when I see an atractive Thai woman with a good looking farang guy, they make a very 'sexy' looking couple. The same is true of an attractive farang woman and a good looking Thai guy.

On a less frivolous note, whether they are attractive or not, I smile when I see a mixed couple. Maybe something to do with the insults I received as a teenager whilst in two relationships with black English girls.

Hopefully we've come a long way since the early eighties.

What I find interesting is that foreign women often appreciate the same Thai looks that foreign men like - tanned skin, high cheekbones and quite Thai (as oppose to Chinese) looking features. I have found that in the same way Thai men often find foreign men's taste in Thai women strange, so do Thai women find foreign women's taste in Thai men different to their own. Yes, a generalisation - but I've heard it said often enough to make it worth commenting on. My husband doesn't fit either of those categories so I'm just repeating observations I've heard from other people.

Certainly food for thought.

A very interesting thread.

Beach boys aside, another angle.

Whilst on a contract for several months some years ago at a leading Thai insurance company in Bangkok, I would occassionally go out in the evening with several of the employees, mostly heads of departments, so, quite well off middle class Thai men. They ranged in age from late twenties to mid fifties.

Invariably after the meal, they would take me to their favuorite members club where we would drink away the evening.

Out of the eight or so regulars, only one was not married. Almost every time we went, the same three (all married) would leave to go to short time hotels with hostesses.

So from this experience, we might deduce that Thai men are certainly not all cheats but a percentage are.

A bigger percentage than farang man in their home countries? Probably, yes.

Having said that, we must remember that there is certainly more opportunity for them to cheat in Bangkok than say the average 'western' capital and if the stakes were the same, the percentages probably would be too.

One thing I have noticed however, is that a larger percentage of the Thai men I've known are much more likely to talk about cheating/having cheated/intention to cheat, particularly in front of women. A case in point being when my wife and I were having dinner with a Thai friend (he was a middle aged businessman, we were both in our early thirties at the time)/. Over dinner he proceeded to tell us (with some pride) how he was due for his monthly 'bath' very soon. The fact that my wife knew he was married and we had all eaten at his house the week before didn't seem to bother him.

The above points are not criticisms, just observations from my own experiences.

My husband was one of the passenger on their first flight to Myanmar. It took them only a couple of hours to do their visarun and head back to Koh Samui. This was a couple of months ago and the price then was 5000 baht as it was their first flight (excl. airporttax airport Samui). I thought they eventually want to ask around 9000 baht.

Interesting to read.

Did they take off/land on sea (Samui/Myanmar) or normal airport?

5K doesn't sound too bad for a visa-run have breakfast and dinner at home and 'visit' another country inbetween...

LaoPo

no landing on the sea just airport to airport

So....why a seaplane....? would be fun to experience a seaplane!

LaoPo

Yes Laopo, it's great fun.

Took one from Vancouver to Victoria a few years ago. Great experience. When they do actually land in the sea, it's a very weird sensation because they seem to land at a much steeper incline than a normal plane on land - sort of just plop down!

Even without the sea landing, it's still a fine experience, as because they fly so low, you get a wonderful view of the secenery below.

yes, as sbk says, the beach boy led me to where I live now. When we visited his hometown I really loved the place. I found a lecturing position at the university. I met my husband while I was on my way to visit sbk a few years ago. We have been together ever since the first day we met. We have 2 teenage children (his wife passed away when the youngest child was 1 month old) we have a frog farm, and we are planning on building our house on beach land we own near our farm, the architect is refining the plans right now. I have found my paradise.

Gisele

What a wonderful story. Superb.

Mabe a shallow point here, but nevertheless a true one (in the effect it has on me personally).

I posted in a thread recently that when I see an atractive Thai woman with a good looking farang guy, they make a very 'sexy' looking couple. The same is true of an attractive farang woman and a good looking Thai guy.

On a less frivolous note, whether they are attractive or not, I smile when I see a mixed couple. Maybe something to do with the insults I received as a teenager whilst in two relationships with black English girls.

Hopefully we've come a long way since the early eighties.

Nice to hear about this. Hope the little fella gets well soon.

Whilst I don't agree with all your points Kat, I have been a bit obtuse, sorry.

Sorry somchai, I must be having difficulty communicating lately. Where I live, poor does mean uneducated.

My husband has been criticised for having dark skin. My Uni educated Thai neighbor woman has told me that she gets criticised for having dark skin. So, to say that educated people don't equate that may be true but you can't say it is true for all Thai people.

Maybe its just the uneducated poor ones who think so.

Point taken SBK. I agree with your last statement.

Khall, you are definitely on to something here. I have the exact same experience, especially in regards to the regional posting. What am I doing? I'm going home, and I'll regroup from there.

Please don't go. I, for one, shall miss you terribly.

SBK: "My husband is from here and I have lived here for 17 years so that makes me accepted,… The massive influx of non-locals has clearly damaged the local community in Samui and is beginning to damage the local community here."

Why does having lived on Koh Phangan make you "accepted"? And by whom?

I am not being obtuse; I am looking at your reasoning and seeing its flaw. Because you were here "first," you feel that you are not part of the "massive influx of non-locals," which you allege have "clearly damaged the local community."

By your reasoning, all the "non-native" people who are here will be "accepted" by 2023 (or sooner). And in the same vein, just when was it when you were acceptable here? Ten years after you arrived? Five? One? Or are you saying that marrying a local gave you a "get out of jail free card"?

I lived in Taiwan for 20 years and I would never say that my presence there was more acceptable than it would be for someone who had been there 20 minutes. Nor would I say that marrying a local gives you special strutting rights.

You lament that non-locals are damaging the community and state that you were in Phangan 17 years ago. This would indicate that you were on the vanguard of the wave of problems. You, in a sense, have led the way for others to follow. Or have you, over the years, told your friends and relatives not to come to Samui or Phangan? Have you said, "This island is a paradise and if you all start coming it will ruin things"? Unless the influx of foreigners and the results have come as a complete shock to you, wasn't part of your responsibility to keep outsiders away?

You can't have it both ways. You can't say that foreigners being here in growing numbers is bad when you yourself came here and continue to be here.

Just about sums it up Mark. Agreed - can't have it both ways.

Skin tone?

well ... watch the people you see in businesses and companies all over the country! North South and Central ... Banks and offices etcare highly populated by lighter skinned Thais.

Good or bad ... that is the way it tends to be in Thailand

Most local banks I've been into in the South have more dark skinned than light skinned workers.

I do understand what you're trying to say though.

Thanks for your support SBK, but I don't think I've admitted any error, apart from possibly pissing off the very patient mods in this case. Other than that, I'm fine.

You are now moaning about the BBC! A bastion of fairhanded reporting.

Would it make you happier if we all watched Fox instead.

Ho hum.... me thinks that's a chip on your shoulder Miss Kat.

Don't think we're going to agree on this one. Oh well.

I'm not moaning - yeesh - what a little sensationalist you are! I'm simply elaborating my point. If you think the BBC is so fair and balanced, then I can perfectly understand why you are unable to listen to and consider a point of view different from your own.

And by the way, I would only recommend Faux News to either my worst enemies or best friends; it is both a source of torture and entertainment.

Fair enough somchai, think what you will but I am with Kat on this one and feel the topic needs to get off of what the guys think of Kat, farang women,race issues in the UK and US etc etc etc

How predictable.

Kat brought race into it, Kat got her just desert.

Kat can argue her own points.

This has now run it's course, I'm bored.

Chock Deee my friend.

Have I brought race into it? What is the title of the thread? Surely, as a poster on the farang forum of Thai Visa, you have most certainly brought race and ethnicity into it as well, albeit a bit less consciously than I have.

Who has given me my just dessert? Certainly no one on this thread. You should first understand what the person is saying before you can actually wreak any kind of havoc on what they are actually saying, ho hum.

I really have touched a raw nerve haven't I?

My goodness, if you dislike the BBC this much, what would you think of my favourite UK news broadcaster, Channel 4?!

I'll continue to watch it though and read the Independent.

But wait.......how can that be? My cousin detests the Independent, loves Sky News and reads the Daily Mail. He thinks one immigrant in UK is too many whilst I think our economy would collapse without them......but we're both British men. We have completely different attitudes!!!

Your judgement that about us British may be a little flawed, no? Perhaps you should sleep on it.

Chock Dee my friend.

Must be a city thing then because out here dark skinned does equate with poor and many of the Thai women I know bemoan their dark skin. Including the educated ones.

Ho hum....if you read my post, you'll see that I didn't mention poor anywhere. I said that educated Thais know that dark skinned = uneducated is a crass notion.

You've actually proved that dark skin doesn't equal uneducated because you've mentioned your thai friends who have dark skin.

Of course I'm aware that many Thais would like lighter skins. This is not just a Thai thing , but apparant in many Asian countries.

e.g. in Malaysia dark skin is not associated with being uneducated but many Malays, including the educated ones (including my wife) say they'd like lighter skin.

The educated Malays of course know that being dark doesn't really mean you are lacking intellectualy in any way. Indeed the ex Prime Minister Mohd. Mahatir frequently told Malays and others from the developing world to be proud of their brown skin.

Ultimately, my friend, it's human nature. How many white skinned Europeans/Americans/etc. would love to have darker skin.

I ridicule my stunniningly beautiful wife when she is the only one in a European Street on a sunny day carrying an umbrella, just as she ridicules me for always choosing the table without shade when we eat outside a restaurant.

It's a funy old world........Chock Dee my friend.

Fair enough somchai, think what you will but I am with Kat on this one and feel the topic needs to get off of what the guys think of Kat, farang women,race issues in the UK and US etc etc etc

How predictable.

Kat brought race into it, Kat got her just desert.

Kat can argue her own points.

This has now run it's course, I'm bored.

Chock Deee my friend.

I think it's a huge generalisation that Thai/western couples are always from vastly different socio/economic groups. Most of the men I see around central Sukhumvit with dark skinned Thai women (perceived by Thais to be low class) are rough as they come. Yes, poor in the west doesn't really equate to poor in Thailand, but my perception is a lot of the farangs in Thailand are as uneducated and uncultured as their Thai lady friends. The better looking, better educated farang men tend to be with the better looking, better educated Thai women.

I won't even comment on this BS.

(oops.. I just did!)

darker skinned ladies are uneducated and not beautiful????

My thoughts exactly, Britmaveric.

Also by posting this Alice, you've betrayed the fact that you are either uneducated yourself or not very bright.

You'll actually find that the more educated Thais don't think dark = uneducated, being educated, those Thais understand what a crass notion this is.

BTW, my wife is Malaysian, beautiful, educated and dark skinned.

I am educated and (IMHO) good looking!

I suggest you think a little before making future posts, Alice.

Chock Dee my friend.

OK, here we go, the overgeneralized, generalizing statement

Just give it up while you're ahead please. That is like saying there are no cultural or political differences between people. I find this especially rich, since generalized, offensive comments about Americans are a regular on the BBC and by Brits.

And as a matter of fact, there are cultural similarities between Jenifer Lopez and me, because her parents are from Puerto-Rico and emigrated to the Bronx, same as my father.

So yes, we are different individuals, shaped by the same culture, and very similar demographics.

But, yes, different people; can you manage that

edit: It's like 3rd - 5th grade math: recognizing like elements in a set. Generalizations and hypothesis are also part of every scientific inquiry ever made.

You are now moaning about the BBC! A bastion of fairhanded reporting.

Would it make you happier if we all watched Fox instead.

Ho hum.... me thinks that's a chip on your shoulder Miss Kat.

Don't think we're going to agree on this one. Oh well.

This thread is moving far off topic. If you have nothing further to contribute on the bus bombing in Bangkok, feel free to start another thread pertaining to the likelihood of Southern separatist bombings in Bangkok. The two issues are unrelated.

Ooooo, you're so masterful.

Any further comment would be superfluous.

Chock Dee my friend.

I have never even been to England yet,

Ho hum....

ho hum - I've lived in 2 different countries for a total period of 6 years, with a large number of English expats; I participated in an academic project in Asia with students from an English university in which our teams were mixed between the American and English university; I have very close English friends who are female; I've dated in total 5 English men, and, I participate on this forum for what - almost 2 years - interacting with a large group of English males, in addition to watching BBC daily.

I do want to go to England soon, but that is not totally necessary for me to discern general attitudes and traits of English people, and in particular, English men.

'general attitudes and traits of English people, and in particular, English men.'

Here lies my point, Kat. How on Earth can you generalise when talking about English men or women!

We're a hugely diverse bunch. On any given English street, three next door neighbours may well have completely different attitudes and traits.

Without wishing to frivolize your arguement, it's a bit like me saying that because you are a Latin American female you must have the same general attitudes and traits as Jennifer Lopez.

Take your Iraq WMD counts to some othe r thread, please.

Bangkok muslims don't have any separatist tendencies, don't claim Minburi as their old kingdom, and haven't commited any violent acts in recent memory. What exactly might have started?

If some southern blokes make their way to Bangkok and shoot somebody or plant a bomb, you can say "it" started. However operating in Bangkok is totally different thing from operating in their native jungles and villages with support of the native population.

I agree with Plus that the conversation has gotten much wider than the original topic, and I would be happy to move it to a different thread. I don't know how to do that without losing context. I ask that one of the admin wizards step in. I think this is a fair summary of how we got here:

1. News that 4 were injured on BKK bus due to homeade "bomb" apparently planted by young men who rode for only one stop.

2. Algthough it was most likely a prank pulled by idiotic schoolkids, lots of people are concerned and SPECULATING about:

2a. whether the bus incident is a harbinger of the violence in the 3 southern provinces spreading up to BKK.

2b. whether this is in some way related to Islamacist terrorism in the global sense of that term.

I personally feel that 2b one of the gravest and least understood threats to Thailand and to the rest of the world, and that it warrants serious and contructive conversation -- as opposed to the hysterical overly-polarized rants it usually inspires. It seems that such a (barely) civil discussion has started in this thread, and I hope it can be continued --- here or elsewhere.

If you look at my reply to your previous post, you'll see that I for one have addressed your questions in a civil and considered manner. It would be interesting to know your views on the questions you raised.

The sad fact is that until the US changes its blinkered, clumsy, ingorant foreign policy, it's unlikely that anyone will learn 'toleration' as you put it.

As for your unfounded quote that '90% of worldwide acts of terrorism are perpetrated by Muslims', the families of those thousands of babies torn apart by red hot fragments of metal from the bombs dropped by America in the initial blitz of Baghdad would of course disagree.

The families of the hundreds of children already butchered by the ongoing indiscriminate bombing by Isreal of the Lebonan would also have something to say about your arguement.

The relatives of the four UN observers recently murdered by Isreal would also probably beg to differ.

Somchai, you are fast with accusations but slow with solutions or facts. PLEASE let's try to have a civil and constructive conversation. I'd be interested in your thoughts on the following:

1. You are speaking about numbers of persons killed in attacks of all kinds. The rest of us are speaking about numbers of separate suicide bombing incidents. In that sense, 90% isn't far off the mark, for the past 20 years.

2. I don't know where you got the idea that there were thousands of babies killed in the initial blitz of Iraq II. From 20 thru 31 March 2003, there were between 563 and 718 civilians --- men women and children --- killed in collateral damage during the blitz (my statistics come from http://www.iraqbodycount.net )

Those are appaling numbers --- but remember, 4,500 men women and babies die in Iraq every year from road accidents unrealted to any war in any way. Furthermore, SH killed at least 3,500 Kurds in Halabja --- men, women and children --- in 4 days beginning 15 Mar 88.

3. Where in the world did you get the idea that the bombing in Lebanon is indiscriminant? Especially compared to rockets launched from lebanon and landing on both Israel AND other Palestinians.

4. How, precisely, would you change US foreign policy (remember --- no rants, no arm waving, and for the sake of argument I'll stipulate that dubya is a moron). Now what?

CB

CB, thanks for your reply, I'll do my best to address your points.

Membrane, it would probably be a waste of time answering your points, as if you are still fooled by the assertion that the US went into Iraq to disarm Saddam of his non existant WMDs, there would be little or no hope of trying to change your mind.

I am truly astounded that anyone is still giving any credence to this nonsense. Pull the wool from over your eyes.

In answer to your points CB.

Quote '1. You are speaking about numbers of persons killed in attacks of all kinds. The rest of us are speaking about numbers of separate suicide bombing incidents. In that sense, 90% isn't far off the mark, for the past 20 years.'

If you read my post again you'll see that I was directly replying to the poster who said '90% of all terrorism acts'. He made no reference to suicide bombing incidents.

Quote '2. I don't know where you got the idea that there were thousands of babies killed in the initial blitz of Iraq II. From 20 thru 31 March 2003, there were between 563 and 718 civilians --- men women and children --- killed in collateral damage during the blitz (my statistics come from http://www.iraqbodycount.net )'

Since the US refused to keep a 'body count' of Iraqi deaths, there was confusion from the start.

Although the website you quoted does give reported verifiable deaths, in bombings of the magnitude used by the US there are many more deaths that cannot be confirmed. Various NGOs have given far larger numbers than you quote.

The fact that you use the obscene phrase 'collateral damage' to describe human deaths is rather upsetting.

Quote. 'Those are appaling numbers --- but remember, 4,500 men women and babies die in Iraq every year from road accidents unrealted to any war in any way. Furthermore, SH killed at least 3,500 Kurds in Halabja --- men, women and children --- in 4 days beginning 15 Mar 88.'

The fact that you are even comparing road accident figures to innocent victims of bombings doesn't deserve an answer. Again, I'm dissapointed because you seem intelligent.

Yes, SH did kill thousands of Kurds. He is a monster. That does not justify (in my humble opinion) the US/UK invading a country illegally. Look at the stae of Iraq now. Civil war.

Quote 3. 'Where in the world did you get the idea that the bombing in Lebanon is indiscriminant? Especially compared to rockets launched from lebanon and landing on both Israel AND other Palestinians.'

When UN observers are murdered after repeatedly informing Isreal of their position and when clearly marked ambulances ferrying injured civillians to hospital are bombed, I'd call that pretty indiscriminate.

Also, again the way you have compared the Isreali bombings with the fact that rockets launched from Lebanon by Hesbollah have landed on civillians would seem to suggest that it in some way justifies Isreal hitting civillians.

Again, I think you are intelligent so you probably don't hold that view.

It's a tragedy on both sides.

I could add a comment about the huge disproportionate military might of Isreal compared to Hesbollah and the hugely disproportionate number of civillian deaths in lebanon compred to civillian deaths in Isreal but that would be getting into your road accident deaths analogy territory.

Quote '4. How, precisely, would you change US foreign policy (remember --- no rants, no arm waving, and for the sake of argument I'll stipulate that dubya is a moron). Now what?'

Firstly, I disagree with you. George Bush is not a moron, morons are usually harmless buffoons; Dubya is much more dangerous than that.

A simple first step in US foreign policy would be to realise that until the Palestine problem is addressed there will never be peace in the Middle East.

Allowing Isreal to ignore UN resolutions without comment whilst condemning other nations in the vacinity is of course unhelpful.

If the US stopped using its mandate to block resolutions and accords that have been agreed by the vast majority of other nations, that would help; not just in the Middle East but also global warming, etc.

Thanks for your time, CB.

Chock Dee my friend.

With a little more contingency planning, this whole debacle could have been avoided.

For instance, why didn't the government ban all hen parties months ago?

I have never even been to England yet,

Ho hum....

It is funny that certain people always think about Muslims when something like this happens. The Muslims are the replacemnet of the Soviet Union. If there is something wrong or israel or the US need a pretext to commit war crimes, blame it on the Muslims like before on the soviet union.

Well, maybe there's a reason for that--that being, it's usually muslim extremists who are strapping bombs on themselves and blowing themselves up--all in the name of Allah. Ever hear of a suicide bomber?

Or are you going to try to tell us that they don't exist?

When 90% of worldwide acts of terrorism are perpetrated by Muslims why shouldn't we think of them as soon as we hear something like this happens? I certainly did, and will continue to so until Muslim extremists learn toleration. I won't be excusing myself for it either.

The sad fact is that until the US changes its blinkered, clumsy, ingorant foreign policy, it's unlikely that anyone will learn 'toleration' as you put it.

As for your unfounded quote that '90% of worldwide acts of terrorism are perpetrated by Muslims', the families of those thousands of babies torn apart by red hot fragments of metal from the bombs dropped by America in the initial blitz of Baghdad would of course disagree.

The families of the hundreds of children already butchered by the ongoing indiscriminate bombing by Isreal of the Lebonan would also have something to say about your arguement.

The relatives of the four UN observers recently murdered by Isreal would also probably beg to differ.

I am another one of the faithfuls...

But can one of you Ladies out there answer this: If I were to tell the Missus I was going to the park to meet a mate,she would be on guard straight away with a lengthy interrogation.

When we stay in BKK and I tell her I am off to Na Na to get drunk she is not concerned at all.How does that work?

Sorry if a bit off topic.

She might be a bit concerned if the 'park' you were referring to was Hampstead Heath!

Sorry if this is a bit baffling to those of you not familiar with London.