BangkokReady

Not a great future, it seems... 🤔

I'm a little confused. You can easily find the original article, and it's barely any different to the above, just a few words replaced here and there. Is that allowed? I don't see a link or a credit anywhere. I understand we're not allowed to discus the merit of the news or the quality of the writing, but how does it work with reproducing another article without credit? Also, why is an article about Pattaya in the Phuket sub? https://thepattayanews.com/2024/04/29/79-year-old-thai-man-defies-age-continues-selling-traditional-isaan-musical-instruments-on-jomtien-beach/

Now this is tricky. Which part of him caused him to go crazy? The Thai part or the British part? According to the forum, both apparently have some form in this area... 🤔

I think the public like it that way. Not sure about the inner city people, but there are a lot of armed police in those places. There have, however, been a few incidences of unarmed police being the first on scene with a knifeman (I don't think they would send them to a firearms incident) who have been injured or killed.

Guy was lying, 1 in 5 Brit police have a gun secured in the boot of their car. I think more exaggerating than lying. It's pretty likely that he would have to wait for armed police in a lot of situations, but they probably aren't that far away. As you say, a lot of police (I think most traffic police) can be deployed as armed police if given the go-ahead.

If people re saying "vote for Biden, no matter how bad we think he is, because he's better than our perceived judgement of Trump", they're not making the best choices.

I think there's two problems here. 1, most people who have the potential to do something like this will probably never do it, but would likely be screened out, so this means a huge number could be locked out. 2, does Thailand really want to reduce the number of these types of people, given how much money they must bring to Thailand (as there are actually quite a lot of them).

And the point is? I think he believes that this post is adding to the anti-foreigner hysteria felt by Thais ("look at how awful foreigners are"). When it is actually saying that the user would like this kind of thing to stop, precisely so there is less anti-foreigner hysteria among Thais.

So if a car pulls across the opposite lane to turn, but it's turn is delayed, then a bike comes along after about a minute or two of the car being in the opposite lane, and the bike hits the car because the rider isn't paying attention, that's the car's fault?

Surely at certain speeds, the car wouldn't be at fault if they could not anticipate that the vehicle would reach them in time as they would not do so if riding at a normal speed? They might not have even been able to see him if he was far away but moving at speed. The car isn't at fault simply for driving into the path of another vehicle, if the other vehicle could have stopped if they were paying attention. You could be making a turn, be delayed in clearing the opposite lane, and have someone strike you due to not looking at the road, who would have been nowhere near you when you began your turn.

They didn't hit him.

"Brick in the wall" kind of means to cut something off or put an end to it. Did you think it means to kind of build something up and confirm it?

When did the first sex-tourists show up to Thailand?

Sex industry but not sex tourism No sex tourism during the Vietnam war either, surely? They weren't in Thailand on holiday...

Indeed. They just relocated to service the troops.

She seemed to swing at him once and hit him once, then he hit her in retaliation. legally, he shouldn't have done so, as it is no longer self defence after the hits have stopped and she begins to move away. But she did worse than him. The sad thing is, even though this is on the crazy lady, the fact that he might not have had the right paperwork means he's in trouble either way. Some Western women just seem to have this weird idea that they can hit men and get away with it. I wonder why... 🤔

Careful, you're not allowed to [redacted] on any of the [redacted]. Even if they're a load of old [redacted]! Edited just now by BigBrother...

Stating one's position is not the same as lying. You weren't stating your position, you were lying (unless you made a mistake, which I doubt). And you seem to be doing it again. Lying is never the answer either. Please stop.

One user noted that another was a supporter of a free Palestine. They went to suggest that Palestintians have killed a lot of gay people, yet this person, who supports gays also supports Palestinians in their fight against Israel, is also a supporter of gays. I went on to point out that Israelis will have killed far more gays than Palestinians have, therefore there is no reason to not support Palestine in their struggle against Israel, simply because of the view some Palestinians might have of gay people. As you can see, what I was discussing is of direct importance to claim being made by the first user.

What question? I didn't pose any questions. Could you be replying to the wrong comment?

Why is that crazy? The covid strain around now is much weaker and we have a vaccine. Of course people are going to be less scared. Please stop being dishonest.

No. That is incorrect. We began with a much more dangerous strain of covid and no vaccine. Now we have a much weaker strain and a vaccine. So we can behave differently. Please don't pretend that the situation now is the same as at the beginning. That is dishonest.

1, I was responding to another user. 2, You don't think the reason for the protests relates to the protests at all?

Haven't many more civilians been killed in Gaza recently than in 9/11?

The point is that to object to what Israel is doing in Gaza doesn't make you antisemitic, not do you need to be antisemitic to do so.