Air Smiles
-
Posts
408 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by Air Smiles
-
-
This issue is really nothing to do with vaping:
Quote"Diacetyl is a flavoring chemical used in E-cigs which are linked to cases of severe respiratory disease, most notably the incurable condition called “Popcorn Lung."
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, ncc1701d said:
Ironically I was told by a surgeon that there’s a reason yoga was developed in the sub continent and that’s because Asians are better suited to it physiologically. Caucasian’s are better suited to Pilates. Just what he told me, haven’t verified it. Though most of his surgeries are on Falang with screwed up hips due to yoga.
Sounds like utter <deleted>, especially the part in bold.
-
2 hours ago, rockingrobin said:
As far as I understand, the person in question never obtained a right of stay. Thus it could not be revoked, and since they did not actually enter Ukraine could not be deported from Ukraine.
I think you're tying yourself in knots with useless semantics ...if the person in question had a right to stay(in Ukraine) then why did Ukraine immigration deny him entry and force him to leave the country. Does that sound in anyway shape or form like 'a right to stay' to you?????
The person in question as an American has, assuming all his paperwork is in order, an automatic 'right to stay' in Ukraine, he didn't even need a visa if staying less than 90 days, only a valid passport ....however, because he over stayed his previous visa his right to enter, and yes, stay, was revoked. This is the part you guys are failing to understand, they refused entry based on his previous visa overstay.
Right to stay just means you can legally be in that country ...nothing more nothing less.
-
1
-
-
On 02/02/2018 at 3:22 AM, jackdd said:
This law says "revoked", which implies that the right of stay would have been granted in the first place. But in case of OPs friend he wasn't granted entry to Ukraine, so nothing to be "revoked", so this law does not apply here. This law would only apply if OP would have been deported from Ukraine, which he wasn't, he was just denied entry.
Did you forget the reason why he was refused entry to Ukraine?
From the OP:
QuoteWhen he arrived in Ukraine they informed him that on his prior visit to Ukraine (several weeks ago) he had overstayed his Ukranian tourist visa. This was news to my friend who thought he could go back to Ukraine.
The Ukranian customs officers told him he would have to fly back to Thailand on the same airline he flew to Ukraine on
Furthermore, Thai immigration law doesn't make any distinction between 'deported' and a 'revoked right of stay' in the foreign country you are coming from, this is plainly illustrated in the Thai immigration act, where it includes both in the same paragraph under the heading "Aliens which fall into any of the following categories are excluded from entering into the Kingdom". The wording uses "or" which means the concepts of 'deported' or 'the right of stay in the Kingdom or in foreign countries having been revoked' are effectively the same thing under Thai immigration law:
QuoteImmigration Act, B.E. 2522
Chapter 2: Entering and Departing the Kingdom
Section 12
Aliens which fall into any of the following categories are excluded from entering into the Kingdom:
Being deported by either the Government of Thailand that of or other foreign countries; or the right of stay in the Kingdom or in foreign countries having been revoked; or having been sent out of the Kingdom by competent officials at the expense of the Government of Thailand unless the Minister shall consider exemption on an individual special case basis.
-
14 hours ago, ukrules said:Quote
Immigration Act, B.E. 2522
Chapter 2: Entering and Departing the Kingdom
Section 12
Aliens which fall into any of the following categories are excluded from entering into the Kingdom:
Being deported by either the Government of Thailand that of or other foreign countries; or the right of stay in the Kingdom or in foreign countries having been revoked; or having been sent out of the Kingdom by competent officials at the expense of the Government of Thailand unless the Minister shall consider exemption on an individual special case basis.
Being denied entry is different to being deported...also his right to stay was not revoked, he was simply denied entry.
The 'right to stay' being 'revoked' is how Thailand often chooses to remove foreigners from the country, it's not deportation though.
Did you miss the bold in my post? I never mentioned deported, however all these words are mere semantics, the fact remains he was forcibly removed from Ukraine for breaking their visa laws, so his right to stay in Ukraine was revoked as he was trying to enter on an expired visa, you can call that anything you like, but it all means the same thing.
The 'right to stay' being 'revoked' in regards to the Thai immigration act is referring to other countries(before coming to Thailand) ...not in Thailand.
Or are you saying he had a 'right to stay' in Ukraine?
14 hours ago, jackdd said:It was explained several times already why the law that you quoted is not relevant in this case
Can you link to that post?
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, BritTim said:
While we do not have all the facts, it was probably a very harsh decision by immigration initially not to give him a visa exempt entry into Thailand.
Although, we do have the facts on Thai immigration rules which seem to have been followed correctly in this case. I'm not sure where your getting the "very harsh decision" from?
QuoteImmigration Act, B.E. 2522
Chapter 2: Entering and Departing the Kingdom
Section 12
Aliens which fall into any of the following categories are excluded from entering into the Kingdom:
Being deported by either the Government of Thailand that of or other foreign countries; or the right of stay in the Kingdom or in foreign countries having been revoked; or having been sent out of the Kingdom by competent officials at the expense of the Government of Thailand unless the Minister shall consider exemption on an individual special case basis.
-
3 minutes ago, BritTim said:
He left Thailand. The flight passenger list confirms that he did so, and there is no way of getting from departures to arrivals without taking a flight unless you have special ID. Ukraine immigration will have stamped his passport to indicate he was denied entry. He then was flown back to Thailand. Again, the flight passenger list will have confirmed this. It is true that he never entered Ukraine, but this does not mean he did not leave Thailand. Thai immigration cannot give him a tourist visa (only a consulate can do that) but they have the option of giving him a visa exempt entry.
No one is saying he didn't leave Thailand but he didn't enter any other country before returning to Thailand which means no departure stamp which is highly irregular and means hes trying to enter Thailand without having the correct paperwork thus breaking thai immigration rules.
He is not entering Thailand as a tourist so why should he be issued a tourist visa?
-
24 minutes ago, BritTim said:
On arrival back in Bangkok, entry into Thailand is not denied automatically based on the denied entry into Ukraine. For instance, if there was only four months validity left on his passport, Ukraine would deny him entry, but there would be no good reason for Thailand to do so. Since he will be arriving back visa exempt,
He is not arriving back from anywhere as technically he never entered Ukraine, he wouldn't have a normal exit stamp from the departure country, so why would Thailand ignore this and issue him with a tourist visa?
-
4 hours ago, Senechal said:
He has broken zero laws in Thailand. There's no reason to assume he wasn't complying with rules here.
Well, as it was pointed out to you in post #2 he has broken the rules under the Thai Immigration Act, from what you've said so far Thailand has done nothing wrong.
Your friend on the other hand has tried to enter 2 countries without the proper paperwork. He is not coming from another country into Thailand as technically he was never allowed into the other country so he is in a kind of limbo of his own making.
11 hours ago, elviajero said:He can lawfully be denied entry to Thailand because of his problems in the Ukraine.
Immigration Act
Section 12 : Aliens which fall into any of the following categories are excluded from entering into the Kingdom :
11. Being deported by either the Government of Thailand that of or other foreign countries ; or
the right of stay in the Kingdom or in foreign countries having been revoked ; or having been sent out of the Kingdom by competent officials at the expense of the Government of Thailand unless the Minister shall consider exemption on an individual special case basis.
-
2 hours ago, Jingthing said:
I generally agree but actually Thailand lacks legal protections against discrimination for gay people, so don't get carried away with asserting that Thailand tops the world in that regard. Foreigners especially tourists are often fooled by superficial appearances. But that's a separate topic really.
The lack of legal protections could well be a result of the lack of persecution in Thai history(which is found in nearly all western countries), so don't get carried away with asserting that is somehow Thailand is not a world leader when it comes to lgbt rights, foreigners especially tourists are often fooled by superficial appearances and don't really know that many kathoey are acutely held in high regard within Thai society, many of who are employed in foreigner facing positions for eg in big hotels and sales positions for their excellent work ethic and customer service, and they can largely walk down the street without being attacked or ridiculed, similarly many gay thais are free to walk down the street holding hands, again something of a minefield in western countries. But that's a separate topic really.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Jingthing said:
There is no doubt at all that civil rights for gay people is better in Thailand than Malaysia. But even for gay people, that isn't the only thing to consider. It would be in more severe cases, like Iran, but Malaysia isn't there yet.
Civil rights for gay people is better in Thailand than almost anywhere else in the world, so the comparison is a little skewed, but the fact remains, Malaysia has a thriving gay scene as well as p4p so its not quite the puritanical hellhole that some posters are making out.
-
7 minutes ago, Berkshire said:
Stereotypes? I wonder....
[Homosexuality is still criminalized in Malaysia, where LGBT rights are practically nonexistent. In February, the government released a video promoting conversion therapy and, later banned a Pride event in Kuala Lumpur after criticism from Muslim groups.]
Homosexuality is only just emerging from being criminalised in the west, conversion therapy is still legal in 41 states across the US, including Massachusetts and New York. The Malay government released a video and banned a march so what? They are still turning a blind eye to the gay bars and massage parlours so, Yes, crushing stereotypes? ...did you not read the comments in this thread that have Malaysia painted as ultra conservative culture a'la Islam?
-
Interesting article crushing a few stereotypes:
The gay scene in Kuala Lumpur has a number of bars and restaurants that cater for the ‘pink segment’. The most famous of these is the raunchy Blue Boy bar which has a special drag show every night. There are also a large number of restaurants that are ‘gay and lesbian friendly’ and gay massage parlors.
https://asiancorrespondent.com/2015/07/kuala-lumpur-prostitution-malaysia/
-
8 minutes ago, TunnelRat69 said:
Why ignore it??, it is a point of discussion, you asked, he answered. We all have out preferences, his has (implied) he doesn't want to live in an area mainly linked with Islam. Maybe not in KL but in other areas of Malaysia, radical Islam is real, and may not cotton to foreigners living there.
You, yourself said: If anyone is wondering why I started this topic: pure curiosity! so don;t knock on us when we answer why we live in Thailand not Malaysia.
I'm pretty sure more farang have died in major western countries at the hands of radical Islam than in Malaysia.
Not going to a country simply because the dominant religion is Islam is simply Islamaphobia.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, MaeJoMTB said:
Unfortunately lifespans haven't got longer (well, not in the last 2,000 years anyway).
lol, what utter nonsense you talk.
-
12 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:
Probably true, but the real question is are we better off that they did?
Serious question.
Most of us on here grew up without anything more advanced than Collossus, and lived successful lives without needing an app to show us where to go.
We can process and access way more information now, so as a result we have more power in our lives than literally any human that has gone before.
You might feel contempt for social media and those who use it, but what about your 20,000 posts on this forum alone?
Using the technology correctly might even help you to research and gain an appreciation and understanding of David Attenborough beyond your current appraisal which is "He might make nice animal shows on tv, but he still looks like a dork" lol!
-
1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:
Or just take him at his word as he has nothing to gain by telling tall tales...
Maybe so, but Thailand boards seem to attract a lot of fantasist with attention seeking behaviour, making up all sorts of nonsense.
-
What did he steal from you?
-
15 minutes ago, tryasimight said:
Try googling for the scientific answer.
I already gave you the scientific answer in post #21 ...maybe try reading the thread before spouting nonsense.
15 minutes ago, tryasimight said:80% sounds like it is basically useless. If it was a braking system on a car that stopped the car 80% of the time, most drivers would have been dead long ago - perhaps Thai brakes are based on this as, by all reports, they seem to work only 80% of the time apparently.
80% success rate in stopping airborne virus is useless?
To follow your logic, if I had a system for winning the lottery 80% of the time, that would basically be a useless system?
-
5 minutes ago, tryasimight said:
All they do is stop people picking their noses in public.
Apart from that - practically useless for normal healthy people regardless what some posters claim. Possibly some benefit if you are old, infirm or have a compromised immune system.
The wife will wear one sometimes - I often have a look at it afterwards - absolutely no signs of dust or dirt entrapment visible i.e. it is doing nothing.
The typical mask you see is to keep YOUR germs from entering the atmosphere, not the other way around.
So the scientific studies saying that a bog standard face mask has an 80% success rate in stopping air borne virus have got it wrong?
Maybe you can answer the question I asked earlier, can you explain your proposition in scientific terms how a face mask can stop particles from leaving the mouth but do nothing to stop particles entering the mouth?
-
2 hours ago, DGS1244 said:5 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:
When people are sick they use them to not spread germs.
Very true, they do nothing to stop particles entering the mouth, for that you need a HEPA type filter system. That is why surgeons wear them in a very clean environment. Protect the patient.
Can you explain in scientific terms how a face mask can stop particles from leaving the mouth but "do nothing to stop particles entering the mouth"?
------
QuoteInternational Journal of Infectious Diseases concluded that when used correctly, masks are highly effective in preventing the spread of viral infections. Family members of children with flu-like illnesses who used the masks properly were 80 percent less likely to be diagnosed with the illness. Surprisingly, the difference between types of masks used was insignificant.
http://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(08)01008-4/fulltext
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0029744
-
1 minute ago, Bangkok Barry said:
As my wife and I did in Kalasin a few weeks ago. Knocked us both out for a couple of days and made us live 'dog-style', sleeping 20 hours a day
I wonder if I'll be prosecuted for saying where it happened
I learned my lesson after the first two times, not been infected again since wearing mask....
-
It's essentially an air filter, they make a big difference in heavily polluted areas like lower sukhumvit or for eg in thai hospitals where you're liable to pick up a super flu or two.
-
15 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:
Have spent too many trips in the past running at full pelt when going on one of my strolls as packs of wild dogs tried to take lumps out of me.
You should read up on canine psychology its way more effective than any of these devices will be.
Have you ever seen how wild dogs/wolves etc hunt? ...running is the worst thing you can do!
Bad news for "Vapers" from Harvard
in General Topics
Posted · Edited by Air Smiles
The article is about popcorn lung. Is vaping the cause of popcorn lung?
Let me put it another way, If I vaped rat poison and died, what would that tell us about vaping?