.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
twix38
-
Posts
771 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by twix38
-
-
Publicus,
Only my opinion, but the talks will fail or any agreement be seen as weak and foolhardy. IRAN DO NOT NEED TO ENRICH URANIUM themselves unless they want a bomb. It should be a RED line! The reason it is not a Red line is because talks would stop immediately. Any other outcome allowing Iran to enrich will be a problem for all right thinking people imho and Obama is too desperate for a deal and would like to push this down the road to the next president who has responsible Red lines!
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
I stand to be corrected but to me this is a very very simply issue.
Iran insists on enriching Uranium and will not allow this to be stopped or for it to be supplied by a 3rd party. Russia was once put forward as a supplier I think. If Iran insists on enriching Uranium themselves rather than having it supplied to them and where it can be ensured not at sufficient purity for a bomb, then there is only one reason for this intransigence. They want a BOMB!!
Now, Iran plays games and deceives and spins negotiations out. It's all in bad faith as they make progress and give themselves time* and reprieve from crippling sanctions. I have little doubt talks will either fail or Obama will sell a bad deal as a success. Well done anyone who can cut through and see that Iran is insincere and if a deal is struck we will all regret it in time and many will realise that immediately. It's just a pity not so many can foresee it with clarity or through past experience. Iran simply does not need to enrich Uranium themselves for peaceful means!!
* they have already gone through 2 prior deadlines with Obama and EU extending them!
-
4
-
fwiw, imho you should wait to marry and find out more. The haste for other reasons such as wanting to leave Thailand is no reason to marry. Otherwise apply for a Fiance visa/settlement visa. I did that years ago and my girlfriend came to UK for 6 months. We did not get married in the UK and she returned to Thailand. We are still together and for 12 years all told. We didn't actually intend to marry in UK, but the Fiance visa was easy/easier to get, at least back then, and the option to marry is clearly implicit if you decide to, or she goes home to Thailand and/or marry later or never. I would advise living abroad in your home country together before marrying here just to be able to both go there. It is a shock to some Thai's and to be away from home/family etc and things can need a period of adjustment or may not work out at all. It's a bit tough if already married and this happens. You must apply for this visa demonstrating serious intention to marry and you may very well do so, but if you decide against it you have both been living in your country and had more time together and she just returns home to Thailand. The choice to marry or delay/quit with her return home is yours, assuming rules etc apply similarly these days.
-
It's not right to generalise - usually.
There are good and bad in all countries, but I must say I welcome less Russians from my experience of them.
Also a German friend from the old East Germany has the view that Russians are arrogant a-holes and along the bottom rung of the human ladder.
There is a condo project that has an unofficial policy not to sell to Russians. Their reputation really is low because it's based on a collective generalisation of their manners and how they behave and each of us basis our opinion on personal experience. I am not in the least shocked that we nearly all get to experience a similar encounter to have so many of us with the same viewpoint - the fewer Russians, the better.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
Don Mega,
If your neighbour decides to poison your dogs I hope you get a taster too.
Dog's barking and disrupted sleep can be extremely stressful especially when consistent. Typical of dog owners to let it persist when they could fit a muzzle at night to at least reduce if not remove the volume/barking. Are ALL dog owners bordering on inconsiderate scum or just most!!
-
3
-
- Popular Post
Thailand is a country with beauty and filth, populated by too many zenaphobic murderers who don't face a credible police force or a just and transparent justice system.
It is truly way past time the international press AND our Foreign Office travel advisories spelt out the truth of what you may encounter to rival TAT's impressions. There is a VERY ugly side to Thailand and it is getting more frequent and more ugly every day!
-
3
-
it's a bargirl, true.
It's also never right to blame the victim. No matter how trusting or stupid they may have been.
Who was the evil wrong doer? Oh yes the guy who lost the money!
He was just the patsy who should have trusted his head and not his heart and been much more sensible and savvy, but he didn't do the lying, robbing etc or shall we blame the bargirl who did?
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
I noted a theme from some along these lines....
"You've got to give it to these bar girls. They can run rings around even educated farangs. Obviously Western education isn't much use out in the real world"
Whilst it may be true, I really believe a lot of Ferangs fall prey to scams of this nature as it is a 'state sponsored' temptation that is just too hard for some/many Thais to resist. By this I mean we Ferang cannot own any land that we buy - there's no zoning or allowance up to a certain land size or any fair minded or legal way to do so whilst also not having us push up prices or take over (lol!), so we must circumvent the law or rely on a Thai national who, if with a bad heart, will find it quite easy to dupe some who cannot understand or read Thai and who are forced to rely to varying degrees of good will in their chosen Thai representative/partner. The reason it happens here so much is because enormous temptation is put in front of relatively poor Thais to transform their life and it is handed to them on a golden plate by Thai law and the system. A system which could be improved upon if there was any will to do so - All Thais are happy to leave it as a scam waiting to repeat and virtually all Thais thinks it's a good and reasonable situation as it's been unchanged for decade(s)!
-
3
-
I can't be bothered to read all the pages since my post, but the first couple of replies missed my point re DNA.
Firstly the two specifics items of concern for UK police on being sent here were DNA and the alledged treatment/torture.
Re DNA, my question was that any way the UK tries to check the DNA against the Burmese boys will be tainted IF the BIB used the first very early round of collecting DNA from some 200 people on Koh Tao (which included the Burmese boys) but rather than concentrating on looking for real suspects they were concentrating on creating convenient non-thai suspects as patsies to plant their DNA. Therefore the bodies (Hannah) has had the Burmese boys DNA inserted/applied by the BIB way before their bodies were shipped back to UK. If the UK police collect Burmese DNA whilst in Thailand in order to independently match to DNA taken from bodies now in UK, it would in that case match due to BIB having planted Burmese DNA very early on. It is not as simple as assuming that because we now have the bodies/evidence we can provide untainted and accurate DNA matching and I feared that may be what the UK police were looking to do and to announce that they could confirm independent DNA they had collected from the Burmese pair does indeed match the DNA independently found from Hannah by UK forensics investigation. That would still leave me with exactly the same uncertainty if that's all that happens.
-
- Popular Post
On thinking about the UK police arrival. I think one of their main jobs has been stated as checking the DNA, but...
The Burmese boys originally first had their DNA taken early on and were not found to match (not arrested) as the BIB went after wild leads and foreigner (deceased friend) etc. So, I fear this early DNA that was taken and was used by the police to find patsies and then then use their collected DNA to plant on the victim's body - probably just the girls who was raped. That would mean that before the bodies were returned to UK, the Burmese DNA was where it would need to be for a later conviction and if the UK do any checking it will match. The UK need to concentrate on finding and ruling in any other DNA present and getting some DNA of the alledged murderer (bar owner's son) to see if they can rule him/other(s) in and certainly not agree just because (if) the DNA in Hannah matches the Burmese.
If the bodies were not returned to UK before the first early DNA collections on the Island when it is reported the 2 Burmese boys were tested and no match found, then the DNA evidence could have been planted for later confirmation of guilt from testing the bodies in the UK and thought to be proof? aimho
-
3
-
if you want to keep her onside and not yet legally marry then just do the Thai Wedding Ceromony, pay a small/reasonable dowry if needbe and buy a ring. That may well be enough for her and her family, so no loss of face and they can show off to the neighbours and you can wed legally at a later date. What's the rush as it's mainly a long distance relationship so far. Once here for a while after 50, then you can register a legal marriage if you feel the same.
-
rijit,
yup, but at least the girls don't tend to come back tooled up and in numbers like the guys etc.
it's about time the uninformed tourists got fed the truth about their standing in Thailand and the dangers that TAT don't include in their brochures.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
"One senior officer told the BBC he did not believe a Thai person could have committed such a crime."
Thai men can be vicious and typically leave a confrontation in order to come back tooled-up and/or in numbers to go as OTT as possible. Surely the example below must have the wrong people in the frame for the good Samaritan who broke up a fight and so they came back to kill him!
More publicity of the Land of Shame needs to go around the world as Thailand is a danger to all who have the TAT impression of a peaceful, gentle Buddhist people! Too many teenagers (AND OTHERS) run around with guns and knives and a lack of self control and perspective, yet just get a rap on the knuckles and back on the street. At least these two will face Australian justice.
-
3
-
"One senior officer told the BBC he did not believe a Thai person could have committed such a crime."
Thai men can be vicious and typically leave a confrontation in order to come back tooled-up and/or in numbers to go as OTT as possible. Surely the example below must have the wrong people in the frame for the good Samaritan who broke up a fight and so they came back to kill him!
More publicity of the Land of Shame needs to go around the world as Thailand is a danger to all who have the TAT impression of a peaceful, gentle Buddhist people! Too many teenagers (AND OTHERS) run around with guns and knives and a lack of self control or perspective yet just get a rap on the knuckles and back on the street. At least these two will face Australian justice.
-
1
-
-
I spotted some dubiousness about the Thai ladies actions early on - not going to a Hospital on the agreed list, but chosing her own Hospital and before the pedo information ever even surfaced she was causing world-wide headlines stating that the (then anonymous) ozzie couple had abandoned their Downs Syndrome baby, but later confessing that she herself had refused to let them take Gammy!! Only coming clean when the ozzie couple refuted her accusation and she changed her story by adding a 180 degree turn. I found that all I needed to know about the Thai ladies character, sincerity and trustworthyness.
I was affronted that she was called a Saint. Far from it!!!
All of this and on both sides is distasteful and upsetting.
-
geodesic,
you wrote...."What lie did this girl actually tell? Psycopathic pedophile slimeball DID ABANDON THE BABY. What part of that don't you understand?"
How many times do I have to state.....I am not talking about the Ozzies in making this point. I am only talking about the Thai lady and what she said.
She said they abandoned the baby and they did. She originally blamed them for doing so quite clearly and without any other information just stating they abandoned their DS baby with all the emotion that created at the time!! Then she admits the actual reason, only after forced by their rebuff of her accusation, was that she refused to let them take the baby. She was the reason they couldn't take Gammy! To say to the world's media that they walked away when the truth was she denied to allow them to take Gammy means to most people the original statement was a clear lie that she changed and that's how it has been reported. Whatever the right and wrongs of her actions, she clearly lied, so what don't you understand?
"A little omission in a complicated story"! - that just happened AT THE TIME to have been the whole story before the pedo aspect was even known about. It was as deliberate and calculated as you get imv and generated the headline story. You can't say what she said when the truth was the opposite but she failed to mention SHE stopped them taking Gammy, but rather blamed them for deserting a DS baby and the point is that only now has she come clean and told the truth. It's there for anyone looking to call her a Saint!
Some of you can't seperate the pedo aspect from anything else, when you know she acted and accused ahead of this fact ever being known about. It is obvious and in her interview she changes her story and the BBC comment on it - at least they are awake. It's been reported as such without actually calling her a liar. she changed her story fundamentally by filling in a fundamental detail she just happened to have ommited first time round and only when questioned because the ozzie's spoke out with a different version and reason for the abandonment. i.e. she told a lie and let it persist until forced to correct it. To call it a little omission is laughable and naive! She had plenty of time to see the press headlines and frenzy her statement caused and correct the false impression, but only did so when challenged and forced to answer a different version of abandonment and supply the truth and admit it was her refusal.
Obviously I have to re-state that the pedo aspect is far far worse. She is no Saint though.
-
How difficult is it to understand.........I think the Ozzie guy is a slimeball, though I have no proof he is still a danger, just my strong belief/expectation. We are all agreed.
For the umpteenth time......I am trying to discuss the Saint (Thai lady) and her actions. That is simply not possible as there appears to be a mental block to only discuss everything in terms of pedo.
However, I do have proof the Thai lady told a serious lie. She has said so by changing her story fundamentally and admitting the truth after being challenged. That she gets a pass on this is stunning as I view it as very telling of her character - supports her changing of Hospital.
It was not a little white lie. It was a massive unsupported distortion that on the facts she had at that time was truly an appalling accusation to make when it was infact her not them. She thought she would get away with it and with you lot she has. Amazing!
The Thai lady is not the headline story and she shouldn't be, but her behavior is worthy of discussion imv.
No wonder there are horror stories of gullible foreigners, when lies this big are excused. LOL
EDIT: Prime example of an Amoeba is our Kooweerup. Support my kind - What a dimwitted offensive prat!! -
duplicate posts
-
-
-
-
-
ok, it's illegal. Changes nothing regarding my points related to her actions, lying, etc.
Would ANYONE like to address my points and stop avoiding them? Can anyone?
Seems to me as she is not a pedo, she is therefore a Saint or at least untouchable to posters here because nobody can look at her actions as they happened and in isolation and chronology and simply say she is....
1. No Saint
2. A liar
3. untrustworthy
4. and imo deceitful and likely opportunistic with that lie. I know of no known basis of fact for her views at the specific time stated it was the anoymous Ozzies, when it was her decision. Simply despicable until the truth was forced out.
CAN ANYONE DEAL WITH THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THE THAI LADIES ACTIONS ONLY AND AS THEY OCCURED or is nobody up to that task while they are pedo bashing. ANYONE!!!!!!
again, I agree with the pedo aspect. That is not in dispute, but is a separate issue.
ATF, what about her own actions - the atrocious lie she was caught out with and admitted to as if it was no big deal when it had actually caused an outrage AUSSIE COUPLE ABANDONED DS BABY, until superceded by the pedo details when they subsequently came out. The truth was the Thai lady refused to allow them to take Gammy, yet stated Gammy was abandoned.
She truly is a Saint with mystical powers. lol
-
samran,
Firstly you say "she decides a child is better in their (meaning "her") care versus an orphanage"
What on Earth led you to believe the child would be put in an orphanage? It's the made up assumption used by the Thai lady to justify her action. There was no evidence of that being the case, ever.
She signed a binding/legal surrogacy contract. It's not simply that she's the mother without any recourse as the parent(s) supplied the genetic material. I agree though she had control and exercised it. Then lied about the story because she thought she would get away with it imv. Doesn't anyone else find that particular lie reprehensible - claiming in the world's press that they abandoned Gammy when all along it was her refusing to let them take Gammy?
The main evidence against her is that she broke a contract by picking her own Hospital and by telling a bare face lie that she now admits to and which is incompatible with acceptable behavior OR is it OK with you lot to make allegations to the world's press that is only put right when contested and then she changes her story 180 degrees and agrees it was her who put a stop to Gammy going to OZ. Until someone shows me why this is factually wrong, I can't say I find everyone's defence of her at all credible.
How on Earth can people say it is.....
"The main evidence used against her is that:
1) she is a woman
2) she is a woman who happens to be Thai
3) she was a paid surrogate (forgetting that someone was doing the paying)"What garbage! I have stated why I find her credibility zero and it never gets any discussion apart from he's a pedo.
Exactly, she went public before knowing of the pedo stuff, so she was lying without even having that (or anything material) as cover at the time. what a Cow to have said they abandoned Gammy when she now says she refused to allow them to take Gammy. I fail to see how much worse the chronology and facts on this particular issue could be!!
EDIT: Mosha - a pedo is worse of course. That's a no brainer! The subject matter of my original post was addressing and disputing her label as a Saint. I have already said it's not in the same league, but then I was not addressing that issue, but it seems no discussion on any other points can be held without recourse to the pedo element. An element the Thai lady had no knowledge of when taking action AND telling a whopper of a lie she had to come clean on when challenged on it. aimho
Im having pre-marriage jitters
in Marriage and Divorce
Posted · Edited by twix38
If this statement ..."Impossible to get her a Visa without intent to marry or actual marriage" is related to my post 104, then of course it is true, but doesn't change a thing I said. Of course in applying for a fiance/settlement visa there must be shown the intention to marry. So what...you show the intention. Things don't need to be all booked and paid for. It's an intention. Rules may have changed since my experience in 2005