Just Weird

11 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Not everyone wants to keep $25,000 permanently in a Thai bank on the off chance of wanting to visit the country.

He said he lives here, he doesn't "visit on the off chance".

14 hours ago, Hackney35 said:

There is no way the OP is making that story up.

He comes across as articulate and honest.

Why not, can articulate people not be dishonest?   I'm not saying that he is dishonest but that cannot be established from a Thaivisa first-time post that he has never returned to in which he does claim to have been living here and gets a tourist visa!

15 hours ago, SupermarineS6B said:

I know this guy and have seen his bank book, 59,000 bht on the 7th of June......

What's the point you're trying to make?  Did he have the cash that an IO, within his discretion, can require to be shown? Bank books do not mean anything in these circumstances.

17 hours ago, whitemouse said:

22 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

These stories are only about people who refuse to get the proper visa and think the rules don't apply to them. No proper news outlet is interested in these self inflicted problems.

What is a proper visa for a tourist?

A Tourist visa or VE, but the OP, which is what is being discussed here is not a tourist; tourists don't live in the country.

18 hours ago, baboon said:

I remember being grilled upon arrival at my native Newcastle (UK) airport a couple of years ago, by a female border guard who didn't seem to like the look of me.

By God it felt great to tell her to mind her own business,

It was her business.

20 hours ago, HeyHeyHey said:

21 hours ago, BestB said:

yes they have the right to refuse anyone , but does not mean they have the right to degrade people.

no they don't have any discretion,

Yes, they do!

21 hours ago, HeyHeyHey said:

lol the Thai immigration banana eaters never had at "IO discretion" power at the first place

Thai IOs sure do have discretion.

21 hours ago, wisperone said:

Quite a story. That was a lot to go thru. Best suggestion, steer clear of Thailand. There are much better places to go. Why would anyone even think twice. That situation is just totally ridiculous.

"Best suggestion, steer clear of Thailand".

Why is that the best suggestion when 99.9% of visitors never have problems being allowed in?

23 hours ago, SteveK said:

No wonder their tourism industry is up the swanny. 

It's not "up the swanny".  Millions come here every year.

On 10/10/2019 at 5:20 PM, tabarin said:

People often say that a clean passport doesn't help because it doesn't change the systems. 

I beg the difference as these type of refusals is almost never due to the computer system but due to the IO his/her discretion,
and almost always after seeing many many used pages with visa's in the psychical passport. 

However, when they see visa's like the non-o, they seem to not abuse this discretion + be careless of the history.
Any IO loves a clean thin passport with a brand new visa. I would have done that if refused already.

All that aside, I guess me is very lucky, I still have the same passport with even a 1y blacklist stamp in it.

"I beg the difference as these type of refusals is almost never due to the computer system but due to the IO his/her discretion..."

Really?  The very first thing any IO does is enter the details of the passport into the computer, obviously!   

On 10/10/2019 at 4:30 PM, SteveK said:

I agree, if this story was fully genuine and he had done no wrong, he shouldn't be concerned but it does seem that there are some holes in the story.

 

It should be criminal for them to refuse you entry on not having sufficient funds when you have 20k in your wallet and a Thai bank book with you. Why don't they have another reason for refusal such as "person attempted to enter on incorrect visa type", rather than using the same old insufficient funds as a catch all to deny anyone?

He did not have B20k or the equivalent in cash, at least he didn't say that he did.  It's a requirement if the IO asks for it and evidence of funds elsewhere doesn't count.  

He didn't say that he had a Thai bank book either but if he did and he showed it to the IO that could hardly be used by him as an argument to justify his not living here or possibly looking for work!

1 minute ago, ta158 said:

On 10/9/2019 at 3:38 PM, Just Weird said:

If this particular type of crime that someone said is "rife" is that common, there must be scores of them, at least, reported somewhere in order for that person to know that it is rife.  My money says that you couldn't link to, let's say, just three other empirical examples of the same crime.

 

"But i know you are the biggest thai apologist and There is no crime in Thailand".

You're wrong on both counts, there. 

 

PS, do you actually know what "apologist" means?

Wait, when did I say it was rife? It was someone else. Also every crime news you are there too argue with people about crime in Thailand like you know everything.

 

It is common throughout Thailand, most snatchings does not get reported/published to news.

 

Born and raised in pattaya, my mother got snatched in khao talo, no news about it, we have also got burgled, motorbike stolen, attempted snatchings but never news reports, and it is the same with all other family members and friends... a family friend who wore gold got told by us to remove it, he said no one dares to take it from me, 1 week later he ended up in a ditch when he lost control, he got his chain snatched ????

I'm sure you can search on Google about snatchings in Thailand too see ????

"Wait, when did I say it was rife? It was someone else".

You didn't.  Where did I say that you did?   What I said was, "If this particular type of crime that someone said is "rife"...".  But you did respond to it.

"Also every crime news you are there too argue with people about crime in Thailand like you know everything".

It's a public forum, the idea is discussion, isn't it?    You're suggesting that everyone else knows everything but I'm not allowed a comment, or opinion, without attracting insults from some quarters.  How exactly does that work?  Does it ever cross your mind that I may be right just as others could be?

"It is common throughout Thailand...".

I was responding to a poster claiming that this specific type of crime was rife, this specific crime is not rife.

"...most snatchings does not get reported/published to news".

That does not make any sense.  If most snatchings do not get reported how can anyone say that they are happening?  They're unreported so, by definition, there's no way for you to know about them!

Your one snatching and the story of one that allegedly happened to  a friend does not make it "rife".    The other crimes you mentioned are all irrelevant to the claim that this specific crime that was reported in the OP is rife .

"I'm sure you can search on Google about snatchings in Thailand too see"

No need for me to search for them as I'm not the one who made the "rife" claim.

From my comment that you quoted, "My money says that you couldn't link to, let's say, just three other empirical examples of the same crime".

Seems that I was right.

45 minutes ago, wordchild said:

Saphan Taksin, this has been an ongoing saga for several years now. The original plan (from the BMA) was to demolish it and provide a pedestrian walkway to connect to another station further up Sathorn ;  but in recent times that seems to have changed to a period of closure (2 years?)  to allow for the complete rebuild of the station and the addition of another track to ease the bottleneck caused by the current (single track)  design . There has been recent press comment that suggested  the closure and start of the rebuild would happen during 2019 but, so far, that has (clearly) not happened. I really have no idea what the current situation is as plans seem to be changing all the time

Thanks.

So the station is not going to be closed in the foreseeable future and, if it is removed, it will be replaced by a new, better one. 

Not much of a problem for the OP, then, I'd guess.

3 hours ago, observer90210 said:

sex, drugs n'rock n'roll.....except that here, the poor girl was killed. RIP

Who killed her and where has it been claimed that she was killed?  So far she is just known to have died, unless you have some other information.

9 minutes ago, overherebc said:

1 hour ago, Just Weird said:

"I said minds, that's plural not singular".

Yes, so what's your point?  My comment stands.

It means I wasn't picking you out. I don't like making you more sad and confused. ????????

"Anyone among the great auto-electrical minds..." 

That is what you said and you accompanied it with a quote of my comment so you, very clearly, were referring to me.

18 hours ago, wordchild said:

They also keep saying the BTS station there will close, but I don’t know when that will be.

Can you give any more information on that, please?  Which BTS station do you mean, and who keeps saying that it will be closed?

On 10/10/2019 at 12:46 PM, ChipButty said:

Drivers fail to realise photocard licences automatically expire after ten years

It's odd that anyone would "fail to realise" something that is printed on their driving licence as clearly as their name and address.

On 10/9/2019 at 6:02 PM, Myran said:

On 10/9/2019 at 3:58 PM, Just Weird said:

Where did you get your LL.B?  Robbery is a crime of theft.

Are you joking or do you actually not get it? Once again, since you seem to have difficulties understanding:

Are you joking or do you actually not get it? Once again, since you seem to have difficulties understanding: robbery is a crime of theft.

On 10/9/2019 at 3:23 PM, overherebc said:

Your reading isn't too good either. I said minds, that's plural not singular. Stop being so sad and confused. ????????

"I said minds, that's plural not singular".

Yes, so what's your point?  My comment stands.

18 hours ago, Myran said:

Robbery is when you steal something using violence. Stealing something with no use of violence is called theft.

Where did you get your LL.B?  Robbery is a crime of theft.

17 minutes ago, Fex Bluse said:

Well, I've almost died a dozen times here. 

 

So who is right, me or you? 

He is. 

How can you have "almost died a dozen times here", what does that mean? 

What is it about you that has made you so prone to life-threatening injuries in Thailand in particular?  Or, do you really mean that you have not almost died here a dozen times?

14 hours ago, ta158 said:

21 hours ago, Just Weird said:

Rife?  You're commenting on the second reported incident, yes?  Hardly "rife".

Yes the second reported on english news... you know There is more crime happening that thai visa and bangkok post does not report right? But i know you are the biggest thai apologist and There is no crime in thailand. Funny that you think that all the crimes you see here is the only ones existing

If this particular type of crime that someone said is "rife" is that common, there must be scores of them, at least, reported somewhere in order for that person to know that it is rife.  My money says that you couldn't link to, let's say, just three other empirical examples of the same crime.

"But i know you are the biggest thai apologist and There is no crime in Thailand".

You're wrong on both counts, there. 

PS, do you actually know what "apologist" means?

8 hours ago, overherebc said:

Anyone among the great auto-electrical minds out there know the difference between an alternater and a generator.

Try this.

A generator produces electricity juat by turning it.

The alternator needs a voltage applied plus turning it to produce electricity. 

To quote your own words to the great auto-electrical mind behind this comment, perhaps the truck has a generator.  But you were wrong to pompously castigate me for my comment, even if it has an alternator, unless your 'great auto-electrical mind' thinks that an alternator doesn't have to be belt driven, i.e. belt powered, while it is being excited.

On 10/7/2019 at 6:53 PM, fasteddie said:

Best airline food I ever had, shame about the infestation of head lice/crabs I caught off my last Thai flight.

Yeah, right, 'course you did...

41 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

Is it not a well known fact that anyone who goes into the back of another vehicle is at fault 100%.

No, it's not a well-known fact, it can depend on the circumstances.