Bday Prang

10 minutes ago, Wanderer555 said:

According to Thai property law a foreign national can own a house but cannot own the land under the house. 

The land is often leased or held under a contract such as a superficies, with the agreement registered at the land department with name of foreigner on the Chanote and no sale or loans against the land permitted without the foreigners consent. 
 

This is more common than some realize and is best organized at the start of building the house, with the foreigner being named on the building permit, retaining all financial records and similar. 
Thai courts will also recognize the ownership claim in the event of a dispute. 
cheers

none of which is relevant to this story 

2 hours ago, Dogmatix said:

 

Somporn co-owns the house with her 74-year-old Australian husband.

 

The article doesn't explain how this is possible.  He is unlikely to be a naturalised Thai citizen, since they spend most of their time in Australia.  Therefore it is more likely that she owns the home outright and he owns nothing.

Does it really matter who owns the house, they are an elderly married couple and its theirs   the issue is the  illegal occupation !     not the usual abysmal standard of journalism, which to be honest is well overdue being the subject of a thread in its own right

25 minutes ago, wensiensheng said:

Exactly the point I have made several times. Thailand isn’t ruled by law, it’s ruled by social influencers. Once they get involved, the police, local authority, government, will start to take action. Without a social influencer preferably backed by a video from a mobile phone, nothing gets done.

Even the news these days looks like merely a review of current postings from facebook and the like, Its quite rare to see a full screen picture or video, it always seems to be in mobile phone camera format

3 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

This is why is is a wise move to buya house in a gated community if you are going to be away for extended periods of time. 

If you are away for extended periods why even buy a house at all ?

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I have no idea what you are referring to.

 

Certainly not demonstrating that GB News is not biased

           And the program in  question hardly demonstrates that it is , Something you would be all too aware of if you had actually watched it.     I would have thought that  a randomly picked audience giving Sunak a hard time on TV would be right up your street but no apparently not for some reason,   How strange, 

             You do realise that they plan to put Starmer under the spot light  in exactly the same way,( he certainly won't get an easy time either)  and several other party leaders too, all seems quite fair to me, as it probably does to just about everybody except you and a handful of left wing activists

              The truth is you didn't even watch the show in question did you?  You are just jumping on the bandwagon , the sort of behaviour one expects from a sociology undergraduate at one of the lower calibre further education establishments, before they embark on a life funded by benefits 

              Most media sources have their own political biases, lefties like you can read the Guardian  or watch Sky or the BBC  so why do you object to those with right wing views having a channel that caters for them ?  You are not obliged to watch it and probably never have

2 hours ago, Skipalongcassidy said:

Try again...

nah you should try again or better still admit that you are wrong and give up

8 minutes ago, johng said:

 

Was this the same program that a couple of vaccine injured victims confronted Sunak  ?

yes 

1 hour ago, charleskerins said:

Italy

Nailed it, just the same, and they have a "mafia" too,   what a coincidence

3 hours ago, Surasak said:

You had a community minded teacher then?

I have no idea what that means,      But it was a standard part of the curriculum, learning about yeast and the process pf fermentation

8 hours ago, jacko45k said:

Don't believe I said that.... but I could have phrased it more strongly for those with a set perspective of being defensive. 

What do you mean "you don't believe you said that"  are you suggesting I made it up ?  Or had you just forgotten? maybe you are smoking too much cannabis

15 hours ago, RayC said:

 

The process governing audience selection for programmes such as QT would suggest otherwise 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/5HrMm77Yz7vwzCZZ570nTdp/frequently-asked-questions

well whatever the process is supposed to be , its common knowledge that it was a total militant lefty audience on that particular show, I watched it and it was actually embarrassing to witness 

no mention of testing for rats urine in the op either, and if its only just been tested what were the various government officials shovelling in to their mouths a couple of weeks ago for the benefit of the TV cameras ?  I'll bet a months wages it was not  the10 years old stuff  just something they bought on the way. 

I'm pretty certain most of this stuff will covertly be mixed in with the more recent crops, we will all end up eating it to one degree or another, good old spuds for me for the foreseeable with a bit of spaghetti now and again  

12 hours ago, Kwaibill said:

Rice is known to ”preppers” for its long term storability. 

 but they don't generally keep it in sacks in rat infested warehouses 

3 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Already established business, same with tobacco, and too many vested in it.   Along with both are a great tax revenue stream.

 

Let those 2 deadly, profitable, tax generating, allowed vices sink in, when govt states they care about your health & well being ... worldwide 

 

Weed is controlled, because it is, a weed, an any idiot can grow it, eventually.

producing alcohol is hardly rocket science, we did it at school as a chemistry project  when we were about 12 years old

1 hour ago, Thingamabob said:

Ridiculous. GB News is far less biased and more diverse than any other UK news channel.

totally agree and its pretty much all I watch if i'm in the UK. The only thing I find annoying are the token lefties they are obliged to give airtime to in order to appease the woke ofcom regs. listening to them trying to  argue that black is white can actually be  rather painful and sometimes I actually feel embarrassed for them, that benjamin butterworth character is probably the worst of them all. From the smug smirk on his face its obvious even he does not believe some of the rubbish he comes out with

33 minutes ago, stevenl said:

I disagree with your statement that if police take you to court you'll be found guilty

disagree all you like, but with a 97% conviction rate he is not far short of the mark, 

17 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You might want to check who’s the DG of the BBC.

 

 

And on the other hand I might not

2 hours ago, riclag said:

All children’s brains are malleable , mush, easily influenced, pliable ,especially here in Thailand. Parentally they are coddled , lack structure .
 The mush is just a phrase to describe how impressionable children are socially. Yes, Children have to be protected from progressives & a culture of mind altering substance abuse .

 

methinks

 

 So alcohol is no problem then ?    and  having gender issues, (and puberty blockers) literally forced down their throats ? , or men dressed as ugly women reading them stories is just fine i suppose.?  And what about unrestricted access to the internet?  would you ban smartphones and computers for everybody too? Not to mention adult content on the TV ?  or even the evening news?  Lets just ban everything  for the sake of "the children"

What part of "not to be sold to those under 20 years of age " are you having trouble understanding? its not rocket science and seems clear enough to me.

 But I do agree with keeping kids well away from "progressives" especially the "progressive liberals"  

is it necessary to even think about investigating, after a pathetic 547 people complained.  Further research into the nature complainers would however explain a lot, many will not have even seen the programme, ever

GB news should be allowed to broadcast without any hindrance at all , If only to compensate for the left wing dribble drip fed to us daily by all the other openly left wing members of the media . Apparently the BBC are trusted to monitor themselves, what could possibly be the result of that ?