PeeJayEm

Why ?

A ladyboy, as headlined, is transgender woman.- not a transgender man as written in the article. The press here have no idea what JJ was.

.

Such arrogance, ignorance or downright extreme nasty prejudices. Which planet have you chosen to live on? Here on planet earth in 2022 a ladyboy is a transgender woman - fact.

Ofcourse they will check - but only if it is convenient to a wanted outcome and how they want to deal with the case

That's irrelevant. That is sex, not gender. A ladyboy is a transgender woman not a transgender man. Such ignorance in the article and some commemtators here

Such ignorance. A ladyboy is a transgender woman. Not a transgender man.

So refugees are only worth helping if they look good.

Totally deluded nonsense to say that Thai women in general are any better drivers than Thai men in general simply because your wife hasn't yet caused your death. My young partner was killed as a pedestrian by a speeding and drunk middle class Thai woman while taking her kids home from school. - That doesn't make all Thai women bad drivers though.

There are several good quality insurance policies for expat long stays in Thailand that cover both the emergency treatment and repatriation.

I, and I think many others, had taken that it was a contribution to the SEA plus Oceania plus West strategic naval rebalancing versus China's aggressive naval expansion over SE Asia. But if it's China they're buying the subs from they're clearly on the wrong side yet again.

.

Geez .... when I first heard of the submarine plans I was supportive because from my reading I got the impression: 1) it was part of a re-balancing of strength versus China's build-up - by the west plus independent SE Asian and Oceania nations contributions; 2) the subs were being procured from Sweden (or was it Finland?). But come the day, Chinese supplied subs will be fighting for China SE Asian domination whether or not the Thai navy brass want the badge on the engine room door to match their privilege cars. Thailand continues to be a snake in the grass in all matters international. Seems they are yet again choosing the wrong side and remain silent on Chinese encroachment and expansion over SE Asian. (In similar vein, it's Surprising it's not a Russian engine they want.)

This is a completely pointless CYA directive. As though re-shuffling the paperwork of certification will yield anything at all. - Only of use if these Thai airlines and inspectors are best in world and can second guess the CAA investigation. - I think not.

<deleted>

Just so much wrong in the head of foreign "husbands" who expect the "wife" to remain celebrate between annual visits.

Agree in principle - but even in UK which is probably one of the furthest into the process you describe, it is going to be a long time before Corona can be tested most like any other virus. Hospitalisation and death rates here are still one order of magnitude higher than flu.

Masks with exhalation valves (which is the subject) do nothing to stop droplets, proper FFP2 masks without valves do.

Ha ha wrong. Fine if only 10.000 ever apply but after 10 weeks with 700,000 applications and only 1,500 approvals per day there'll be a 400 day turnaround.

Really big problem I have found with Qatar airways is that a huge percentage if mid-easterners using these flights simply would not wear the mandatory face masks. For that reason I would never use them again during pandemic

Why are so many folk making themselves upset about this? The advice offered in his points 1, 2 and 3 is just a sensible suggestion. If you don't want to follow it then just let it pass. - Why bother yourself otherwise?

Yes - in other words, places that the UK can vet and trust.

Mixing up unrelated issues here with quite a lot of emotion and irrationality as the glue.

It is not incumbent on the various UK country administrations (England is only 1 of 4 and they each make their own rules) to justify in detail why countries are red listed or vaccination programmes are not trusted. Their duty is to protect the people residing in their particular country whether they be British or other nationalities. If they were required (as you state) to justify their decisions on each foreign country in detail then the decisions would become on promises by politics and detente.

I totally agree. Even if the vaccination programme were robust, the continual threat to open up to tourists (which means opening all tourism related businesses) would just thwart the progress. So indeed it is probably much based on mistrust of the government's words and portrayals.