RobU

Anti Vaxers really need to read up on how vaccines work. Vaccines do not replace the body's natural defences. Vaccines support the body defences by causing the body to produce antibodies against the virus without catching the virus. Normally the body only produces antibodies to fight a virus once the individual has actually caught the virus, which is too late for the body to mitigate the the deleterious effects of the virus since the virus overwhelms the immune system. Vaccinated people can still catch the virus but it will have little or no effect because their immune system is prepared to fight it. Unvaccinated people can catch the virus from vaccinated people, who don't even know they have it, and because they are not vaccinated they will suffer severe symptoms and possibly die or be severely incapacitated, sometimes, as with polio, for the rest of their lives. Parents who stop their child from being vaccinated should be charged with child neglect.

A vaccination strengthens the immune system to assist the body's natural defences. A vaccinated child can still carry the virus it means that the vaccinated child will be better able to fight the virus and will not have any symptoms worse than a common cold and mostly no symptoms at all. But the unvaccinated child will suffer the full effect of the virus, thus it is the unvaccinated child who would sicken and perhaps die.

The 'Expert' in the UK who advocated not vaccinating children with MMR vaccine was struck off the UK medical register. He moved to the USA and plays the system he is now a multi millionaire in the USA promoting non vaccination and selling goods from his website. Making money from the stupids.

They already have a choice. Either get vaccinated or don't go to school. The vaccination is for the protection of the other children in the school to prevent infection by carriers who have not been vaccinated.

And the Lord said "before Armageddon there will be a mighty Trump"

There are 2 sides i.e. left groin and right groin distinctly marked in anatomy text books

I agree with you, I presume the law is similar to UK law where a person is deemed capable of understanding and giving consent to having sex once over the age of 16, however the parent's consent has to be obtained in order for a person to marry between 16 and 18 because it is a legal contract (it used to be 16 and 21 until the legal age of adulthood was dropped to 18). Point to note in the UK if 2 kids under 16 have consensual sex and they are found out, the eldest is forced to sign the sex offenders register

Once again a veiled insult with no proper content save your trolling for others

Good post Lou it answers the question clearly and succinctly without the suppositions and speculations that others are making

No I haven't

We live in Nong Khai Province and regularly go to the popular market on the banks of the Mekong River. Rubbish collection and tidying up afterwards is good but there are no rubbish bins in the market. The bankside is littered with garbage where people have just casually thrown it over the railings. It is never cleared away only the market site is cleaned. We have good regular weekly garbage collections but I take a walk round our village and there is plastic garbage at the side of the street and in locations where people gather. It's the job of the headman to ensure there is no litter but ours is a lazy man who spends his time making speeches and 'being the headman ' but actually doing nothing. Again no rubbish bins in the village which could be emptied by the weekly garbage collection

What additional passports are This section tells His Majesty’s Passport Office staff about additional (more than 1) passports. HM Passport Office does not usually allow more than 1 passport per person but may issue additional passports to customers who: have a genuine need for one and can provide evidence to show it meet the criteria in this guidance We must issue all additional passports in the same name and have the same observations as the original passport we issued unless: the customer has a title or title observation, which must only be included in one of the passports this guidance tells you otherwise, for example, when some dual nationals travel to incompatible countries We commonly refer to additional passports as ‘second’ passports, but we may consider issuing the customer with more than 2 (on a case by case basis). If a customer asks for 3 or more valid passports and has a genuine need for them, a Higher Executive Officer (HEO) or someone senior must authorise it. We must refuse an application for an additional passport, if: we have concerns with a customer’s entitlement, nationality or identity the customer cannot clearly prove they have a genuine need for one (in line with this guidance)

Absolutely no need for your sarcasm Trolls tend to hover around this site looking for victims to insult. It appears that you are one of them. As the questioner said you have contributed nothing whatsoever of any value to this discussion. All you have done is post deriding and insulting comments

Very good point

What people don't seem to understand is that what he did (and what the vicious American did) is libel. Until 2010 libel was a criminal offence in the UK. It remains a criminal offence in Thailand. Everyone has the right to free speech, you are entitled to voice your opinion, no one has the right to tell outright lies about an individual or organisation and mount a campaign of lies against an individual or an organisation, which is what he did against this restaurant and the vicious American did against the hotel. It's not free speech it's criminal activity

Many business class seats don't recline or convert to beds as they should video screens don't work. The airline has no maintenance schedule. Staff on the planes reported the problem months ago and were ignored. The airline continued selling tickets for those defective seats knowing full well that they were defective. People pay 3 to 4 times more than economy for these facilities. It is no better than travelling economy class (probably worse since most economy class seats can recline). The airline offered minimal and inadequate compensation and a false apology trying to keep the profit on the seat sale.

Again the hotel will not suffer, the warning is that negative reviews may result in prosecution in Thailand it does not mention the hotel in question. Since all the bad reviews he posted were removed their website reputation remains the same as before the incident

JosephBloggs explained it correctly. The violent and dangerous bully needed to be reined in and this was the quickest way to do it resulting in his deportation back to America. The hotel will recover it's reputation since those people who stayed previously know that he lied. He had to be stopped.

Deeply confused by your post and your attitude. May I suggest that you also get a sense of humour and post comments that make sense

IT problem posted duplicate in error

Duplicate post in error

The 'tourist' in question was a vindictive bully wanted in his home state in the USA for firing a gun at a bar that had told him to leave because of his atrocious behaviour brandishing a gun at the bar. He was not a tourist he was teaching English in a Thai school. His teaching visa was revoked (probably because of his violent record) and he was deported back to the USA to face investigation.

What have roots got to do with it?

AN is owned by the Thaiger now and we have all complained in the past about incomprehensible articles from that publication

Careful. many of the literal minded trolls on this site are unable to comprehend irony or sarcasm