stevenl

6 hours ago, johng said:

 

Of course it was,  the point is that certain people tried their damnedest to deny the possibility and  vilify anyone not following "the narrative"  and worse than that they colluded to falsify facts and/or deliberately withheld the truth.

 

The article whilst admitting these facts still tries to  defend these actions as somehow being understandable  and in that way is rather disappointing..however it is still a small step along the way.

" the point is that certain people tried their damnedest to deny the possibility and  vilify anyone not following "the narrative"  and worse than that they colluded to falsify facts and/or deliberately withheld the truth."

Maybe in your mind, but not in reality.

7 hours ago, Toby1947 said:

Ain't we just had enough of these halfwits. Nothing to do with criminal activity. They've missed the money produced by Visa applications. Who do these morons think they're talking to. 😡

Let's wait with that conclusion. O presume the visa applications will go up now, but the main profit would be in returning the Chinese tourists to visa on arrival. 

12 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

That’s not what the Judiciary agrees.

 

The court ruling is his case shall be heard in the jurisdiction where he was at the time his appeal to the court was submitted.

 

He was at the time in NJ.

Yes, so the judiciary agreed that was a blatant attempt by the administration to circumvent the rule of law. As the poster i replied to and i said.

9 minutes ago, Hatari fan said:

I think alot of retired people that are here for the winter will probably stay for a shorter period because of the change.

With the sixty days on entry they could get thirty days extra by doing an extension do a border bounce get sixty more days plus another extension which is six months.

Now it will probably be thirty days on entry plus thirty days extension or sixty days visa plus thirty days extension a border bounce thirty more days plus an extension which will be four months without a visa or five months with the hassle of getting the visa. All those retired people those ret

Since the 60 days on arrival hasn't been in use for 1 year yet, a lot of retired people will be able to switch to the system they were used to: applying for a visa. Unless you think those retired people came this winter for the first time?

29 minutes ago, Nomadic1460 said:

All we hear is on arrival visa to drop to 30 days from 60 in the past week but i have not seen the implementation date in any of the news clips or YouTube videos. Does anyone know when they implement it???

Decision whether to change hasn't been officially made.

It doesn't concern visa on arrival but visa exempt entry.

On 3/18/2025 at 12:33 PM, placnx said:

The Trump administration moved him to Lousiana so that any appeal of a Federal judge blocking deportation would be reviewed by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. It is the most reactionary appeals court in Amerika.

Seems the judiciary agrees.

15 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

Thanks. Late 50s early 60s opening hours were indeed still limited, but enforcement was relaxed.

A lot later as well. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_licensing_laws_of_the_United_Kingdom

Quote

More than 10 years later, the restrictive licensing laws were repealed in England and Wales with the passing of the Licensing Act 1988. On 21 August 1988, for the first time in almost 75 years, British pubs were permitted to remain open through the day; uninterrupted consumption of alcohol was allowed on premises from 11:00 until 23:00.

26 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

But you're assuming who the culprits aren't.

Reading comprehension issues?

6 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

Enjoyed many of my younger days and nights in Soho. I am puzzled by the residents attitude. If they don't like living in an entertainment area best to move elsewhere.

I presume in those days the opening hours were still limited?

But basically agree, living in an area like that means one has to accept the consequences.

11 hours ago, Gottfrid said:

By informing of what has happened, and only asking information about one single transaction. Relatives can do that.

No, they can't.

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Rather than constantly discussing/attacking other members, why do you not try to come up a comment of you own?

You quoted the wrong person there. 

19 minutes ago, Andre0720 said:

Again, what is it in the word 'seem' that you do not understand?

 

It does not mean that it proves anything. But many Thais believe so, as supported by many facts in property ownership. Might not be true. Same as the fact that they believe in Buddha. Might not be true.

What don't you understand about the title of the thread?

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I may have got it wrong, but I don't remember you advising caution when it's some nothing accusation against Trump.

I was wrong in this case, seems to be not even enough for a weaponised DoJ to take it to court.

5 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

So, nothing worth reporting gets written.  I find it mildly amusing.

 

 

Disagree. This is the first time one of the so-called farang experts is basically saying ' relax, just wait, nothing has been decided yet '.

12 hours ago, blaze master said:

 

Seems more and more likely it was a lab leak. And to think you called me tin foil hat guy for saying it a week ago. 

You may think that, but i never did.

I have always believed a lab leak plausible.

3 hours ago, novacova said:

 

…or lost control of the jet ski, fell off, got dragged by the current and didn’t have the strength to reach the jet ski. 

Not according to the initial account.

26 minutes ago, AustinRacing said:

Where are the stats regarding high power bikes causing more accidents than small bikes. My gutfeel says the other way around makes more sense. The novice or someone with no riding background is more likely to rent a small bike for fun and new experiences. 

No idea about stats, but those Nmax's, Tmax's and others are a major pain in the butt.