WDSmart

I doubt if people in most countries even have birth certificates. 🤔

How does anyone think all those White people got control of that land in the first place? 🥺

Well, I'm sure glad nothing like that is happening now that Trump is president! 😃

I hope so. That will help reduce the overpopulation of humans on the Earth, which will slow down our destruction of the Earth's biosphere.

I think keeping a snake as a pet would be okay as long as when you allow them to go out in public, like the hallways, they are on a leash - the same as a dog. 😉

I carry my actual ID cards with me. I have a photo of my passport and the relevant pages, and my yellow book, in my phone. I've never been asked for them, I can tell you, however, that a photo doesn't work for you at the bank, at least not at my bank, Krungsri. Whenever I do something other than just a deposit or withdrawal, I have to have my actual passport.

The dog owner (and it doesn't matter if the owner is a foreigner or the dogs are pit bulls) should be charged and tried for this offense. He should at least be made to pay a fine and restitution to the owner of the dog who was attacked. IMO, he should also serve some time in jail, but that's up to the judge or the Thai justice system.

My main criterion for classifying someone as a "MAGA folk" is that they support Trump. All those other criteria listed in the forum topic are suggestions that they might be MAGA, but not necessarily a certainty that they support Trump.

Well, that's why I posted what I did. We do see on these forums mainly ladyboys (transwomen) fighting, but this forum shows regular women fighting. I think we mainly see ladyboys because that's considered to be more of an interesting topic on these forums. Ladyboys may indeed be stronger than regular women, but from what I've seen on these forums, they are mainly fighting with each other, not ladyboys ganging up on regular women. Anyway, my original point was that regular Thai women and Farang men both get into fights near bars, just as ladyboys do.

That all depends on what you mean by "best way." Is it the fastest, cheapest, most reliable, or the ones accepted by Thai Immigration? I use an international wire transfer to transfer money from the USA (Bank of America) to my bank in Thailand (Krungsri). It's more expensive than most ($40) but very fast (next day), and Thai Immigration considers it an acceptable deposit.

What on Earth are you talking about? What I'm talking about is usually when we see forums like this, the "women" fighting in Pattaya are transwomen (katoys), and people always make a big thing about them being trans. This time, they are not trans, so, for me, that shows there's not a lot of difference in the actions of transwomen vs. women.

And these are "real" women, not transwomen, so there goes another reason to hate transwomen down the drain.

I certainly recommend DEI in all of society, but not just for "beauty ideals." The very classification of beauty as an ideal is against DEI.

I suspect all these charges are somewhat exaggerated, but even if they aren't, and even if the truth is worse than portrayed here, and I knew it at the time, I would have still voted for Biden (or anyone else) over Trump.

This is not a "fad" just among the children of celebrities. We only see and hear about transgender children of celebrities more than the transgender children of "regular" people, and, of course, because of our access to social media. Transgender is not even anything new. It's happened forever, but until recently, it was hidden by either the transgender person themselves or their parents. Nothing new here...

Although I am not an opponent of PRIDE month, I do agree that no one or no facility should be required to fly any type of flag at any time.

Thanks for your response. I believe and agree with everything you said above, except for two things: "What you might see in the movies is rarely factual." I believe that many movies with scenes of trials are based on facts, even though they may be dramatized somewhat. "A court generally determines the level of guilt and the severity of punishment, not that the person was or was not a criminal." If the person is found guilty of a crime, then they are, by definition, a "criminal." If they are found not guilty in this one case, they still could be a criminal, but not from the judgment of this one case. They may be a criminal because they have been found guilty in a prior case, or have admitted their guilt without going to trial. You also bring up an interesting point when you write, "I also decided, on my own volition, that a violation of crime was unintentional and closed the investigation, not seeking punishment for the individual as there was no harm done." That, for me, raises the question of whether or not a person is a criminal if they UNINTENTIONALLY committed a crime and/or there was, at least in your judgement, NO HARM DONE. These are aspects of a crime that, IMO, should be decided by a prosecutor, judge, or jury, not by an investigator.

I agree with most everything you've said above, but I'd expect all this to be done following due process. In other words, I don't think an ICE agent should be able to stop anyone on the street, demand proof of their citizenship or visa status, and if they couldn't produce that on the spot, detain them and deport them without further due process. And, yes, my "...how do YOU KNOW,,,?" was a generic reference. I could have written, "...how does ONE KNOW,,,?" I have never worked in law enforcement, investigated violations of the law, or gathered evidence to be used in a court of law. I have only learned about these from reading about them or seeing them portrayed in movies.

The Catholic world might need a pope, but I certainly don't...

Don't you mean "Donald," not "Joe"? 🤔

Don't you mean "Donald," not "Joe"? 🤔

Yes! I agree with all that above, (except the first sentence/question). You seem to be confusing "protesting" with "freedom of speech." They are not the same thing, although most protests do involve freedom of speech. But nowhere can freedom of speech be used as an excuse to violate rules or laws, or commit or encourage violence. I've put more "double-speak" remarks beneath each of your points above.

They ALWAYS have the right to free speech under the 1st Amendment. "Occupying campus buildings," or "disruptions to our academic activities," or lighting buildings on fire or injuring people is not "free speech." These protestors are not, or should not/cannot be punished for their free speech. They are being punished for violating rules or laws, but not for their free speech. Another example that you might agree with is that the insurrectionists on January 6 were not arrested (and now pardoned ) for exercising their free speech. They were arrested for breaking into the Capitol using force.

Yes, we disagree. Free speech can occur at all times and in all public places. No, you can't disrupt a place of business or any other private gathering, but you can speak your mind and support whomever you want, even Zionists. Yes, Columbia is a private university. I'd put them in the category of a "business." I don't need to look up any laws. All I need to do is read the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution. There are some exceptions to speech considered "free speech," but none that apply here in this instance.

First, I think the university should take action against any students. Second, if public laws were broken, people should be accused and given a trial if they contest the charges. Those who are determined to be guilty should face the consequences, which, I assume, would not be severe since what they appear to have done are only misdemeanors, not felonies. These people did protest without violence, at least none that I read in the article. All citizens and foreigners have the right to free speech, so they should be allowed to participate in protests, as long as they are peaceful. Who cares what other countries do? This is about the USA, not Zimbabwe.