OhdLover

Well... finally stopvt7 got wise and decided to stop posting here, as he states on his blog.

The real reason will be he knows his chances of winning the case are gone, the reason he gives is that he is being censored on this site.

I think that the moderators here have been very patient with both sides of the VT7-posters,

and like to believe stopvt7 is running with his tail between his legs.

Tell me then what I am mixing up .

Be specific please, not generics and generalities

Why do you not like the posts copied 63547 times, are they to close to the truth for you?

Ask yourself why there are 100 pages, isn't it obvious.

The people who will decide are still studying because the Bangkok Supreme Court allowed the corrective appeal, and are giving due process , isnt it obvious.

Give me some examples of opinions and facts I mix up, don't just say it,over to you then.

If you have problems with this thread then I'm sure you also have problems with issue 9.

I have just walked down jomtien beach road toward the police box.

VT 7 completely closes off the previously open vista.

It presents you bang in the face with a closed end.

It looks awfull, the great wall of Jomtien.

<snip.

Do you seriously want me to repeat everything that has been written by for example ThaiBob or jpm76?

If I am talking to somebody, I can understand they ask me to repeat something, because they couldn't hear it or missed something.

If it's written down, it's quite funny to ask "sorry... what did you write?".

I refuse to contribute to this topic by the copy-pasting that I attacked before.

So if you want to know about the mixing up: re-read. It's not too difficult.

I think the real facts fit 1 A4-sheet

No I left it at 180 deg.

You cannot get the true perspective from the sea end as the land falls away to quickly.

But I seen enough from 180 deg landside.Its totally destroyed the beach to buildings symmetry down there.The buildings are just to close together.You think the Thais are going to let this eyesore happen all down the coast?

You have to remember the Bangkok supreme administrative court has already ruled two out of two for stopvt7, and the king has reminded the judges to be strong and honest for Thailands reputation and people.

Do you think they are going to let a few investors tarnish that, especially when the regulation is so clear?

You are mixing up a lot of things. I suggest you re-read the thread from the start (or at least the parts that weren't copy-pasted 63547 times). One thing to ask before you start reading: If the regulation is so clear, do you think there would be an almost 100 pages long thread over here about the subject, why are the people who have to decide still studying the case?

The other part is that you, as stopvt7 continuously does, mix up opinions with facts. You don't like VT7. That's ok. Projecting your opinion on all Thai is not ok, unless of course you interviewed them all and they all agreed with you. So please, keep your opinion, but keep it as an opinion, keep it away from the facts. It makes life, at least for this thread, easier.

I have just had a walk around vt7 , in the rain.

Fom whichever angle you choose to view vt7 ,in the location it occupies it really is the most hiddeous creation you could imagine, and just looks horrendously out of place from all 180 deg angles of view.

Regardless of its illegality, it just does not look nice there.

You really have to see this live in situ to appreciate this,photographs just do not show the real horror show.

It really destroys the beach to land symetry down there.

I am sure the Thai authorities (not Pattaya authorities ) and people do not want this situation to explode down their coastline.

Also , I have just read in the Bangkok Post, that the King has yesterday reminded the administrative court judges of their duties to the country and to be brave and honest in their decisions.

He said the country and the people were depending on them greatly to maintain Thailands reputation, especially as this year Thailand was head of Asean.

Everything is against vt7, in my view its going back to 14m.

Of course you are entitled to have your opinion. My opinion is that VT7 look very nice, from all angles. Not the same old stuff as before, I didn't see the Y-shape somewhere else in Jomtien. I always found the 2 towers behind VT7 horrendous, so I am glad that we won't see those monsters anymore when we are at the beach. Perhaps you should wait until everything is finished, sometimes it's difficult to get the idea when things are under construction. Or visit the VT-office, you can admire the small version over there.

It's a good thing people have their different tastes about beauty.

It's even better that this case hasn't got anything to do with beautiful or ugly meters, only with how many of them should be measured.

P.S. walking around a building usually means 360 degrees. Which beautiful side did you skip?

Then the court orders the building to be torn down to 14 meters. don't weary the money setting at the building sight to do it.

Now we just wait for the Supreme Administrative Court order. .

It's all so easy, isn't it? No doubt about it. That's why this case is already lasting for almost 2 years.

The law is so clear, you need to be out of your mind not to be able to understand the facts.

What exactly is the judge waiting for??? There's no left, no right, just 1 straight answer.

Why does only stopvt7 understand these facts ??? Why do they keep us waiting???

And why is VT7 growing higher every day? Maybe because... no... how can I even think of that.... silly me.

Dear ThaiBob OldLover

Your comment (pouring cement unevenly) or form the news article "however when cement was placed on the second floor of the construction, it was not evenly spread and the weight is thought to have collapsed the structure". Is a bunch a BS!

I sent my summer and vacation from the age of 16 working in construction and at a concrete plants. They are pouring this concrete so wet that the "slump" is so high it flows like water. It can not pile up enough to cause a collapse. So don't try to BS use about the collapse.

Also, today after work stared, at 8:55 AM a large tuck came to VT7 building sight carrying about 30 plus workers. I bet it came from their other construction sight which was close for 30 days?

ThaiBob OldLover you need to get back on subject!

Wow.. did Thaibob start the news about this collapse????? NO!!! YOU, Mr. StopVT7 must have too much cement in your brain.

As far as I can read, ThaiBob just corrected some speculation from another forummember, who changed the news and wrote that VT3 collapsed.

This is another example of your disability to read, interpret, and distinguish facts from whatever your brain/cement is coming up with.

<snip>

Dear OhdLover / ThaiBob

Your statement "The V in VT stands for viagra." Viagra wears off and then the erection falls.

In this case the Admin Supreme Court will knock VT erection to 14 meters!

I wish I was as eloquent as ThaiBob... but I am not. So thanksfor mixing him up with me.

Construction continues (pic taken 2 days ago); I am told they are on about the 20th floor.

Quite an erection.

But many erections do not last.

The V in VT stands for viagra.

I know it's been asked before but does anyone know when we will know the final verdict on this case??

Please.... take a break!! Never ask for real facts, you won't find them in this topic!!

P.S. I asked fr it a couple of times as well.... maybe there is no case??

So now I am the one who accuses people of corruption?? Man.... your mind is really twisted!!!!

Dear spacebass

Your statement "The question is does he know enough of the judges not farang claptrap".

Read this interesting article on Thailand king who palace worked very hard to set up a honest Admin Supreme Court. All the court orders I read about in the newspapers and talk about with Bangkok legal experts tell us the Admin Supreme Court is intelligent and acts honestly and correctly in their decision. We do not need to know or influence the Judges.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080821/en_af...lthpeopleroyals

Thai king world's wealthiest royal: Forbes

Thu Aug 21, 3:47 PM ET

NEW YORK (AFP) - With a fortune estimated at 35 billion dollars, Thailand's King Bhumibol Adulyadej is the world's richest royal sovereign, and oil-rich Sheikh Khalifa Bin Zayed Al Nahyan of Abu Dhabi is far back at No. 2, Forbes magazine reported Thursday.

King Bhumibol, 80 and, at 62 years on the throne the world's longest-serving head of state, pushed to the top of the richest royals list by virtue a greater transparency surrounding his fortune, Forbes said.

It said that the Crown Property Bureau, which manages most of his family's wealth, "granted unprecedented access this year, revealing vast landholdings, including 3,493 acres in Bangkok."

Forbes called it a good year for monarchies, investment-wise. "As a group, the world's 15 richest royals have increased their total wealth to 131 billion dollars, up from 95 billion last year," Forbes said on its website.

We are looking forward to a fare decision of our appeal which point out the flaws of the so-call expert witness report.

Thailand is a country of laws and honorable ASC Judges.

So can you give the names of the corrupt people you are suggesting to exist in this case?

Between the lines you accuse of corruption many times, but never in the open.

Enlighten us with your knowledge/opinion.

But I was the born yesterday!

That explains it all. Thanks.

Attached is an image of Obama body surfing, he looks like he's done this before. To be where he is in this image he would have to be a man that appreciates the oceans natural beauty and therapy… leaves any $$ spa treatment for dead by any who knows the experience of sliding down the face of a clean ocean…

Obama is loving the sea and in all its natural glory that is given to it by respectable coastal development. VT7 and everything it represents does not respect such an image in any manner at all, it's all about greed and me me me ….

Now again in Phuket…. The building setbacks from the high tide (or MSL) were only ever one way (200m, 20m for different structures) as per Stop vt7's idea of the Jomtien "setback" law. And it all makes sense to keep it that simple and give the water front some breathing space… a public and natural space!!!!

Unfortunately this is not a political issue. It's a legal issue.

Even when stopvt7 wants to fight the facts ThaiBob brings, he just confirms them.

Why isn't anybody capable of READING???

ThaiBob, I admire your continious replies to this obvious very confused or desperate man.

I would have given up longtime already.

To me it's clear that you and some others like jpm are presenting the right facts, and stopvt7 is trying to safe his face

by continuously mixing up facts with thoughts.

And if it's clear to me, it will be even clearer to a judge, who studied to separate facts from thoughts.

We will miss stopvt7 though, once he is forced to leave Thailand.

I cannot believe Thai authorities accept farangs, who accuse them of corruption and many other things, to stay as a guest in their country for another minute, once the final judgement is there.

Good thing for him he will still have that little guy that makes him laugh......

Well well.... the repeating continues....

I will just state that everything ThaiBob states is so clear and evident, that it's almost hilarious how stopvt7 and others try to change blue into yellow. Facts are facts, no matter what side you approach them. You can post the same map 6 million times, flip, rotate, enlarge it, but unless you blurr it, it doesn't change the map.

I guess stopvt7 is in a state of mind that is not accessible to logic.

Call to the moderators: What has an article about Taksin to do with the subject of this thread??

What will happen to this thread if we start posting articles that show "Thailand is not (always) a country of laws?

I would like to suggest that the repeating copy/paste of things that have been mentioned at least 20 times before, and posting irrelevant things be punished with a ban or at least removal of these postings, just to keep this thread interesting.

Funny thing is, stopvt7 says he never accuses anybody of corruption, and again he posts something to "prove" corruption will be punished. So stopvt7, give me something new to think about: who exactly has been corrupt in the VT7-case????

So, stopvt7, when can we expect the final decision? Is there any planning beyond the numerous copy/paste-art in this thread?

It seems to me that there is no progress at all (except of course by the VT7-workers) and you fill your time with re-re-repeating

all your re-re-repeats.

Are you able to bring some news or will it be the old song for the next few months?

There must be some kind of schedule, right?

Dear OhdLover

Your statement "Can you please explain once more????"

I would but you not able to understand such legal matters!

I like this little guy. Doe he make you laugh?

Yes .. mee not now howe too reed engklisj. Pleese teech mee.

Your posting: "Your argument that MSL = CCL is simply not supported by the Issue 9 map. Please look at the map again. It shows both the MSL and the Borderline of Restricted Construction. We all know the problems in translating Thai to English and especially technical Thai. I think most people can see the similarities and easily make the transition from Construction Control Line (CCL) to Borderline of Restricted Construction. However, to argue that CCL = MSL requires a leap of faith and is simply not true."

Please read the regulation and I explain why MSL = CCL :

"Ministerial Regulation Issue 9 (B.E. 2521)

2. No. 3 of the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) issued under the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 is to be amended by the following statement:

"No 3. To specify the area within the 200 meters measurement from the construction control line see the map. Annexed to the Royal Decree Promulgating the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 in the regions of Tambol Bang Lamung, Tambol Nhong Plalai, Tambol Na Khua and Tambol Nhong Prue of Amphur Bang Lamung of Chonburi Province B.E. 2521 at the seaside in which the following constructions shall not be built:

Building of 14 meters higher than road level."

Now compare with Issue 8

"Ministerial Regulation Issue 8 (B.E. 2519)

2. The land areas under this Ministerial Regulation are restricted from construction of the following buildings:

3. To specify the area within the 100 meters measurement from the construction control line see the map. Annexed to the Royal Decree Promulgating the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 in the regions of Tambol Bang Lamung, Tambol Na Khua and Tambol Nhong Prue of Amphur Bang Lamung of Chonburi Province B.E. 2479 at the seaside in which the following constructions shall not be built:

Building of 14 meters higher than road level"

What does this regulation say on the matter of the construction control line? It defines from where we make measurements! Issue 8 have you measure 100 meter. Issue 9 was amended to change 100 meters to 200 metersmeasurement.

Where is the construction control line? It is at the seaside on the map !

Do you fine the words construction control line on the map? NO! But you fine the words seaside on the map. With the words seaside on the map is written Mean Sea Level (MSL) on the map,

So the seaside ( or sea shore ) is located at the Mean Sea Level (MSL) on the map, So using good logic I'm able to determine the construction control line is at MSL. Or MSL = CCL

The "Construction Control Line" CCL is represented by the yellow line on both maps where from you measure onto the land.

Can you remember where I concluded you measure onto the land? The Minutes from "Meeting on the Drafting of Ministerial Regulation No. 8. See below:

"Meeting on the Drafting of Ministerial Regulation No. 8" Which is part of Issue 9

"There have been several amendments made during the Meeting on proposals to the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 B.E. 2518 issued under the virtue of Building Control Act B.E. 2479..

This was later amended to read "The area of 100 meters measured from the construction control line according to the map annexed, from the sea towards the shore shall not be permitted to construct the following types of buildings"

(8) Building of 14 meters above the road surface.

Further amendment was to delete the wording "towards the shore" since the wording was clearly understood, then the following wording was used instead "to fix the 100 meters measured from the construction control line according to the annexed map at the sea shore that building of the following types are not permitted for construction"

The amendments were consented by the meeting because the meeting wanted to protect the beach by controlling the construction which may impact the natural look of sea beach area."

Now read reread the differance between Issue 8 and 9

[/color]Issue 8 "To specify the area within the 100 meters measurement from the construction control line see the map at the sea shore that building of the following types are not permitted for construction"

Issue 9 "To specify the area within the 200 meters measurement from the construction control line see the map at the sea shore that building of the following types are not permitted for construction"

Issue 9 has a reason attached: "Note: "The reason issuing this Ministerial Regulation due to the updating of the construction control areas .....................................by extending the construction restriction areas as appeared in the map annexed to the Royal Decree"

Do you understand the word "extend"?

extend >verb 1. make larger in area. 2. cause to last longer. 3. occupy a specified area or continue for a specified distance.

The Issue 9 map specify construction restriction areas "borderline" is 100 meter into the sea from MSL at the CCL construction control line.

By extending the measurement at MSL or the CCL from 100 meters to 200 meters onto the land!

Please read this quotation from the Supreme Administrative Court decisions which says: "Nevertheless, where No. 3 (8) under the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) issued by the virtue of the Building Control Act B.E. 2479 amended by the Ministerial Regulation No. 9 (B.E. 2521) issued by the virtue of the Building Control Act B.E. 2479 prescribed that the 200 meter line measured from the construction control line shown in the map annexed to the Royal Decree. .......................... promulgating the Building Control Act B.E. 2479 governing ........................................on the seaside shall be restricted from constructing of any building exceeding 14 meter high from road surface. Therefore, if the Construction Permit No. 162/2007 dated 28 November 2006 granted by the Defendant No. 1 to the Defendant No. 2 should appear to be unlawful against the Ministerial Regulation thereto as being claimed by the ten plaintiffs, the Court of First Instance should have sentenced this point of being unlawful, i.e. the judgment shall be focused on the permission of construction the building exceeding height limit by the Defendant No. 2. Whilst the Administrative Court of First Instance ordered the provisional measure to cease construction before judgment, the building's base rocks were built, the construction did not reach the height limit of 14 meter above the road surface. Where the Administrative Court of First Instance issued the order of provisional measure to effect temporary protection by ceasing the entire construction is, therefore, in excess of what reasonable under the circumstances.

The Supreme Court, therefore, gives an order to amend the order of the Administrative Court of First Instance. That the Defendant No. 2 shall cease the construction performed, under the Work Permit No. 162/2007 dated 28 November 2007, on the part exceeding 14 meter height. On a temporary basis until the Court has ordered otherwise.

Mr. Vorapoj Visarutpich

Judge of Supreme Administrative Court"

q

Can you please explain once more????

So, stopvt7, when can we expect the final decision? Is there any planning beyond the numerous copy/paste-art in this thread?

It seems to me that there is no progress at all (except of course by the VT7-workers) and you fill your time with re-re-repeating

all your re-re-repeats.

Are you able to bring some news or will it be the old song for the next few months?

There must be some kind of schedule, right?

There will be re-re-re-repeating until anti-stopVT7 stop posting. Why do you bother? The case is with the Courts and they will make decision.

Does he pay you to be his private secretary or did you mix up your nick's again?

I am not asking you, I am asking stopvt7, but I can understand why he doesnt answer.

It's probably out of his comprehension box.

So, stopvt7, when can we expect the final decision? Is there any planning beyond the numerous copy/paste-art in this thread?

It seems to me that there is no progress at all (except of course by the VT7-workers) and you fill your time with re-re-repeating

all your re-re-repeats.

Are you able to bring some news or will it be the old song for the next few months?

There must be some kind of schedule, right?

So, stopvt7, when can we expect the final decision? Is there any planning beyond the numerous copy/paste-art in this thread?

It seems to me that there is no progress at all (except of course by the VT7-workers) and you fill your time with re-re-repeating

all your re-re-repeats.

Are you able to bring some news or will it be the old song for the next few months?

There must be some kind of schedule, right?

Has any one else heard the roomer going around Bangkok. I was first called about it on Wednesday.

The roomer is reported as been from the Ministry of Interior office? The Ministry on the Interior been reported to be very angry about the VT7 building construction! Because he believes Pattaya City Hall will lose the appeal in the Admin Supreme Court. He upset that VT7 has not waited until the SAC court decision before restarting construction of the VT7 building. He wants VT7 to stop their work.

He knows the upcoming court decision will be very large news for Thailand. He understands that there could be accusation of the corruption his office could face? This decision news will not be as big if their not large illegal building!

I can verify some facts! The Ministry on the Interior was personal givenq a copy of our February appeal to the Admin Supreme Court. He did send a person from his office to Pattaya.

So could their be some truth to this roomer? Because he must read the newspaper and understand what be happening in the courts..

Massager = messenger??

Ok... here's some facts about your rumor: It's a rumor, not a fact, that's a fact.

Your 'rumor' is full of if's and then's and things you presume.

And then... you can verify some facts. Well, verify them. You say he was PERSONALLY giving a copy and next line you say he was SENDING SOMEBODY. And... how can this be a verification?? Give us a copy of a newspaper that states it, or a photo of him handing over the document. Verifying is not repeating what people told you, it's got to do something with PROVE IT TO US.

If you want me to fight your facts, give me facts, don't give me BS.

I like stopvt7, he makes me laugh.

Has any one else heard the roomer going around Bangkok. I was first called about it on Wednesday.

The roomer is reported as been from the Ministry of Interior office? The Ministry on the Interior been reported to be very angry about the VT7 building construction! Because he believes Pattaya City Hall will lose the appeal in the Admin Supreme Court. He upset that VT7 has not waited until the SAC court decision before restarting construction of the VT7 building. He wants VT7 to stop their work.

He knows the upcoming court decision will be very large news for Thailand. He understands that there could be accusation of the corruption his office could face? This decision news will not be as big if their not large illegal building!

I can verify some facts! The Ministry on the Interior was personal givenq a copy of our February appeal to the Admin Supreme Court. He did send a person from his office to Pattaya.

So could their be some truth to this roomer? Because he must read the newspaper and understand what be happening in the courts..

Sorry, I spoke to the roomer, but she said she left the room already, so she is an ex-roomer.

OMG.... how dare you pretend to understand english.....

Let's start a new game: how manny gramar/zpelling miztakez are their inn stopVT7 poztz????

I counted 12... (but I am dutch, so I am bad at english )

1. Place for keeping and selling fuel

2. Theatre

3. Wooden shop

4. Concrete shop house

5. Market

6. Garage or paint shop for car, motorcycle or motor boat

7. Warehouse

8. Building of 14 meters higher than road level.

1. Oil, Gasoline storage and distribution area

2. Entertainment Halls

3. Shop houses

4. Shop buildings

5. Fresh food market

6. Cars or motorcycles garage of fixing or air compressing spray

7. Products storage

8. Tall building with the height over 14 meters

Which one is right?