Insight

Thanks, 7by7 - appreciate the thorough response.

Looks like obtaining a visa would be the safest approach. When we get through immigration I'll check with the staff there what the rules are.

Apologies if this has been asked before. I did have a brief scan of the pinned topics but couldn't see it mentioned.

The Mrs has just successfully had a UK spouse visa renewed, and is now the owner of one of these Biometric Residence Permit doofers.

We'd like to take a week out in Spain. Point #6 on this website - http://www.exteriores.gob.es/Consulados/LONDRES/en/Consulado/Pages/CheckPassport.aspx - seems to indicate that because she has a BRP she does not need your typical Schengen visa to visit Spain. Can anybody here confirm whether this is the case?

We'd much rather obtain a visa is there's any possibility we could be turned away.

Big thanks in advance to anybody who can shed some light on this.

Getting B1 under the belt is one worry removed when applying for ILR!

Thanks for the post. As just posted, this is also the reasoning we have come to also.

The problem is that your wife has TOEIC and that may be classed under para 32B - basically this means that because TOEIC was struck off because of fraud then they may not be accepted. Yours is the first case I have personally come across with this specific query. That surprises me because for at least 6 months people have been applying for FLR under the new rules and no one has raised the issue. I therefore suspect, although I am by no means sure, that TOEIC is still being accepted. Good luck.

Hi,

My wife is currently in the process of requesting and extension of her UK Spouse Visa. Her original Spouse visa was obtain around Dec 2012 (just after the new rules specifying financial requirement were put in place). Two questions have come up so far -

a) When she obtained her original Spouse Visa she was required to obtain a TOEIC certificate. As far as I understand, this certificate will now no longer be accepted to expend her visa. Is this correct? If so, I guess she'll need to complete an English language exam while here in the UK? I understand the Trinity GESE Grade 5 exam is the best option as this could also be used for when applying for ILR?

The form asks if she has a Biometric Residence Permit in section 9.1. She hasn't been issued one previously. If we state that she presently doesn't have one will she then be invited to obtain one via the local Post Office after the application form has been submitted, or should be take steps to obtaining one before submitting the form? If we should take are own steps to obtain one, what are they? I couldn't find the process on the gov.uk website.

Any confirmation that could be provided on the above two areas would be hugely appreciated. Let me know if any more info is required. Thanks in advance.

Is Michael Yon really 'viewed as a joke" by the international community ?

Or - far more likely - the various pro-red lobbyist groups are desperate to smear him using a variety platforms (including ThaiVisa), as they do with anybody who publicly makes allegations about the red movement.

These are not bribes. They were promised hire for casual work and then the offer was cancelled after they had already incurred out of pocket expenses and opportunity costs by travelling to Khon Kaen.

Oh I see.

Some things never change.

Much more revealing video available here:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152064086634456

@Insight

"So everybody on this forum who challenges "red rule" (read: can see through their heavily PR-enforced BS) is a "fascist" ?"

"With so many of these "contemporary" Neo-Nazi's about on here, it's a wonder why this forum wasn't shut down years ago."

You made these statements, not I.

You, not I, said, so everybody on this forum who challenges red rule.

You, not I, said, "With so many of these "contemporary" Neo-Nazi's about on here, it's a wonder why this forum wasn't shut down years ago."

You got "this forum" in there twice, so, yes, you are right in this respect - everyone here is at this forum. And a fine forum it is.

Backpedalling on semantics. Pretty pathetic.

The pro-Suthep farang are in fact and reality contemporary fascists who want to retain as much of the quaint and charming feudal order of the post-war period as possible. They don't want girls from Issan out of their bar slave roles in Bangkok nor do they want any more of the modern world in Thailand than they are compelled by reality to accept. Developments of the past 14-15 years are directly relevant to these fahlang, personally, vitally, in their entirety. Their virulent lashing out against the changes modernization has imposed on the society testifies to the vested interests of these farang in their own private yet passé quaint and charming feudal Thailand. If they weren't so personally invested in multiple ways, they wouldn't be making such unrelenting and unrestrained personal attacks against those who threaten their own private Thailand.

The talk in recent years of republicanism is just that, a lot of empty talk. Keep In mind however that such talk mortifies these fahlang. The only two native English language countries that are republics are Ireland and the United States, neither of which are strongly represented among farang. Even the empty talk of republicanism here doesn't calm the hyper horrors of so many fahlang.

(Also overlooking every ridiculous claim of the desires of other posters beyond the first sentence...)

So everybody on this forum who challenges "red rule" (read: can see through their heavily PR-enforced BS) is a "fascist" ?

Well there's clearly a wide range of them on here, from what appear to be a wide range of cultural and political backgrounds.

With so many of these "contemporary" Neo-Nazi's about on here, it's a wonder why this forum wasn't shut down years ago.

Sent from my armchair

Your post is in the category of things my post never said.

The pro-Suthep farang are in fact and reality contemporary fascists

...

Where did this headline come from?

Yeah, it's pretty far from a shining moment of journalism. Part of the course for The Nation.

Regardless, it is a statement that could be attributed to the persona he's keen to portray. And his uncompromising, Thai Big Man approach is probably exactly the type of response the anti-govt movement were hoping to see...

And this is the type of guy who will be leading Phua Thai-led "reform" ....

Finally the people of Thailand are taking a real stance against this sort of nonsense.

I don't have all the details, but whenever you have two protests going on for opposite sides and you do not keep them apart...

When *who* does not keep them apart?

(Edit - you do realise that the Education Minister and the Interior Minister - responsible for the police - were on stage supporting the red movement not far from where this shooting of a student, allegedly by the Thaksin-aligned guys highlighted above, occurred?)

It has changed. It went from a protest rally to the beginning of holding a country hostage by occupying government buildings etc. until the duly elected government is forced out and replaced by a dictatorship. Whether it is an airport, or all government services - holding a country hostage is wrong.

The same tired, broken "we won an election" rhetoric.

Either the red shirts, or a policeman protecting the red shirts, shot a student dead tonight. When was the last in Thailand students were killed by hired hands of the government? Who will be to blame for putting Thailand on this same path *yet again* ?

It's borderline retarded. Spend millions bussing in "red shirts" as a demonstration of support for the current despots ru(i)nning the show, then allow it all to be massively overshadowed by shooting and killing students from a nearby university who dare oppose your presence.

The red/Thaksin cheerleaders on this forum - you clearly have your work cut out.

Partisans are going to play this for proganda, though whether you can really call it propaganda when it's so driven by hatred and blindness that people actually believe it (propaganda is usually more cynical)... I don't see how your post gets away from that. I think it's part of it. Just don't see how you can be so black and white about this and point the finger at reds alone. Can't you see that this is a nasty and childish game that neither side is going to win?

blah blah blah

If you want to see examples of "nasty and childish" games, view the video footage from the events of tonight. Up until now the anti-govt rallies have by and large been peaceful. Reds head into town and conduct themselves in a way we're all too familiar with right now.

So carry on with your (rather average) attempts at character assassination. You clearly don't have much else.

It's borderline retarded. Spend millions bussing in "red shirts" as a demonstration of support for the current despots ru(i)nning the show, then allow it all to be massively overshadowed by shooting and killing students from a nearby university who dare oppose your presence.

The red/Thaksin cheerleaders on this forum - you clearly have your work cut out.

Videos now circulating social media with a woman yelling to people to tell them to change from black shirts to red shirts. Shooting is then heard shortly afterwards.

The link I have right now is to a Facebook video - not sure that's allowed on here.

Obviously this now puts the real identity of those committing acts of violence today into question.

I watched the video and there is no mention of anyone told to change shirts.

Really? Watch again:

facebook.com/photo.php?v=574319095974402

Just seen a video on youtube of a bunch of reds being escorted by police in riot gear. The reds were clearly waving huge sticks and metal bars.... So there it is, the police are actually assisting the violence against the students.

its BS if you dont post the link...please post the link or are you just a johnny know nothing wind up merchant

facebook.com/photo.php?v=10151768119931439

Regards,

Johnny

Videos now circulating social media with a woman yelling to people to tell them to change from black shirts to red shirts. Shooting is then heard shortly afterwards.

The link I have right now is to a Facebook video - not sure that's allowed on here.

Obviously this now puts the real identity of those committing acts of violence today into question.

Erm.. I posted that half an hour ago with the link.

You need to brush up on your Thai language skills. The woman is clearly shouting change your red shirts for black shirts. She is part of the reds if you had any sense of perception of what is plain to see.

Right. Just wanted to get the word out there. I agree with your conclusion - she is clearly a red.

Here's a link to the video mentioned in my last past on Facebook:

facebook.com/photo.php?v=574319095974402

Videos now circulating social media with a woman yelling to people to tell them to change from black shirts to red shirts. Shooting is then heard shortly afterwards.

The link I have right now is to a Facebook video - not sure that's allowed on here.

Obviously this now puts the real identity of those committing acts of violence today into question.

People power in action, the government should call on their red thugs to act in a peacefull and civil manner as Suthep has done. The PTP's silence demonstrates their compliance with these violent and anti social actions.

Wait, weren't you one of the people blaming Nick for daring to try to do his job and photograph anti-govt protests? How come you're not blaming these anti-govt protesters for going into a well known red sympathetic area? Surely they should've known better and actually deserved a proper kicking, not just some itchy seeds?

So there are public areas "off limits" to protesters?

Some "democracy".

I think Suthep could now be overstepping the mark by invading buildings.

There. I said it. Can I be viewed as neutral now please?

Well... anyway, I think it's fair to say Jim Taylor must've lost it at some point because his 90s pieces on Thailand are pretty good. Incidentally, if you think Nick is partisan, it's worth bearing in mind he's had very public arguments with Jim Taylor, and Andrew Spooner, both of whom are clearly partisan - and in the latter case may actually be employed by Robert Amsterdam. Yet neither of them consider Nick 'red' enough. I think Jim disagreed with Nick because Nick insisted the 'men in black' existed and that he'd encountered them several times. Jim, of course, thought all that was all an 'amaat propaganda trick'. Some people are too far gone to see sense, I guess.

So because people engage in debate (or full blown arguments) with people who could be described as politically aligned, they therefore must be non-partisan? And we should forget about the 100's of posts made by NN, on NM, here and elsewhere suggesting otherwise...?

You know as well as I do that Andrew Spoooooner could well be described as "paranoid" (to put it very mildly), and is prepared to fire off any accusation - maybe it's just for the attention. Only yesterday he was accusing BP of having a hidden agenda with the Dems. For real.

Has anybody got any video footage of the incident?