jayboy

Actually as PM she has the right to travel as much as she wants if its for the benefit of the country no ?

Please quantify the benefits that will accrue to Thailand.

To redress the balance after the incompetence of the last administration's foreign policy, particularly the ludicrous antics of little Kasit.

Perhaps you would like to list the competencies and successes of the current administration for us.

Apart from trying to get into the Guiness book of records for most cabinet reshuffles, most white lies, most traveled "official" PM, and not to forget longest time taken to answer an Ombudsman's question relating to an illegal action carried out.

You seem to have difficulty in containing your bile but your ranting dislike of Yingluck is in fact beside the point.The question under discussion is whether Thailand's foreign policy under the current administration has had the effect of improving the country's reputation and interests.After the incompetence and stupidity of the last government in foreign affairs, the issue is hardly up for debate.In improving the situation the personal contribution of the Prime Minister has been a key ingredient.Nobody is claiming she is a Palmerston or Metternich but her charm and good nature has been rather effective.If someone with rather more discernment than you argued that the achievement was really a negative one ( ie only being better because the Abhisit/Kasit performance was so appalling) I could accept this.

Actually as PM she has the right to travel as much as she wants if its for the benefit of the country no ?

Please quantify the benefits that will accrue to Thailand.

To redress the balance after the incompetence of the last administration's foreign policy, particularly the ludicrous antics of little Kasit.

This is badly worded but it must refer to the change of nationality from "angrit" to "britis", following a Ministry of Foreign

Affairs directive in about 2007. I was obliged to go through this painful rigmarole to apply for Thai citizenship. The problem was that the district offices software was amended to only give out the nationality of "britis" some years ago, while Immigration kept on inscribing "angrit" in PR documents. That meant you were "angrit" on some documents and "britis" on others which was not acceptable to the Interior Ministry in applications for citizenship. Getting the police station to change the nationality in the alien book was the most difficult part of the procedure. Immigration was also very difficult and insisted on doing a 1.5 hour interview to re-verify all personal details. The Labour Ministry was the easiest, making the change on the spot. The whole ridiculous process took me three months to complete and involved several visits to Immigration at Chaengwattana and my local police station and several phone calls to both to chase up. I hope they have the process more streamlined now. Those who have tabien baans issued before the software was amended will need to get them changed too. Good luck.

If a PR holder isn't planning to apply for citizenship I wonder what the penalty is, if any, for not complying or if there is any time limit or if there are any practical reasons why one should make the requested changes.I was amused that Immigration was the most difficult in your experience given that the mistake,if that is how it can be described, is on their part.In a sane world the officials there should have been ruefully apologetic for subjecting you to the inconvenience.It would require a Kafka to explain.

Actually exactly like the Red Bull youth in terms of arrogance, entitlement and double standards.And if you believe a busy schedule isn't a weird excuse, so be it.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I'm not quite sure what principles are being upheld by Abhisit refusing to turn up at the courts - just like the Red Bull youth.It seems a little ironic that Abhisit boasts of his respect for the courts and Thai justice, and then finds a weird excuses to avoid his case being considered.Perhaps I am being premature and he will turn up next month - we shall see.But as several members pointed out months ago everyone in this game knows Abhisit will never serve a day in prison - even though his alleged crime is far worse than the relatively trivial crime with which Thaksin has been charged.He knows it, the educated Thai population knows it and Thaksin knows it.the only group that don't know it are the usual suspects.

I didn't realise that Abhisit was hiding in Singapore after missing 5 other court appearances ... just like the Red Bull youth.

I also didn't realise that the prosecution not being ready was a weird excuse to avoid a case in the courts.

He doesn't need to hide.He knows he is safe as far as the Thai courts are concerned.We have no real idea what his weird excuse is - but he clearly isn't taking the matter seriously.Why should he? He's untouchable notwithstanding the seriousness of his alleged crimes - though I think the case he's skipped is just the footling one relating to alleged evasion of national service.

The prosecution position was mentioned only as a secondary event.Abhisit took the initiative in postponing the proceedings.

Good that you conveniently omit Mr T would also be facing a host of serious charges had he actually returned to Thailand after he used the excuse of attending the Olympics & promising to return.

None of them anywhere near as serious as those faced by Abhisit and Suthep.The human rights offences with which Thaksin might have been charged with (drugs war, repession in the South) have never been followed up on, possibly because his persecutors were enthusiastic proponents of these policies.The honest answer is of course that the charges against both Thaksin and Abhisit are politically motivated.We know for certain from Wikileaks and elsewhere the old guard was out to "get" Thaksin and were desparate to find some hook to hang a case on.I daresay a similar process took place to "get" Abhisit, though not much searching around is needed given his personal role in presiding over a massacre.In a sane world there would be some kind of negotiation.But sanity is not a easily found commodity in Thai politics.

cant wait to see the responses from the red faithful on TV on this

It can be deferred, delayed, postponed, whatever, for a long time but eventually the PM serving at that time will be brought to court to justify his actions / decisions and to account for the unarmed civilians who were murdered and injured by the military during his period of tenure and under his authority.

Absolutely no problem with this statement, leaders and former leaders need to be brought to account for their alleged wrong doings, and if a Thai court decides that that the accused parties have infact committed a crime, they should serve their court imposed sentances...

or of course they could be found guilty and run for the hills and hide away...

It certainly appears that these charges have been laid against the former PM in an attempt to strong arm him into agreeing to an amesty bill, which will absolve a certan other PM from any wrong doing...ie agree to what we want and we will drop the charges

So its good to see the former PM calling their bluff and not doing a runner and standing by his principles, which is not common in Thai politics or any politics for that matter

I'm not quite sure what principles are being upheld by Abhisit refusing to turn up at the courts - just like the Red Bull youth.It seems a little ironic that Abhisit boasts of his respect for the courts and Thai justice, and then finds a weird excuses to avoid his case being considered.Perhaps I am being premature and he will turn up next month - we shall see.But as several members pointed out months ago everyone in this game knows Abhisit will never serve a day in prison - even though his alleged crime is far worse than the relatively trivial crime with which Thaksin has been charged.He knows it, the educated Thai population knows it and Thaksin knows it.the only group that don't know it are the usual suspects.

They sound like a level headed bunch who actually care about the country.

Good luck to them..... they'll need it.

Before you get too carried away, look at the people actually involved.They are in fact the same old quasi fascists and PAD dinosaurs.

Funny how the Thai media has repeatedly made mention of Yingluck's shortcomings with the Thai language ever since she was elected and yet, some farang on here claims she speaks perfect Thai.

Because she does speak perfect Thai like most middle class people who have the language as their mother tongue - though she does have a pronounced accent (I'm surmising like many of Thai Visa's English speakers).

I have this on authority of a Cambridge educated Thai lawyer since I was genuinely puzzled by the references to her poor Thai language skills in the Thai press (which the poster refers to) and more particularly on the social media.Much of this seems to be just political schtick

Her English language skills are a different matter and obviously she is much less proficient than Abhisit with his years overseas at outstanding schools and university.On the other hand she is a great deal better than Chuan or Banharn.Frankly she seems fairly typical of middle class Thais whose sole overseas experience was at a third tier US university.

But it's hard to demonstrate she has significant shortcomings in the Thai language.Not being very articulate is a different matter.

Because she need to go to Wall Street first. That's the Wall Street school of English.

At least she attempted to speak English, unlike some of the great leaders from say China, Japan, Russia, etc, who couldn't utter a word of English at all.

Actually I would bet their English is better than you think. Diplomacy dictates they speak in their mother tongue/language on official engagements.

My wife assures me that her Thai is pretty pi** poor as well!!

That's what my Pathum Thani fiancée says, as well as the Bangkokian wife of a pal. They say she has quite a rough, low-class accent, and they say her English is a joke. I've never heard her speak in any language, so I can't comment, but these comments are from 40-something educated Thai women who have no respect for her at all.

'Mai bai rong rian', they say and that because she's from a wealthy family, she's never felt the need for an education. Hence I doubt she has a degree from Kentucky unless she paid for it off the Internet! :-)

Sorry to contradict your Pathum Thani fiancée ( where did she graduate incidentally?) but she is talking nonsense.Yingluck speaks perfect Thai but with a Northern accent - is that a crime? As for her English it isn't that good but much better than some past PMs.The criticism is however quite common on the social media among "educate people", the cosmic joke however being that they can scarcely string an accurate English sentence together.

And by the way an educated Thai would never say of someone " Mai bai rong rian".You might wish to review the social and educational credentials of your Thai acquaintances.

Historically, the real power in Thailand has not been with the government. The US government takes greater stock in keeping good relations with the Thai military. Although the PM hasn't been given an official invitation to the US, I wonder how many generals have been to Washington and how many high ranking US military have been to Thailand in the past year?

It's a point well made but I think really relates to a past era.The key relationship is with the Thai government of whatever political stripe.However you are absolutely right that the strong links between the Thai and US armed forces continue whatever the political vagaries - though there are constitutional issues should the former undertake a military coup.Obama avoided this constraint in Egypt by denying there had actually been a coup - perhaps he had been listening to some of the more meatheaded members of our forum for inspiration!

As far as the Nation opinion piece by Kavi I think it is wish fulfilment and unsupported speculation from beginning to end.Kavi is a notorious cheerleader for Abhisit and not in my view a journalist worth taking seriously.See below for an example of his unvarnished partisanship.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/09/28/opinion/opinion_30113182.php

Whether Yingluck visits Washington in the future is not in doubt.Mor importantly the Obama administration on more than one occasion has made it clear it wishes the current government to succeed.Hilary Clinton was even more specific by giving support to "this government", ie one elected by the Thai people unlike that of Abhisit's - formed in political back rooms and the barracks.

Is it only on Thai Visa now that a few meatheads claim there was no coup against Thaksin? Nobody else whether Abhisit, the generals concerned or the international community believes this nonsense.The coup did take place during an election campaign but its objective was to remove Thaksin.It is also dishonest to imply that the human rights abuses during Thaksin's time (particularly the drugs war and harsh repression in the South) were anything to do with the coup - not least because those policies were enthusiastically backed by those that planned the eviction of Thaksin.

Suranand (Abhisit's cousin) is as as far from a ranter as can be imagined - a highly intelligent and articulate man.Incidentally for all you meatheads out there Abhisit himself now concedes the coup was a terrible mistake which set the country back a decade.

The only reason I would call the coup a "terrible mistake" is because it failed to do what it set out to do, remove the megalomaniac despot from power, the dirty little tyrant is still running the show from outside the country. Sometimes coups are for the better, the only way to rid countries of vermin.

As for referring to a great deal of TV members as meatheads, you should hear what they call you !

It did not fail since the result was precisely that the plotters and their army accomplices aimed for, the relatively painless removal of Thaksin.Thereafter the script was a revised constitution and the election of a government, with Thaksin neutralised, aligned with the establishment power groups.Unfortunately even with the rigged constitution and directed judicial intervention, the plan didn't play out as envisaged because the Thai people didn't agree.In effect the coup had the effect of bolstering Thaksin's hold on power although ironically for him it was to be second hand.I used the term "meathead" carefully because I certainly have no issue with those who loathe everything Thaksin stands for.But it is is just the height of stupidity to argue that Thaksin is somehow the embodiment of the country's problems without recognising the context in which he achieved success.Thailand has become wealthier by far in the last few decades and the old patterns of deference are breaking down.The rural majority and urbamn lower middle class can no longer be patronised in the old way.The Democrats could have been the progressive party capitalising on these developments but could not rise to the challenge, completely tied up with old feudal, corporate and military elites.Thaksin saw the opportunity and made the most of it.

Suranand ought to have balanced his rant by warning of the dangers of a PM resigning and then seizing power later without elections or royal consent, not to mention the thousands of extra-judicial murders he ordered and the billions he stole. By omitting the facts his words are verging on hate-speech. This is not conducive to the reconciliation the PTP are often bleating about.

Strange that you find it necessary to cherry pick your "additions" as essential to a discussion by Suranand about the financial repercussions of the 2006 coup and in particular the proposed infrastructure investment.

Just who is verging on hate-speak here?

Jaidam was providing balanced comment to a PR statement issued by Suranand. Unfortunately the PTP propoganda machine like to forget or re-write bits of inconvenient history. I think real history shows a PM who dissolved parliament, and then shortly afterwards tried to sieze and hold on to power without any legality. How can removal of an illegal self-appointed PM be a coup d'etat?

Is it only on Thai Visa now that a few meatheads claim there was no coup against Thaksin? Nobody else whether Abhisit, the generals concerned or the international community believes this nonsense.The coup did take place during an election campaign but its objective was to remove Thaksin.It is also dishonest to imply that the human rights abuses during Thaksin's time (particularly the drugs war and harsh repression in the South) were anything to do with the coup - not least because those policies were enthusiastically backed by those that planned the eviction of Thaksin.

Suranand (Abhisit's cousin) is as as far from a ranter as can be imagined - a highly intelligent and articulate man.Incidentally for all you meatheads out there Abhisit himself now concedes the coup was a terrible mistake which set the country back a decade.

Who said a man should yearn to be a "true gentleman"? It's just a concept, imposed by

British culture. It has nothing to do with Thailand.

 

I am not a gentleman, and never wanted to be one.

 

 

Quite so.But unlike you Abhisit was raised in a tradition where good manners and gallantry are valued.Unfortunately he has behaved like a common guttersnipe and traduced these values.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The Thai women will speak with their votes, nothing he can say now will change anything. If he was the opposition leader in a European country he would have been fired by now.

You are presuming that the country would have a decent PM not a traveling shopaholic.

 

 

 

Whether you are correct or just fantasising about what "everyone thinks" will become apparent at the next general election, and the respective fates of Abhisit and Yingluck.

 

 

That's of course if  another election is allowed  by the puppet master if the  current  reconciliation process and the whitewashing bill is on the statute book thus allowing the  puppet master to fully assume the reins of power.

 

Yinglucks fate is to be  ferried off to a land of plenty as her reward for being a ventriloquists puppet.

 

Abhisit and his  allies?

 

Thaksin and co may find them a more difficult case to deal with unless of course they vanish like prominent Muslim lawyers or prosecution witnesses in a Thaksin court case did in Chang Mai some years back.

 

In my view though if one wishes to hear a  high class of insult there is no better pace that the strangers gallery in the House of Commons when it is in session.Indeed a very high level of intellectual scathing mudslinging far in advance of  that which the Thai's can manage.

 

Perchance Abhisit has learned his rhetorical trade at the masters feet in the U,K rather than here in Thailand

 

 

 

Why should Thaksin be nervous about general elections when parties affiliated to him keep on winning them?It's Abhisit and the Democrats that soil their pants at the prospect because the Thai people keep on rejecting them, hence their dependence on street politics, military coups and directed judicial intervention.In other words you have got it completely the wrong way round.

 

Thaksin's human rights record is deplorable but it was under Abhisit and Suthep that protestors were murdered in Bangkok.

 

 

Do you think that Thaksin is not going to allow another election. I see you reefer to it as a prospect. I was under the impression it was a sure thing.

 

Also if your going to insist on telling porkers I would suggest you do it on a red shirt forum. They will believe any thing you want to say against Abhist.

Every one with the sense God gave a goose knows that it was armed opposition illegally firing rockets at transit terminals and invading hospitals from behind barricades they had built to hide behind on public property.

 

Since when do protesters come armed?

There is no objection to getting wasted on a Friday night but on the whole, in this eventuality, it makes sense to leave the computer alone

Nope, your post displays either an ignorance of the truth or a wanton promotion of lies.

 

 

I do have a fairly good idea which one it is, it's the why I'm having a bit of difficulty with.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Still content free blah.If you actually have a point to make let's hear it.

He only said what everyone else is thinking.

Out of character, certainly, but not something

that he should be haunted by. Quite the opposite,

in fact, as it is not going away and is haunting the

person he mocked.

Whether you are correct or just fantasising about what "everyone thinks" will become apparent at the next general election, and the respective fates of Abhisit and Yingluck.

Why the hatred at Abhisit when inferring something. He did not directly call Yingluck anything. The fact the inference was so quickly attributed to him talking about Yingluck maybe shows how's accurate others thought the remark immediately referred to her.

Exactly, and if Yingluck and her ice cream team of advisers are so concerned about her being seen as lacking intelligence, all she has to do is answer questions in Parliament and from journalists in detail.

Perhaps she could go on a talk show with Apisit to discuss the topics of the day and show us all how she's not only beautiful, but also smart!

Is anyone seriously still disputing Abhisit's low class behaviour? Apparently so.He professes to be a gentleman but his gutter language (In public) demonstrates otherwise.

No perceptive person would place Yingluck in the same league intellectually as Abhisit but she has qualities he lacks, and the Thai people still apparently take the view she is a better choice.She is the more talented politician

Is Abhisit right to challenge her and question why she appears relatively infrequently in parliament? Of course he is.

Another cherry picking info twister stands proud.

Lame attempt at invective aside, it's difficult to understand what your concern is.

What you descibe as "cherry picking" surely means in this forum context responding to one or more issues rather than deal with them all.That occurs all the time.

As it happens, my post was a direct and relevant response, and in line with the thread subject matter.Yours was entirely irrelevant - just a personal sideswipe since presumably you had nothing useful to say.

Why the hatred at Abhisit when inferring something. He did not directly call Yingluck anything. The fact the inference was so quickly attributed to him talking about Yingluck maybe shows how's accurate others thought the remark immediately referred to her.

Exactly, and if Yingluck and her ice cream team of advisers are so concerned about her being seen as lacking intelligence, all she has to do is answer questions in Parliament and from journalists in detail.

Perhaps she could go on a talk show with Apisit to discuss the topics of the day and show us all how she's not only beautiful, but also smart!

Is anyone seriously still disputing Abhisit's low class behaviour? Apparently so.He professes to be a gentleman but his gutter language (In public) demonstrates otherwise.

No perceptive person would place Yingluck in the same league intellectually as Abhisit but she has qualities he lacks, and the Thai people still apparently take the view she is a better choice.She is the more talented politician

Is Abhisit right to challenge her and question why she appears relatively infrequently in parliament? Of course he is.

Apart from the sheer stupidity of the proposition (ie Thaksin is more evil than Hitler) and the low level of historical education it betrays, there is an additional bizarre twist to the quoted post, namely that Hitler's crimes were mitigated because of his belief he was committing them for the good of the Aryan race.

Your reading and comprehension skills leave a lot to be desired, the dons would be disappointed. I did not speak about mitigation of anybodys crimes, but spoke of the degree of inherent evilness which made the 2006 coup necessary. Let's consider which mass murderer, after a killing spree, made a sick joke blaming the victims for their own deaths because they hadn't eaten that day? Which one lashed out and had thousands of innocents killed after finding somebody close to him dusting his nose?

You will find that after careful consideration of the crimes of the beforementioned beasts, most serious observers would agree with me that because of the motive of face, power and money rather than misled ideological motives, one is significantly more evil than the other. Rather than simply accuse me of stupidity because you have an emotional attachment to one of them, you could try arguing your case. Love is a beautiful thing I agree, but it tends to warp the thought processes.

Generally it is a useful rule of thumb that when you have made a complete idiot of yourself, in your case suggesting Thaksin is more "evil" than Hitler, it is best to exit with tail between legs rather - as again in your case (mixing metaphors) - digging yourself into a deeper hole.

As a further polite suggestion if you wish to retract your earlier expressed crass opinion that Hitler was preferable to Thaksin because the former was acting for the good of the Aryan people rather than for personal aggrandisement, then do so.In your latest post you simply compound your folly with the suggestion that Thaksin was somehow the worse mass murdererer.Frankly it's just ill educated bar talk but no doubt there is an audience out there for this kind of gross stupidity - but count me out.

I think it is you that needs to learn and reflect on history.The junker element in the German army officer corps primarily wished to assasinate Hitler because of his policies were losing the war with the successes of 1940/41 long past.An early Hitler death, say in 1939, would almost certainly have strengthened the Nazi regime because it would have become more moderate, probably under Goering.The foolhardy invasion of Russia would not have taken place and Germany would have kept invaded territories like the Sudetenland, Austria etc.The comparison of Thaksin with Hitler is ludicrous (except in the minds of crazed PAD types) but hypothetically his removal from the scene would not have addressed Thailand's structural and social divisions which Thaksin exploited for his political ends.Indeeed the 2006 coup may well have had the effect of strengthening the Thaksinite forces.It certainly didn't have the effect intended and indeed tragically had the effect of weakening the institutions it ostensibly claimed to be protecting.All of this, both in Germany and Thailand, is the impact of confusing symptoms and causes.

"comparison of Thaksin with Hitler is ludicrous"

This is the first time I have ever agreed with something you wrote. Hitler's actions were borne about by his being an idealist, he wanted the Aryan race to increase in strength and sincerely believed he was doing a good thing. Thaksin on the other hand's disgraceful behavior was only to increase his and his families wealth, face and power at any cost and knows full well that his actions spell disaster for Thailand. Thaksin is far more inherantly evil than Hitler IMO.

Apart from the sheer stupidity of the proposition (ie Thaksin is more evil than Hitler) and the low level of historical education it betrays, there is an additional bizarre twist to the quoted post, namely that Hitler's crimes were mitigated because of his belief he was committing them for the good of the Aryan race.

Army should have no voice at all, in any country. Your only duty should be following orders by the elected government at any given moment and from no one else, if you know what I mean.

Learning from a coup, what a %@ joke....

No, you should learn a bit history......the army has to stay with the people and country and not with politicians. For example a lot of the army in Germany knew that Hitler is crazy and it is wrong, but they did their duty.

Shooting him and make a coup would be the better thing to do for millions of people and people like you would have been whining that this democratic elected leader was removed by an illegal coup.

And you can find a hundred other examples in history.

(Beside the fact that in the 2006 coup, there was no elected government).

I think it is you that needs to learn and reflect on history.The junker element in the German army officer corps primarily wished to assasinate Hitler because of his policies were losing the war with the successes of 1940/41 long past.An early Hitler death, say in 1939, would almost certainly have strengthened the Nazi regime because it would have become more moderate, probably under Goering.The foolhardy invasion of Russia would not have taken place and Germany would have kept invaded territories like the Sudetenland, Austria etc.The comparison of Thaksin with Hitler is ludicrous (except in the minds of crazed PAD types) but hypothetically his removal from the scene would not have addressed Thailand's structural and social divisions which Thaksin exploited for his political ends.Indeeed the 2006 coup may well have had the effect of strengthening the Thaksinite forces.It certainly didn't have the effect intended and indeed tragically had the effect of weakening the institutions it ostensibly claimed to be protecting.All of this, both in Germany and Thailand, is the impact of confusing symptoms and causes.

 

 

 

He He........Fantastic............something tells me a few people who paid for his time will not like this at all..............

Brilliant!!

 

Both Blair and the Thai government have confirmed he was not paid.I believe them.In any event his involvement was never a propaganda stunt for one side and his natural sympathy surely lie with the Democrats, especially the likes of Abhisit and Korn.

So these silly posts about paymasters being displeased about the British Embassy meeting with fellow Oxonians are complete stupidity.

 

 

Oh dear, I think Jayboy's feeling a bit flustered this morning, the man who is so quick to disparage others for lack of intelligence has made 2 grammatical errors in the above post.

First poster to correctly point them out wins a signed photo of Tony, Apisit and Korn enjoying themselves at the British Embassy.

 

 

 

Just noticed this comment.

 

I make spelling and grammatical mistakes from time to time like most of us.I don't however make the ignorant assumption (quite common among those who lack anaytical capability) that lack of grammatical or spelling accuracy has anything to do with intelligence one way or the other.

 

Don't worry Jayboy, it's just amusing to see someone who's so quick to criticize other people's education and knowledge make basic errors himself.

Presumably the same thing happened last night- anaytical capability-  perhaps at that time, 8.45, it was just a question of one too many!

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

That could well be the issue I concede.Still well done for avoiding the issue of confusing intelligence with education

 

 

 

He He........Fantastic............something tells me a few people who paid for his time will not like this at all..............

Brilliant!!

 

Both Blair and the Thai government have confirmed he was not paid.I believe them.In any event his involvement was never a propaganda stunt for one side and his natural sympathy surely lie with the Democrats, especially the likes of Abhisit and Korn.

So these silly posts about paymasters being displeased about the British Embassy meeting with fellow Oxonians are complete stupidity.

 

 

Oh dear, I think Jayboy's feeling a bit flustered this morning, the man who is so quick to disparage others for lack of intelligence has made 2 grammatical errors in the above post.

First poster to correctly point them out wins a signed photo of Tony, Apisit and Korn enjoying themselves at the British Embassy.

 

 

 

Just noticed this comment.

 

I make spelling and grammatical mistakes from time to time like most of us.I don't however make the ignorant assumption (quite common among those who lack anaytical capability) that lack of grammatical or spelling accuracy has anything to do with intelligence one way or the other.

 

Don't worry Jayboy, it's just amusing to see someone who's so quick to criticize other people's education and knowledge make basic errors himself.

Presumably the same thing happened last night- anaytical capability-  perhaps at that time, 8.45, it was just a question of one too many!

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

That could well be the issue I concede.Still well done for avoiding the issue of confusing intelligence with education