Jump to content

skippy

Member
  • Posts

    264
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by skippy

  1. Before this degenerates, may I remind members to please stick to the topic, and not start throwing personal comments at each other.

    I know nothing of Australian visa and immigration rules. I do know that every country has it's own requirements and that for each country it's easier for certain nationalities to meet those requirements than others. For example, when my wife and I went on a day visit across the border from Thailand into Myanmar she just had to show her Thai id card and pay a nominal fee; I had to leave my British passport with the border control and pay a much higher fee.

    Is this discrimination? I suppose that in the strictest definition of the word, yes it is.

    Is this illegal? Depends upon the laws of the country concerned.

    Remember that discrimination is not necessarily wrong. When an employer chooses one job applicant over the others, that is discrimination; but it's not wrong. It is the reasons for the discrimination that makes it right or wrong.

    Mason, in this and your other topics you have had the Australian rules and requirements explained to you. If you want your wife to visit Australia your only option is to follow those rules and meet those requirements

    By all means discuss the rights and wrongs of those rules and requirements on this forum; but remember that doing so ain't going to change anything!

    Only the Australian government can change the rules; so if you really want change you should petition them. Unfortunately, though, I would hazard a guess that, like in the UK, the vast majority of Australians simply don't care about this issue, and so the likelihood of any change is very remote.

    I take your point 7by7 but if as you say the Aust Immigration rules and requirements are set down by the Aust Government then why does the Bangkok office have a different set of rules than the others. Ive checked with Aust Immigration in KL and SG and they both stated that foreigners married to Australians can come and go as they please as long as they pass the support and character criteria as set down by the Aust Government, not them as appears to be the case with the Bangkok office. I understand the laws but I dont understand the logic, if my wife intended to become an Aust resident then she wouldve applied for a spouse visa long ago but we're only seeking a visa for a holiday in Aust, wouldnt a spouse visa be an overkill if we only wanted to take a holiday for a short time in Aust every 2-3 years. By the way the KL and SG offices emailed their replies within a few hours on receiving them, I certainly wouldn't expect that prompt service from the Bangkok office if I even received a reply at all.

    Maybe Australia have had their Fill of Thai Ladies for now.

  2. Timeline update:

    1.30 pm: Judges start reading the verdict by outlining the prosecution case

    The high court begins by outlining the prosecution argument detailing Thaksin's equity structure in Shin Corp. The prosecution contends equity structure was designed to conceal true ownership.

    The next issue is the conversion of telecom concession fees into excise charges to favour the family-controlled Shin Corp.

    The other prosecution point is the adjustment of the revenue sharing agreement on pre-paid mobile phone services to benefit Advanced Information Service.

    The prosecution contends Thaksin's interference in regulating the telecom industry to benefit his family-controlled telecom group, boosting its market valuation.

    The prosecution outlines Thaksin's involvement to fix the concession contract on satellite communications. Because of his meddling, ThaiCom 4, a designated satellite for back-up communications, was cancelled and replaced by the launching of IPStar which allows the operator to start the satellite service for Internet instead of fulfilling the original ageement on satellite communications.

    The prosection contends Thaksin's inference in satellite communications has inflicted Bt4 billion damage to the state and left a long-lasting impact on the country's communications security.

    The prosecution contends Thaksin's involvement to grant Exim Bank loans to Burma in order to benefit the telecom and satellite businesses of his family business empire. Under Thaksin's instruction, the loans were increased from Bt3 billion to Bt4 billion.

    The prosecution contends Thaksin's involvement in increasing the equity cap on the telecom business to pave way for him and his family to sell their Shin Corp stakes to a foreign buyer.

    The Asset Examination Committee has frozen Bt66 billion of Bt76 billion sought as compensation to damage caused by conflict-of-interest decisions.

    2.50 pm: Judges begins to outline the defence arguments.

    The defence contends Thaksin filed his asset statements as prescribed by the anti-graft law.

    The defence contends Thaksin openly transferred his equity stakes to his children before assuming office.

    The defence contends the AEC was biased in trying to fault Thaksin. The AEC conducted iits investigation based on expediency and not prescribed procedures. For example, the AEC claimed the shares belonging to Thaksin's children when it ruled on tax liability. But it insisted Thaksin had full control of the shares when it wanted to prosecute him for abuse of power and conflict of interest.

    In rebutting charges related to telecom business, the defence contends Thaksin's leadership following precribed procedures and implementing all policies sanctioned by the laws.

    The defence contends the wealth of Thaksin and family was earned before assuming office.

    The defence contends the wealth distributed from Thaksin to his children was genuine and not a scam for asset concealment.

    --

    To sum it up, prosecution says Thaksin used nominees to hide assets and kept pulling the strings, using state power to benefit the business

    You cannot have it both ways George. Either state from the Nation or your own version but not together.

  3. I was kicked out of a Korean restaurant in Pattaya the other day for not being Korean. They weren't even subtle about it (didn't try to make up a story like we are full).

    you are one lucky so and so ,Korean food must be the worst in the world,its no wonder they always look so miserable :)

    Are you trying to be funny or are you just ignorant?

    From our forum rules:

    7) Not to post slurs or degrading comments directed towards any group on the basis of race, nationality, religion, gender or sexual orientation.

    indeed , i was waiting for a slant directed towards the Irish that step out of line.

  4. I would stretch to baht150 if you lobbed on another pie.

    Good idea Skippy, I am good at selling for less than cost price :) .

    Best idea is to come along with your 150 Baht and we can negotiate over what food is available.

    I will require the price confirmed before I book my flight.

  5. Pics of these pies might be a good idea.

    Available from Coffee Corner in Prakhon Chai :D

    post-62645-1259215752_thumb.jpg

    Looks good for baht99

    Good effort Skippy, :D .

    You may have to bring out more pocket money if you want anything more than a children's meal. If you only have 99 Baht I can let you have just under half a portion - but, you will have to bring your own water :)

    I would stretch to baht150 if you lobbed on another pie.

×
×
  • Create New...