PeterRS

Ah yes! Rama IV will be in desperate need of new shopping malls, new office towers, new apartment blocks and let more luxury hotels even after One Bangkok, the city's largest integrated development, opens in the area around the top of Sathorn and Silom!

I realise two fragments of the fatal bullet were found. But have they ever been connected to the bullets fired from Oswald's gun? The bullet illustrated earlier was a full metal jacket bullet that could not have fragmented on impact with Kennedy's skull (or so I am led to believe). At the speed it was travelling it would have resulted in a clear entry wound at the back of the head and an exit wound at the side or in the front. It would no doubt have killed Kennedy but it would not have shattered his skull into almost 40 pieces.

That still leaves AIS. I find True is already far too big with all its tentacles into much of Thai life. Certainly its virtual satellite TV monopoly has gone way downhill in recent years and remains one of the most expensive in Asia.

Interesting. I have no doubt that that digital image was based on the bullets allegedly used by Oswald according to the remaining bullets left and found in the Book Depository. We also know that the second bullet - the one in the "single bullet theory" that passed through two parts of Kennedy's body before hitting Governor Connelly - could be reconstructed and compared with the bullets Oswald was firing if only because the remains of that bullet were found at Parkland Hospital. But I believe the third bullet, the one that killed Kennedy, has never been found. I have tried to find photographic evidence of the remains of the third bullet but it appears to have disintegrated on or soon after impact. And where are the remains of the first bullet, the one that missed and hit the pavement? It has never been found. But there are other issues that are essential to conspiracy theories. The destruction by the Secret Service of the 2 boxes of files requested in 1995 by the Assassinations Record Review Board just 2 days before they were due to be delivered to the Board. No explanation has been given. And the continuing determination by the Administration not to release certain details which had been promised to the public years before now. What are Biden and others hiding?

I never believed that theory in Oliver Stone's convoluted movie. Stone had it wrong, anyway. Kennedy could never have agreed to pull out troops from Vietnam for the simple reason there were no troops there in 1963. They did not arrive till 1965. Eisenhower had first sent military advisers and Kennedy increased the numbers. Both Presidents suppoted the South Vietnam government much more through tons of military aid and cash. For a senior government aide to talk about troops and not advisers would be not just unusual but incredible. Also the ranting on about what would have been done to check the route beforehand and during the motorcade is no doubt what should have been done, but there are plenty of direct sources which confirm it wasn't done. This bears out William Manchester's comments in his book I refer to above.

I fully accept he may indeed have been the intended assassin and we will never know his reasons. But when you look at Frame 313 of the Zapruder film and the way Kennedy's head literally explodes, I see no way the type of bullet Oswald was using in his rifle could have had that result. It would have had to have been a relatively clean in and out shot. Whether it came from a second rifle in the Secret Service car or as others believe from the grassy knoll, I also have no clear idea. But I have yet to see a shred of credible evidence that the shot that shattered Kennedy's skull came from Oswald's rifle.

@z909 may well know more about this than I, but aren't the vaccinations in Thailand progressively working down through the age groups. So while 30s and up may well have had their two vaccinations, younger people have not. And surely it will be younger people who mostly hit the bars?

Let''s remember this is the same Constitutional Court which approved Thaksin's ascendency to the Premiership despite his not having declared all his assets in advance. That should have ensured he could not even be an MP. His grardener and housekeeper were found each to hold many millions of shares in his company. The Court voted by 4 to 3 that it was an honest mistake. That one or more was bribed is certain. There are plenty of people in government who do not want a same sex marriage bill. I would put money on influence having been made on the Constitutional Court to ensure its verdict!

No Bangkok. No Pattaya. A lean year for gay tourism seemingly.

Perfectly fair point and one that the Warren Commission came to. But how do you explain the two different types of bullet, given that it has been proven the third shot which exploded Kennedy's head was different to that of the second and there was no evidence of Oswald having two types of bullet. Indeed, why would he bother to have two types? I had hoped that this topic might be of interest to the members of the Board who live in the USA.

We are getting close to November 22 and conspiracy theories will again be front and centre as the world remembers the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. As some readers will be aware, I like conspiracy theories. And this one is surely the mother lode of all. Who really did kill Kennedy? Sorry guys, this is going be long! Does anyone now seriously believe the findings of the Warren Commission set up by President Johnson have any credibility? Indeed, in its 1979 Report, the House Select Committee on Assassinations discovered several facts which had been deliberately withheld from Warren’s Commission. This second Report concluded – 1. Oswald fired three shots at Kennedy. The third killed the President. 2. Kennedy was probably killed as a result of a conspiracy 3. Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that at least two gunmen fired at the President. 4. The Department of Justice, FBI, CIA and the Warren Commission were all criticized for not revealing information available in 1964 and the Secret Service were deemed deficient in their protection of the President. One publisher estimated that more than 40,000 books have been written worldwide about the assassination. Every possible theory has been examined and many dozens of “true” explanations detailed. I have read several books on the assassination and have been fixated on the various theories about a second gunman. Why? I’ll start the ball rolling by saying I believe in a two gunmen theory. Dealy Plaza in Dallas around the mid-1960s. One question that is obvious. The Presidential motorcade entered from Main Street on the right, slowly turned right into Houston Street before slowly turning left into Elm Street in front of the Book Depository. If Oswald was intent on killing Kennedy, why did he not shoot when the limousine was directly coming slowly towards him for what must have been something like 8 seconds? It would surely have been a much easier shot than attempting the assassination from behind. The Presidential Limousine Route When details for the visit to Dallas were finalized, instead of proceeding directly down the central Main Street toward the overpass, it was decided the change the route to include the turns that would divert the limousines to and then along Elm Street. This final route was then published in the Times-Herald on 19 November. Without going into the mass of background detail, we know that Oswald’s first shot missed its target and chipped the pavement to the left of the Presidential limousine. Some think that a shaving of concrete was blasted upwards and might have nicked Kennedy’s neck. Oswald’s second shot hit Kennedy high in his left back, exited from his front, passed through his right arm and then hit and wounded Governor Connelly sitting in the right front seat. But it was the third bullet that shattered the right side of Kennedy’s skull with bone and brain matter flying in several directions. It is fact that he could never have recovered from such major trauma. The real question then is: did Oswald really fire that shot? I believe not. Oswald was in a position to reveal a lot to the Dallas police about his odd background. Court-martialled and jailed as a marine, he spent three years in the Soviet Union where he married and had a child. Fired from several jobs after his return to the USA, he made his way to Mexico planning to transit on to Cuba. He was seen entering the Cuban Embassy applying for a transit visa where he claimed his real intention was to fly on to the Soviet Union. The visa was denied and Oswald returned to the US. Back in Dallas he was given a job at the Book Depository. After the shooting of Kennedy, Oswald returned by taxi to his home for a few minutes before setting out again on foot. He was stopped by Dallas Patrolman, J. D. Tippett. Oswald killed him with four shots from a handgun. Four cartridges were found at the scene. Yet curiously not one of the bullets in Tippet’s body could be identified as having come from Oswald’s gun as all four were too extensively damaged. Later he entered a cinema without paying. It was there he was finally apprehended. In custody, Oswald denied owning a rifle and denied killing Kennedy and Tippett. Before he could reveal anything of substance Oswald was shot dead on live television two days later by another oddball figure, nightclub owner Jack Ruby. Unmarried and with a violent character, Ruby lived with another man but always stated he was not homosexual. His activities in Dallas had included running strip clubs and dance halls. He had close ties to some police officers to whom he would supply prostitutes and free booze. Convicted of the murder of Oswald and sentenced to death, Ruby’s conviction was overturned on appeal. He was awaiting a new trial when he was discovered to have extensive cancer. He died in January 1967. The reasons for Ruby’s real actions remain unknown and are the subject of intense speculation. One witness claims he was seen at Parkland Hospital as surgeons worked to try and save the President’s life. The House Select Committee on Assassinations Report in 1979 stated that Ruby’s killing of Oswald was not a spontaneous act. It is also assumed he had mob connections. The mob itself was said to be furious with Kennedy over the Bay of Pigs disaster as Castro’s revolution had killed much of their profitable businesses. The Autopsy My concern with the evidence which has been presented to the public centres primarily on two issues: the gun that fired the fatal shot and the absolute disaster of the autopsy. First the autopsy. We know there was near chaos in the trauma room in Dallas and that the autopsy in Washington was totally botched with endless Secret Service, army and other personnel entering and leaving as though it was Grand Central station. A total of 32 individuals came and went during the 4-hour autopsy. Many had absolutely no business being there. The autopsy findings have been generally discredited resulting in little direct evidence of the angle at which that fatal shot entered Kennedy’s skull. That shot had blown to pieces nearly half of the President’s brain. This can be seen in frame 313 of the famous Zapruder film. Almost miraculously, Abraham Zapruder was filming Kennedy’s motorcade from the grassy knoll to the right of the motorcade. Apart from about one second when the limousine passes under a street sign, the entire assassination and its timeline was captured on that film. The public statements and the testimony to the Warren Commission for some reason show opinions from personnel present at the autopsy that rapidly changed. For example, Dr. Malcolm Perry attended Kennedy in Dallas and performed a tracheotomy. Later that day, three times he stated at a press conference that he made the incision over a small wound in the President’s neck and that the wound in his opinion was an entrance wound – not an exit wound. Thus it could not have been fired by Oswald. Later, at the Warren Commission hearings, he gave a more detailed description in response to questioning by Arlen Specter Mr. Specter: Would you now describe as particularly as possible the neck wound you observed? Dr. Perry: This was situated in the lower anterior one-third of the neck, approximately 5 mm in diameter. It was exuding blood slowly which partially obscured it. Its edges were neither ragged nor were they punched out, but rather clean. Even with the lapse of time this still seemed to indicate an entry would rather than an exit wound. But the Commission concluded it had to be an exit wound. Otherwise it would certainly have screwed up their final Report as it would have implied two gunmen, Oswald and someone firing from the front. The other mystery about the brain is that it was stolen from a locked vault at the US national Archives in Washington where it was stored in February 1965. On October 31st the following year it was discovered to be missing. This information was kept top secret until released in 2016 under the Freedom of Information Act. It is widely believed that Robert Kennedy took the brain to ensure there were never lurid photographs of it appearing in the media. The Fatal Shot So much for the farce of the autopsy. The key question that has never been answered is: who fired the fatal shot. I do not believe it was Oswald. It is known that Oswald used an Italian made 6.5 x 52mm Mannlicher-Carcano M91/38 rifle with standard military ammunition designed for penetration but not massive wound cavitation. The bullets used by Oswald of which some were found at the scene were encased in a heavy copper jacket and are specifically designed not to fragment on impact. The bullets are also 6.5 millimeters in diameter although would have expanded to 6.75 mms when zooming through the rifle barrel. There is no way this tallies with the entrance wound in Kennedy’s skull being 6 mm. He had purchased it by mail order. Why he selected a wartime rifle rather than a more recent American one we will never know. What is of concern is: could he have fired three shots in the timeline as outlined in the Zapruder film. Film travels through a camera at a certain number of frames per second. Thus the length of time it took for Oswald to insert new bullets and fire the second and third shots is a matter of fact. Tests subsequently done on the rifle by a variety of experts are inconclusive. Some prove it could be possible; others that it definitely was not. However the evidence that the rifle used by Oswald could actually fire its second and third shots in such rapid succession and still hit its target as Kennedy’s car first slowed down and then started speeding away remains unproven. We have to remember that the alleged third shot shattered Kennedy’s skull into almost 40 fragments. Yet how is that possible with a bullet designed merely for penetration? The second shot had passed through several of Kennedy and Connelly’s body parts and ended up mangled but intact. It had not shattered on impact with any body parts. The assumption therefore is that the fatal shot had to come from a different weapon using a very different type of ammunition. Making the theory more impressive is that fact, as confirmed by the Warren Commission, that bullet totally disintegrated on impact. Without going into further detail about Oswald, I believe the theory first put forward during the 1990s in the book “Mortal Error: The Shot that Killed Kennedy” by Bonar Menninger is by far the most plausible. I seem to recall this was all but trashed when it appeared and I gave it little credence until watching a programme on television a few years ago Forensic Evidence Titled, “JFK: The Smoking Gun”, the television programme illustrated research by some former FBI officers and an Australian detective Colin McLaren during four years of extensive investigations of the facts. In particular they were the first to investigate the assassination on the basis of major advances made in ballistics and forensic pathology since 1963. Indeed, in 1963 forensic pathology was in its infancy. It also took into account further documents released by the Clinton administration. These focused largely on the second and third bullets that actually hit Kennedy. The essence of their research is incredibly simple, although it might take some stretch of the imagination. When you think about it, though, there is no way it could not have happened this way. Vice-President Johnson was in the third limousine, behind the second which contained several Secret Service agents all armed with revolvers. As per standard procedure, though, on the back floor of that limousine was a loaded AR-15 rifle ready to be fired in the event of any trouble. In charge of the rifle was a relatively new member of the Secret Service, George Hickey. He had been on the job for only 4 months. Hearing Oswald’s first unsuccessful shot, Hickey looked behind to where the shot had come from and then immediately bent down to get the rifle on the floor. The second shot then hit Kennedy and for some unknown reason its driver first slowed down before being ordered to slam his foot on the accelerator and get out of there. Photo of two agents in the second limousine looking back immediately after the first shot Now certain there was an assassin behind them, Hickey stood up on the seat and was bringing the rifle up just as the order had been given for the motorcade to slow down. With his hand on the trigger and no way to brace himself, the sudden change in motion knocked Hickey forward. Losing his balance, Hickey’s finger accidentally fired the rifle and the bullet hit the President. That the third bullet disintegrated on impact was confirmed by a Maryland medical examiner, Russell Fisher, who had examined the Washington autopsy x-rays. That fatal bullet is entirely consistent with the type .223 fired from the AR-15. Besides the .223 is 5.56 mms in diameter which tallies with the entrance would being 6 mm. Two photographs exist of Hickey in the second limousine. The first is of him bending down to pick up the rifle. The second is of him looking to his right with the rifle in his hands. In Chapter 2 Paragraph 167 of the Warren Commission Report, it states that Hickey only picked up the rifle after he heard the last shot as “the cars were speeding through the underpass and had left the scene of the shooting.” There is certainly a photo of Hickey clearly holding the rifle but there is absolutely no indication when this was taken and therefore no clue about precisely when he picked it up. Did Hickey Fire The Shot? All conspiracy theories are a mixture of plausibility and conjecture. What makes this more plausible to me is that the Secret Service rifle was loaded with precisely the type of bullet which would shatter on impact. As stated earlier, we know for a fact that the bullets used by Oswald would not. Witness Hugh W. Betzner Jnr. saw someone in the motorcade with a rifle and “a flash of pink”. In addition seven witnesses stated they smelled gunpowder at street level immediately after the shooting. Senator Yarborough who was riding with Johnson also claimed he smelled gunpowder. It is perfectly possible that the smell of gunpowder would still be in the air as their limousine moved into what had been the position of the second. Motorcycle policeman Bobby Hargis riding just off the rear bumper of the Presidential limousine asserted, “it sounded like the shot was right next to me.” The Warren Commission writes that Agent Hickey picked up the rifle “as he heard the last shot.” This is contradicted by no less than 15 witnesses. S.M. Holland who was standing on the overpass is on record as saying he saw Hickey lose his balance during the firing [by Oswald]. Other witnesses state they saw Hickey turning around immediately after the first shot, and then bending down to pick up the cocked rifle from the car floor. He would have had plenty of time between shots 1 and 3 to have the rifle in his hand and be ready to turn to fire back at Oswald’s position. One of the Secret Service agents, Winston Lawson, had planned the route and was driving one of the motorcade limousines. He stated, “I noticed Agent Hickey standing up in the follow-up car with the automatic weapon and first thought he had fired at someone.” In his earlier book “The Death of a President”, William Manchester illustrates how dreadfully poor was the training of both the Secret Service and the White House detail in that second car. “They were supposed to be picked men, honed to a matchless edge.” But they had been given almost no training in the recognition of open air shooting. “The behaviour of the men in the follow-up car was unresponsive . . . for five terrible seconds they were immobilised.” Finally, there is also doubt that George Hickey was ever called to give evidence before the Warren Commission. It is believed he did not. Since that day in 1963, however, no matter how unlikely this conclusion, absolutely no evidence has been presented to refute it. Interestingly, and again I consider it so, although the subject of “Mortal Error” had been well trailed many weeks in advance, never once did Hickey attempt to block publication. Surely if you are wrongly accused of killing a President, however accidentally, the first thing you do surely is to get a team of lawyers to ensure the story is killed? Even more odd, it took Hickey a full three years before he sued the publisher. If, as I believe, this was the true description of the events of that dreadful day, the evidence then leads to the inevitable conclusion of a massive cover up by the Secret Service and the White House detail. In 1995 just a few days after two boxes of documents had been requested by the Assassinations Records Review Board, a temporary federal agency set up by the Clinton administration, they were destroyed by the Secret Service. Why? Most of those alive in 1963 will be gone within a generation. The detail of those events in Dallas will remain unverified and the public will never be made aware that a President had been accidentally killed by one whose job it was to protect him. Interestingly, perhaps, Hickey never spoke about the events of that day. Not even once! When Hickey died in 2005, no obituary or death notice appeared. Curious? I am. Certainly there are plenty of experts who disagree with the Hickey theory. Others argue quite rightly that witness testimonies cannot always be relied on. But isn’t that true of every conspiracy theory? Even with my lack of knowledge and my not having been at the scene, I am convinced. Are you? Postscript As reported in Politico, last month President Biden inexplicably threw another bone to conspiracy theorists by delaying once again public release of thousands of government documents on the assassination when he wrote in a Presidential memorandum: “Temporary continued postponement is necessary to protect against identifiable harm to the military defense, intelligence operations, law enforcement, or the conduct of foreign relations that is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in immediate disclosure.” What? As if that was not sufficiently obscure, he added the National Archives and Records Administration needs more time to conduct a declassification review due to delays caused by the coronavirus pandemic. So after more than half a century and before the virus even appeared, the US government has still not been able to check its own files on the Kennedy assassination? Biden deliberately fudged the issue and clouded in a host of possibilities. I do not believe his statement for one minute!

I know the Venue has its popular cabaret show quite late in the evening - or it used to. I know too that many have enjoyed it. For whatever reason, it has always left me cold! Just not my type of entertainment I guess. But because of the noise and the possibility I might occasionally want an early night, I would not stay there. Just too much noise.

Just for info, the Eurostar fast trains also link London and Brussels.

With respect you are taking this a step too far. Ever poster has agreed with the basic comment in the OP's news clip about this being a great project. Period! But it is perfectly usual for threads to develop. In this case, it is the comments made in the OP news clip which @readerposted (it was a newspaper clip, let's recall, not the opinion of a poster) that has led to comments about social habits. And the matter of habits is a perfectly natural follow-on given what the BMA spokesman is quoted in that clip as having said. This was - "Canals are treated like sewers." That is not about the past. It is about the present. That has nothing about posters to this thread. It is from the BMA. I have lived in Bangkok for 20 years. I am perfectly happy to have taken it as it is. That does not mean I like everything about it. I doubt if there is any city in the world where I would like everything. Tokyo, Seoul, Taipei, Singapore and other cities are certainly cleaner, but I chose not to live there.

I am sure in general that assumption is perfectly correct. Equally I have seen hundreds - many hundreds - of instances where it is not always true. Tossing trash is far more common in certain countries than we might consider appropriate. One reason is pure tradition. How many times in Bangkok have you seen people unwrap a small food item from a 7 11 only to toss away the wrapping? Or a cigarette butt? If you have been brought up where throwing away trash of any sort is virtually the norm, you don't think much about it. Another is the relative lack of trash bins on sois and main roads. In my experience, those you can find are almost invariably full to overflowing. We know from the Bangkok Metropolitan Authority that klongs get filled up with garbage and which has to be cleared each year. Someone is throwing that garbage into the klongs! To me it is almost similar to what those of us from the west might regard as rude. I have completely lost count of the number of times I have walked in to a building and a Thai in front of me has not bothered to hold the door open for me. When I hold a door open for anyone, I can count on one hand the times I have been thanked by a Thai for my gesture. It is just not the custom. Then there is the queue jumping. Last week I was meeting an old friend for coffee at Central Embassy shortly after it opened at 10:00. Having got there early, there was a small queue waiting for the 10:00 opening. I walked around until just before 10:00 when I joined the longer queue. Seconds later a Lexus drove up and the driver opened the door for a lady in the back seat. She looked at the queue and then promptly walked to the very front. In some other countries, someone in the queue would have pointed out that she should go to the end of the queue. In Thailand that is not done if you know that queue jumper is clearly of a higher social status. I have taken it many times. Not just the dank water. There is almost always trash floating around.

1) Oh really? News to me! 2) To some, perhaps! If you expect the bars not to reopen until 1 December 2022, I guess you haven't been reading the various threads on bar openings and tourism opening.

So you don't think it odd that the term 9/11 has come to mean just one thong over the years since that dreadful event?

A great project! Too many of the remaining old klongs are just an eyesore. Lest anyone think the disappearance of the klongs in the 1950s and 60s was purely a Thai idea, it took as a result of reports from supposedly expert overseas consultants!

I had coffee with a former business colleague yesterday. She is on the fringe of the group @macaroni21 mentions and I'd call her medium-so rather than high-so. She is a well-travelled lady whose husband spent much of his working life in New York (her first husband died many years ago). I'd call her very open minded, but she detests the reputation Thailand has as the sex capital of Asia. She certainly does not believe for a minute that "temples and elephant parks" are what drives tourism. She does believe that Thailand competes with countries like Malaysia and the Philippines for family beach holidays. Since this is a gay chat room, I think we tend to forget that many millions of families do visit Thailand for that very reason. I remember a week I spent at a 5-star hotel in Khao Lak about 7 years ago. I only went because a travel site had a 70% discount. I had forgotten that my week was the week after Easter. All the other guests bar a few Japanese were European families. An afternoon having a look at other up-market beach hotels showed a similar clientele. Tours to Phang-na, the Andaman Islands and others were fully booked. Khao Lak had no sex scene at that time (or I believe has at any time). My Thai friend has known for years that I am gay. She fully understands that many capital cities in Asia have a thriving sex scene. What angers her is that in Thailand it is so "in your face" internationally, as it were. As a regular visitor to Tokyo she had no idea there is a thriving gay scene in Shinjuku, Ueno and elsewhere until I told her. Same with Taipei. But then few visitors to those cities know about their gay scenes because they are no understated.

Other airlines are offering what seem like good fares but then you find there are expensive add ons. I booked on Qatar to the UK in March - 4 sectors with plane change in Doha. Every other time I have booked a biz class ticket, lounge access and seat selection have been part of the advertised price. I know some other airlines make you pay for seat selection - notably the huge fees charged by British Airways - but never before on Qatar. My ticket ended up 20,000 baht more than the basic offered on the website because I do need to select seats on overnight flights and I just prefer to spend a a long stopover in Doha in the excellent lounge than sitting for hours in the noisy departure area. My choice which others might prefer to forego.

That's a huge number of slots. This must indicate a continuing long slump for the tourist industry.

I did not in any way mean to suggest that you were incorrect or that the USA does not have its own system. However, as @macaroni21 confirmed, there is a standard international certificate of vaccination accepted by virtually all countries. I just do not understand why it would not be issued within the USA. Although the international certificate is for those travelling overseas and the US document is clearly for internal USA use. I am sure you can also apply for the yellow international one.

Thailand issues the standard international vaccination document similar to what you would receive if you went to South America or parts of Africa and required proof of a Yellow Fever vaccination on your return. This small yellow paper document is issued by the Department of Disease Control and does indeed have full name, passport number, nationality and date of birth in addition to the details of the vaccination dates and doses.

I had never heard of Phú Quốc until late 2018 when I was planning a trip to Vietnam for February 2019. I wanted the trip to end somewhere on a beach. Fortunately I had loads of points in the Marriott Hotel programme and I noticed that the island has a Bili Bensley designed Marriott Resort which had opened the previous year. So I got rid of many of them for a 5-night stay. I absolutely loved the hotel and the beach. It's certainly not cheap but the facilities were wonderful and the mostly young staff fantastic. I thoroughly recommend it for anyone wishing to splurge. I would prefer to return to a good hotel on Phú Quốc before Phuket now. Bangkok Airways used to have a daily flight from BKK. Once tourism is up and running again, the authorities may also restart the hydrofoil from Ho Chi Minh. The Marriott is close to the south east end of the island. Further up the same beach are a couple of other hotels which might be worth checking. There are also loads of other hotels on other beaches.

The covidvax website estimates that Taiwan will be 70% vaccinated with 2 doses by November 29. https://covidvax.live/location/twn