Well this has turned into a right handbags at dawn thread ,,,,,,,,,, its not rocket science and as simple as me frying a sausage ,,,, IMO its just best not to post private /intimate family happenings good or bad on an open forum . Benzoma i dont know you but i really hope things turn out ok and quick for you , just dont attack members for commenting in anyway on a private subject you chose to make a public discussion ,,,,,,, i personally know several of the members engged on this thread and all are decent , respectable people so i would sumise it could be a combination of your bitterness , anger and pent up stress thats makes your replies so aggressive ........ having been in a similar sutuation i hope you can understand my point .

BTW ... this thread means nothing without pictures ...... thar was alighthearted interlude from mash .

good luck and chill out if poss .

who has been dragged to court over abusing women or children ?

Benzona. That's who.

OT's off to get drunk with a pocket full of money together with another WFB. There'll be no court case over that, however. I'll give her a visa if she wants one.

OT........--------....

jackspratt wrote:Let's assume for a moment that, however improbable you may think Ben's narrative is, what he is telling us actually happening.

The question that I keep asking myself is - what is motivating him to keep coming back here (after earlier closing the thread) in the face of continuous questioning, negativity, and in some cases, outright hostility?

Is he not yet confident that he has achieved the moral high ground - which on this forum at least, seems to be slipping further away with every new post he puts here?

I suspect Frankie got it right on page 18.

To judge the emotional base of someone that is raw with pain and finds himself having salt rubbed into the wound by expats making judgements against him rather than support,is presumptous to say the least,IMO!

Let’s look at something else here. The ex’s visa is ‘Temporary Residence’. This is a two year ‘cooling off’ visa after which she will have to go to Immigration again and apply for the 5 year Permanent Resident visa during which time she will be reassessed (been there, done that).

Along with the normal proof of income, character references, medical, etc. these court appearances and this situation will come to the fore. IMHO if she is granted the new visa she obviously fulfills the requirements to become an Australian citizen and has done nothing wrong.

nkstan wrote:

To judge the emotional base of someone that is raw with pain and finds himself having salt rubbed into the wound by expats making judgements against him rather than support,is presumptous to say the least,IMO!

No Stan . What is presumptuous is posting a detailed , blow by blow account, of his marriage relationship on a public forum
(Forum: A place for discussion, not sympathy.) and expecting others who have never experienced what he has said occurred,to understand. I cannot , for the life of me , understand why he has chosen to do so . His postings have long gone over simply venting, which might have been therapeutic, to absolute vitriol, not only against his wife but now to other posters. He , by his replies, is showing a personality trait that just might account for his wife's seemingly unaccountable behaviour , if indeed it is true, and several members have sensed this. There are "Auntie Mary" type columns who he could have written to and received sympathetic ,understanding ,advice, unfortunately for him, this forum is not one of them.

benzona,
having read your antics on this forum and your history with women,ie two children to different partners that ended soon after kids were born have you ever sat back and thought hay maybe there is something wrong with me,or is always someone else and fault and not yours,and before you call me an alcholic or a old fart you can count on 1 hand how many times i drink in a year and im 38 years old. :-"

From what i've read, possibly only one of you know the OP.I don't know if the guy is a troll or is is genuine. Let's assume he is for real. Some of his descriptions of his wife were to say the least, colourful. Understandable if he feels he has been scammed, i guessing some of you would do the same, were you in his position. He seems to have got offside with other members with his reply when questioned about his Social Status (what that has to do with anything eludes me, unless you feel superior to others). He airs his dirty laundry on a public forum, so what. If nobody replies, it dies. But 'would be' sleuths, lawyers and moralists can't help themselves. Hostility doesn't rest only with the OP, some of the old members do their share too. If you've got nothing good to say, say nothing(mum told me that), otherwise it just turns into a slanging match. Mum also told me, 'don't judge others unless you think you're perfect'. Just my opinion

There seem to be two major problems here. One, the OP comes off as a bit overbearing and obnoxious; therefore, he is not very likable. Two, only one side of the story is available. It may be as the OP states, but who knows for sure?

In all fairness I believe "Pompui" knows BenZona and his wife; perhaps he can shed some light as to the authenticity of the OP's plight.

Whatever, I, amongst most, hope that in due course all concerned find their due happiness .. especially their children.

Chock Dee

Bandung_Dero wrote:Let’s look at something else here. The ex’s visa is ‘Temporary Residence’. This is a two year ‘cooling off’ visa after which she will have to go to Immigration again and apply for the 5 year Permanent Resident visa during which time she will be reassessed (been there, done that).

Along with the normal proof of income, character references, medical, etc. these court appearances and this situation will come to the fore. IMHO if she is granted the new visa she obviously fulfills the requirements to become an Australian citizen and has done nothing wrong.

Wrong, she claimed domestic violence and has had the 2 year period waived, she is now a FULL resident. Incidentally she applied to them only 9 days after vanishing
let me repeat that.

SHE USED CLAIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE TO GET HER TWO YEAR WAITING PERIOD WAIVED WITHIN NINE DAYS OF LEAVING
In two years she can get an Aussie passport, she cannot have the visa taken away...........lets keep supporting the poor Thai girl shall we? She didn't plan this at all did she?

jackspratt wrote: Let's assume for a moment that, however improbable you may think Ben's narrative is, what he is telling us actually happening..

if its implausible for a third party, Imagine how hard a time i have had getting my head around it, Is it any surprise i get a bit miffed sometimes.

jackspratt wrote: The question that I keep asking myself is - what is motivating him to keep coming back here (after earlier closing the thread) in the face of continuous questioning, negativity, and in some cases, outright hostility?.

Now that IS a very good question, and it has two answers. 1: Its a vent for when i am frustrated, some people hit the bottle, i feel better shouting out to the world and 2: The hostility is part of the fun Jack. Lets face it, only two people know what has REALLY happened, me and her, and im pretty confident that i am being more than honest, so seeing people come in here and say things like he wrote the word bifta therefore he is a junkie is entertaining at best, and stupid at least.

jackspratt wrote: Is he not yet confident that he has achieved the moral high ground - which on this forum at least, seems to be slipping further away with every new post he puts here?

jack, i don't want any moral high ground. Im telling the truth 100%, to the people that matter,and what i am telling them is what i am telling here...Why do you need the "moral high ground" when you are absolutely confident that the truth will prevail. (incidently, to have the high ground over a visa scammer who went as far as to have a child with someone to get that visa is not that hard)

So, once again, i say, flamers (not you this time Jack) FLAME AWAY, cos i seriously dont care

Someone just above mentioned Pompui, look, i met him a few times, i stayed (with her and the baby) and my daughter at bamboo gardens, I met him there through another friend. he is not a life long mate, but he did catch the gist of what was going on over there.

There are guys over there who know im telling the truth.. but i don't need their "support" and them coming on here wont change the flaming because they know it wont stop them , and anyway the other person is actually banned from here, going back 3 years or so, so he cant post (not that i would want him too)

in ya come boys............ "Japanese horse porn" lets have some more assumptions

Japanese horse porn now that is interesting!

BenZona wrote: Wrong, she claimed domestic violence and has had the 2 year period waived, she is now a FULL resident. Incidentally she applied to them only 9 days after vanishing
let me repeat that.

SHE USED CLAIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE TO GET HER TWO YEAR WAITING PERIOD WAIVED WITHIN NINE DAYS OF LEAVING
In two years she can get an Aussie passport, she cannot have the visa taken away...........lets keep supporting the poor Thai girl shall we? She didn't plan this at all did she?

Well some more "Japanese Horse Porn"???

You got to hand it too her, she must be pretty smart and/or have some serious help as well as being very convincing.

Took me over an hour to find this and I can't fully make head nor tail of it.
http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/38domestic.htm

Just one point that stands out.

Eligibility

Under the FVP, people who are in Australia and who are applicants for the following visa classes may be eligible to continue with their application for permanent residence:

Family stream visa classes
Primary applicants for:

Partner (permanent) – offshore
Spouse (permanent) – offshore*
Interdependency (permanent) – offshore*
Partner (temporary and permanent) – onshore
Spouse (temporary and permanent) – onshore*
Interdependency (temporary and permanent) – onshore*.
*Although these visas have been closed to new applicants from 1 July 2009, existing applicants are covered by family violence provisions.

She would have fallen into the "Spouse (temporary and permanent) – onshore*" catagory and the note says that has been closed for more than 2 years and I can't see anywhere where they could or would waive the temporary residence period.

Can you quote a reference where this waiver is in place or do we still piss around with more Horse Porn? I mean speculation is still the only option as we have seen NO facts!

BanDung you want facts? There hasn't been any real facts stated yet since this started except that she left him. That's about the only real fact we are going to get. But it sure makes for a great read and the OP has brought all this on by himself. He actually seems to relish all the negative remarks. If it was sympathy he wanted should have wrote to Dear Hillary in the Pattay Mail.

Bandung_Dero wrote:

BenZona wrote: Wrong, she claimed domestic violence and has had the 2 year period waived, she is now a FULL resident. Incidentally she applied to them only 9 days after vanishing
let me repeat that.

SHE USED CLAIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE TO GET HER TWO YEAR WAITING PERIOD WAIVED WITHIN NINE DAYS OF LEAVING
In two years she can get an Aussie passport, she cannot have the visa taken away...........lets keep supporting the poor Thai girl shall we? She didn't plan this at all did she?

Well some more "Japanese Horse Porn"???

You got to hand it too her, she must be pretty smart and/or have some serious help as well as being very convincing.

Took me over an hour to find this and I can't fully make head nor tail of it.
http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/38domestic.htm

Just one point that stands out.

Eligibility

Under the FVP, people who are in Australia and who are applicants for the following visa classes may be eligible to continue with their application for permanent residence:

Family stream visa classes
Primary applicants for:

Partner (permanent) – offshore
Spouse (permanent) – offshore*
Interdependency (permanent) – offshore*
Partner (temporary and permanent) – onshore
Spouse (temporary and permanent) – onshore*
Interdependency (temporary and permanent) – onshore*.
*Although these visas have been closed to new applicants from 1 July 2009, existing applicants are covered by family violence provisions.

She would have fallen into the "Spouse (temporary and permanent) – onshore*" catagory and the note says that has been closed for more than 2 years and I can't see anywhere where they could or would waive the temporary residence period.

Can you quote a reference where this waiver is in place or do we still piss around with more Horse Porn? I mean speculation is still the only option as we have seen NO facts!

Erm, how is this for a stallion.. In her affidavit it says she was granted a full 100 visa on the 26th September, A day after that i got her full resident green medicare card accidental sent to my address.

She came in on a 900 visa, left me after seven weeks, approached immigration on about the 9th of September and had her 100 visa ACCORDING TO HER EVIDENCE on 26th September... maybe an immigration expert could come in and confirm more facts for you but this is what has happened. So i have been told, by immigration themselves, there are only limited clauses allowed for her to stay after such a short time in the country, and domestic violence is one of them.... I doubt she would pretend to have the 100 visa now, do you?

as for handing it to her... yes mate, you do that... hand her what you like...it does not change the facts.

Bandung_Dero wrote:
She would have fallen into the "Spouse (temporary and permanent) – onshore*" catagory and the note says that has been closed for more than 2 years and I can't see anywhere where they could or would waive the temporary residence period.

She had offshore and the way i read that it is actually that type of visa which is no longer available, maybe they call it something else now. I dont think the cut off they talk about is in relation to the actual DV thing that allows them to stay but... THANKS....After reading what you have to do its obvious what she did, she got some dyke refuge idiots to write two stat decs and used them to claim DV..

I doubt if it woud have been that hard when you have bleeding heart dyke commies helping you out

The only fact that can not be disputed is the fact that she left. Don't know anything about visa's but isn't there something when obtaining a visa about financial responsibilty? Somebody surely must pay for all this legal stuff or is it the taxpayer's responsibilty? Along with supporting the child which the OP said he wouldn't pay as long as the child was in the mother's coustdy. As far as anyone on the forum who does know the OP none have spoken up for or against him. If you can't say something nice about someone don't say anything seems to be the rule here, at least from anyone who knows him.

merchant seaman wrote:The only fact that can not be disputed is the fact that she left. Don't know anything about visa's but isn't there something when obtaining a visa about financial responsibilty? Somebody surely must pay for all this legal stuff or is it the taxpayer's responsibilty? Along with supporting the child which the OP said he wouldn't pay as long as the child was in the mother's coustdy. As far as anyone on the forum who does know the OP none have spoken up for or against him. If you can't say something nice about someone don't say anything seems to be the rule here, at least from anyone who knows him.

are you actually as (self censord)as you write? surely noone could be such an (think of your right hand and vaseline couped with lonely nights at sea with a copy of playdude)in real life... tell me ....WTF are you even doing here in this thread? You obviously do not have half a brain cell to comprehend whats in front of you if is is not a compass and a poop deck so why dont you just ignore it.. dont post.... your one liners and hackneyed cliches arent even as amusing as a normal flamer, you cant even get that right ..... your contribution is pathetic, your analytical skills could be beaten by a gnat ( i love the gnat analogy) and your grasp of reality is so weak Ronald Regan in his last year, would have a better grasp

At least the others ask questions.

The only person i have met in Udon who is a member of this forum has posted, did you miss that?

I comprehend just fine, you abused your wife either physically or orally, she left you, and now you must pay. You sir need to get over it and get on with your live or you will surely always be a loser.

merchant seaman wrote:I comprehend just fine, you abused your wife either physically or orally, she left you, and now you must pay. You sir need to get over it and get on with your live or you will surely always be a loser.

Yes seaman, you are spot on, take a bow for being so clever, your talents are wasted on ships, have you considered running for high office? (refer to my previous statement)