whybother
-
Posts
19,283 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
14
Content Type
Events
Forums
Downloads
Quizzes
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by whybother
-
-
"released it at proper place"
... in the kitchen.
-
From my understanding, and I could be wrong, but the Constitution states for a man to become President, he must be a "natural born citizen" of the United States, which, if I'm interpreting it correctly, means born on U.S. soil. If he was born in Canada to an American mother and a Cuban father, that would rule out "natural born citizen", and could very well be challenged in court.
"Natural born" citizen means having citizenship at birth, which he did have due to his mother having US citizenship.
That would also apply to Obama if he was born in Kenya (which he wasn't).
-
Do You think he filed a black suit or a grey suit ?? sorry couldn't resist,someone really needs English words help
Someone (ie you) does need some help.
Suit
A generic term, of comprehensive signification, referring to any proceeding by one person or persons against another or others in a court of
law in which the plaintiff pursues the remedy that the law affords for the redress of an injury or the enforcement of a right, whether at law or in Equity.
-
Acquitted by the appeal court, but subsequently given a life sentence?
"Initially, an Appeal Court verdict gave Pichet the death sentence"
-
Nope it's not good enough. If the locals can't afford the public transport then something is wrong and they won't use it.
So we have to take the purple line to Bang sue, change for the metro to Mo-Chit, climb the stairs there and then take the bts to Siam? I don't think so. If we travel like that with several persons then it's cheaper/more convenient to go by taxi who gets us from home right to the destination.
Seen the huge construction going on around Chatuchak weekendmarket i don't understand why they didn't build a skytrain between Bang Sue and Mo-chit. That whole area is under construction now so it could be build pretty easy.
Regardless of whether you use it or not, it is going to be well used, particularly during peak hours.
-
23 km for 40 baht isn't that cheap. Riding a motorbike costs half of that.
It's cheaper for those that don't have a motorbike, and probably cheaper than if you take into account buying and running a motorbike.
-
Here you have the MSM doing the work for their lapdog Jeb! What is clear is that Trump tied muslim registration to illegal immigration. And registration is what all LEGAL immigrants are required to do. It's called a Green Card. In fact, it used to be the case that, just like Thailand, the US required non-citizens to notify US immigration of any change in their address (although there was nothing like the 90 day report), just a notification of change of address. But even that was wiped out by Clinton in the pre 9/11 United States. The fact is the registration and monitoring of non-citizens has completely collapsed, making the building of terror networks all that much easier. Here is the real quote of interest.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-says-he-would-certainly-implement-muslim-database-n466716Trump tied his reasoning for the database to the need to identify who is in the country legally."It would stop people from coming in illegally," Trump said. "We have to stop people from coming into our country illegally."
I totally agree. The whole thing was a bait and smear tactic.
NBC News's Vaughn Hillyard: "Should there be a database system here that tracks the Muslims in this country?"
This question, to me in reflection, is very poorly formed (or cleverly formed to appear that way) and could have been easily handled with a simple: "I don't understand the question. Can you be a little more specific?" would have given Trump more time to think about it and deal with it more effectively.
Trump looked tired and was certainly distracted by his book signings and didn't spot the potential of the question. Instead he switched to his routine "wall/border" position after a very nebulous:
"There should be a lot of systems. Beyond databases, I mean, there should be a lot of systems. And today you can do it. But right now we have to have a border, we have to have strength, we have to have a wall. And we cannot let what is happening to this country happen."
and did not realize with his further responses that what he was saying could be construed as his support of a Muslim-tracking database (the original question). He's usually pretty good thinking on his feet but often too impulsive an bombastic like the proverbial bull in the china shop.
He had successfully deflected a similar question earlier in the week, but his non-committal answers were, in my view, taken as acceptance of it.
He did, however, successfully deflect a second, similar question equating such a database to the tracking of the Jews by the Nazis with: "I don't know. Why don't you tell me?" (after asking the reporter what organization he was with). By that time he was apparently on to them.
This whole thing was a setup and NBC the GOP and even some opportunistic Republican candidates shouldn't be surprised if the public sees through this sham.
Both text and video of both questions and Trump's response HERE (www.vox.com)
It's a pretty simple question with an even more simple answer. It's a bit too difficult for some people though.
-
What a gift...I am sure the asylum seekers will do well once they vote themselves into office and change all the rules...feel sorry for the German villagers...chances of this ending badly are very good...
They're refugees. Not citizens. They can't vote. Even if they could vote, I'm not sure how with probably way less than 0.5% of the population, they could vote themselves into office.
-
15 things: how the ISS has improved life on Earth
And here I was expecting to read about 15 things how ISS has improved life on Earth.
-
Wow. And I thought building a stadium in the rain forest was the dumbest decision a government would agree to. What next - removing citizens from their homes to house the refugees?
And I thought the Germans were very intelligent. Wake up Germany!
If you bothered to look, you will see that they already have the infrastructure to house these refugees.
-
They have office space that can house 750 people. How many people were working their before what ever it was shut down?
https://www.google.co.th/maps/@53.2873145,10.8768471,808m/data=!3m1!1e3 -
Where is this video showing the girl hitting the police officer before (not while) she got dragged to the floor?
-
Simple example:No, you are contradicting yourself when you say "she was not doing" something. If "she is not doing" something, then she is doing nothing.
Officer gives you an order: "Place your hands on the hood of the car".
Instead you do not move and do not comply with the officer's order--you do not place your hands on the hood of the car.
In this example, you are doing something even though you are not moving. You are refusing to foolow the police order.
That may seem contradictory to you but that is the way the law works. It is not me who wrote the law and it is not me who is being contradictory, I am simply explaining to you how the law works. If you think this is contradictory then your issue is with the law and not with me.
The law is irrelevant to this discussion.
The police officer ordered her to do something, which she refused to do.
Therefore she did nothing.
Nothing was the wrong thing to do, but that is what she did.
-
You have just contradicted yourself.
Nothing is exactly what she was doing.Yes...it could be argued that way as well. There are various interpretations or conclusions possible about whether she was acting irrationally or not.
But your claim she was sitting there doing nothing was not entirely accurate--she was "doing" something, she was defying the rules of the class and the instructions of authority figures.
I am not saying that justifies the outcome so please do not put those words in my mouth. I am simply responding specifically to your specific claim that she was not irrational and was not doing anything.
She wasn't doing what she was told. She wasn't screaming and yelling. She wasn't a threat to anyone.
You have said she was doing nothing AND she was not doing what she was told (which is doing something).
If you are instructed to follow a police command and you choose not to then you are actually "doing" something. You are not following a police order. I do understand what you are saying but its not accurate in the eyes of the law.
Again, I am not condoning the actions of the officer; however, I always prefer to see an entire video of events rather than a snapshot. Would you agree that a snapshot can be misleading?
No, you are contradicting yourself when you say "she was not doing" something. If "she is not doing" something, then she is doing nothing.
In no way am I saying she shouldn't have done what she was told. She should be punished for having her phone out. She should be punished for not doing what the teacher and administrator told her to do.
But the police shouldn't have been called into such a situation, and the police officer certainly shouldn't have dragged her to the floor.
I do agree that a snapshot can be misleading, but there has been an additional video released and reports from students. Everything I have seen so far indicates that the police officer's actions were WAY out of proportion to the situation.
-
Yes...it could be argued that way as well. There are various interpretations or conclusions possible about whether she was acting irrationally or not.
But your claim she was sitting there doing nothing was not entirely accurate--she was "doing" something, she was defying the rules of the class and the instructions of authority figures.
I am not saying that justifies the outcome so please do not put those words in my mouth. I am simply responding specifically to your specific claim that she was not irrational and was not doing anything.
Nothing is exactly what she was doing.
She wasn't doing what she was told. She wasn't screaming and yelling. She wasn't a threat to anyone.
-
It could easily be argued that defying the directive of a teacher, a principal AND a police officer over something so simple is acting "irrationally".
The teacher did request the principal to address the situation.The policeman shouldn't have been in the classroom.
It's not his job to control students, that's the teachers job.
If the teacher isn't up to the job, they call HoD, deputy Head, Headmaster.
The child was apparently behaving so irrationally that the principal then felt the necessity to request assistance from the school resource officer (the police officer).
She looked completely irrational while she was sitting at her desk doing nothing.
Or acting childish? Scared about what was going to happen?
-
The girl had her phone out for a second and didn't want to give it to the teacher. It hardly deserves being tackled to the floor by a police officer.
-
The policeman shouldn't have been in the classroom.
It's not his job to control students, that's the teachers job.
If the teacher isn't up to the job, they call HoD, deputy Head, Headmaster.
The teacher did request the principal to address the situation.
The child was apparently behaving so irrationally that the principal then felt the necessity to request assistance from the school resource officer (the police officer).
She looked completely irrational while she was sitting at her desk doing nothing.
-
Trump has 27%. As the other candidates drop off, he will continue to have 27%.
-
If that's the intellectual level of the bigoted backlash against marriage equality, cats and dogs, WOW ... pathetic!
BTW, gay is NOT a lifestyle and this isn't the 1970s!
So as it is simply against the law then the woman deserves everything she gets because it is against the law. it never enters your head that throwing a woman in jail because of this law is wrong doesn't come into it ?
So by that very argument where homosexuality is illegal then the gays in that country deserve everything they get also ? Do they also deserve to get stoned to death or thrown from tall buildings ?
Of course they don't even if that is what the law says
You can't see that forcing the world to change the very definition of a word is wrong no matter what the cause is. Hence the cats and dogs analogy which was totally missed by you.
As said you demand that everyone bows to your demands yet have a zero tolerance for others that do not agree with you
Which shows who the real bigots are.
I personally have no objection to gays getting married as I have a very much live and let live outlook. I also tend to respect other peoples beliefs and lifestyles.
What I don't do is try to FORCE my choices on other people especially when their beliefs do not agree with mine regardless of what the law says which makes me and you very different people indeed
If I go to a veggie BBQ I will eat a veggie burger and make the most of the night. The people wanting this woman thrown in jail will demand that they are served a steak and to hell with the veggies beliefs
I have found that like the climate change activists the gay rights activists cannot be debated as they simply scream homophobia to shut down debate. They just cannot debate period !
People want to change the CURRENT definition of marriage.
The Romans had same sex marriage in the 4th century before the church changed the definition to be between a man and a woman.
-
Abortion is much more a matter of personal opinion and beliefs, but science is pretty conclusive on man made climate change. So far you have been one 'of those who claim to authority' on that subject, so from no one you'll 'be viewed with great suspicion'.
Circular argument once again. The moment you blindly assume that "science is pretty conclusive on man made climate change", then of course you view people who disagree with you with 'great suspicion'.
Logic 101.
EDIT:
Furthermore, everyone working in the scientific field should be happy to 'be viewed with great suspicion' .
Einstein certainly was, as was Wegener, as was Darwin. The only way you can prove whether your science is right or wrong is to have people constantly questioning it.
The fact that this sort of questioning is discouraged in "climate science" is a key reason why the subject is in such a wretched state right now.
Just because the science is pretty conclusive doesn't mean it can't be questioned. It just means that the evidence for it far out weighs the evidence against it.
-
Any doubts about the faith of BO should be put to rest by his own words in this interview....
His own words taken out of context.
-
Is there a Muslim running for President? If not, why is this even being talked about?
-
There is very little chance of a Muslim being elected President, so it's something that doesn't need to be said.
No More U-Turns on Asoke Road
in Bangkok
Posted
The issue isn't U-turns. The issue is right turns, particularly into/out of buildings. But by not allowing those turns, it means that cars need to do a 10 km detour to get where they want to go.