rickirs

Based on your information you can file federal income tax return free online directly with the IRS through its Freefile program:

http://www.irs.gov/uac/Free-File:-Do-Your-Federal-Taxes-for-Free

Now I understand Suthep. He only listens to the voices IN HIS HEAD!

But at least Abhisit lives in the real world and desires to listen to all sides of the political conflict to resolve issues. Abhisit may sometimes have his head up his a*** but at least he occasionally pulls it out into the real world. I'm afraid Suthep's head has become permanently sutured.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

If the image is so important it should have been packed properly. Even when it wouldn't have been folded, it would still be wrinkled due to the way it is packed.

Attention seeking drama queen. The guy must be perfect himself.

Absolutely correct. It is the senders responsibility to do everything necessary to protect a valuable package or photo in this case. Many postal operations are mechanical and can inadvertantly bend or mutilate a flimsy flat envelope. Postal employess can be very rushed, tired, or inattentive to notice the warning on the envelope. The sender can place the photo between stiff cardboard or plastic divider that can resist bending and folding. I bet this guy believes that if he puts "Fragile" on a package containing glass that he thinks it will be delivered undamaged. Protect your special package.

Yingluck was elected by tens of millions of Thais to serve as PM. She owes those supporters her testimony regardless of what the Court will make of it. She needs to answer to the People and use the Court as a public opportunity to speak to the People. She shouldn't consider the effect of her testimony on the Court. If the Court has already reached a decision of innocence or guilt, it won't change one way or the other with her testimony. But Court's decision for a guilty finding will have greater transparency with her testimony.

Thailand is a very odd country when it comes to law enforcement.

An arrest warrant is not a determination of guilt. An arrest warrant reflects a totality of the circumstances gathered through an investigation that there is a fair probability that the facts relied on by the police find valid probable cause for an arrest. Typically a defendant can challenge an arrest warrant by showing through a prepondance of the evidence that specific parts of the evidence submitted by the police are false; that the police either knowingly contrived false evidence or accepted evidence with reckless disregard as to their truth or falsity; and that, excluding the false evidence, the remaining portion of the evidence would not have by itself established probable cause to arrest the defendant. Failing to invalidate an arrest waarant, the defendent has the opportunity to explain to the Court why charges should be dropped; failing charges from being dropped, the defendent can make a detailed defense before the court.

Suthep acknowledges arrest warrants have been issued but refuses to submit himself to arrest. Suthep has said he'll decide when he will submit to an arrest warrant. His reasons for avoiding arrest are irrelevent. Suthep has not challenged the validity of the arrest warrants nor even publicy proclaimed his innocence to the charges. Police know Suthep will not willingly submit himself to arrest. Suthep has had an outstanding warrant for six months and yet he has been appearing in public venues almost daily. In that time police have made no attempts to arrest Suthep although it is their legal responsibility to do so.

However, during the last six months the police have made arrests of many citizens and foreigners resulting from arrest warrants. So it is not that police are unaware of their authority to carry out arrests. No one can be above the law and Suthep often cites that when it comes to the PTP admin istration and its supporters. But somehow he is complacent to apply the law to himself.

If the Thai legal system is working, it shouldn't matter whether Suthep cares about being arrested or not; whether he truly believes in compliance with the law. What should matter is that the police enforce the law equally and consistently to all people in Thailand. If Chalerm cannot provide equla and consistent law enforcement, he needs to resign for someone who can.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Good announce the 20th of July

If any party doesn't want to participate then that's up to them.

For the ones that do you have plenty of time to state your case to the people and show your policies.

If your chose to follow the so called people's medium and not participate then enjoy your picnic down in lumpini or go and collect some money with the monk.

Abhisit go for it!

For once, the EC should grow a pair of balls and announce when the election will be. Those political parties that choose to participate have enough time to produce their respective manifestos and campaign; the police and security forces have enough time to make their plans to ensure the elcection goes ahead. This time round, stealing the election, whatever the result, from ordinary people will not be accepted.

Interestingly, the suggested date just happens to coincide with the end of the 3 month timescale SCB said it needed to rearrange the portfolios of their wealthiest private clients to protect them form the effects of the political unrest. Put another way, some of the wealthiest people in Thailand will have moved much of their wealth abroad.before the election is held. Do you think they might know something we don't?

The EC has no authority to unilaterally annouce an election date. The Constitutional Court ruled in 2013 that the election date must be jointly concurred with by the EC and the PTP Government. And that is how the Feb. 2, 2014 election was set. But what is disturbing is that there is no limit as to how long an impasse can last on an agreement to an election date. The 2007 amended constitution seems to have a lot of loopholes in it that work against a democractic process-maybe that was deliberate.

Suthep delivers "electrifying" news to the PEA.

Just as an aside:

Is the PDRC tracking all the donations it has received in the last six months and how it is spent? Is it reporting to the Government such information, ie., for tax purposes? Is it reporting to the NACC such information to assure noncorrupt uses? If the PDRC isn't accountable and transparent, how can the People expect it as a government to be so?

Is it reporting to the EC such information for campaign purposes? For the last six months the PDRC has spent millions promoting its political platform, pursuing and securing political support, doing its final pushes to replace the current PTP administration. On the other hand the other 63 political parties including the PTP are restricted to a 60-day period prior to a scheduled election date to campaign and limited to how much funds can be spent to campaign. This is the law designed not to give any party an unfair advantage in spending for a campaign. Yet, the PDRC/Democrats appear to show no compliance with these legal constraints.

Therefore, isn't the PDRC/Democrat's political expenditures for the last six months UNCONSTITUTIONAL to remove the PTP administration, assuming the PDRC/Democrats will participate in the next elections? Maybe this matter should be brought to the Courts for review.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Again Suthep calls on the people to get ready for the "final", the man has it right with many of his points, but he starts to look like this government willingness to pay the rice farmers.

delay, delay and even more delay.

Just get the damn thing of overthrowing this government done, so the normal people can start to rebuild the country and their lives.

In most countries overthrowing a government is done in days, but yeah, we all know the Thais, never on time...

In most countries where the government is overthrown by other than military coup, it is in violation of the Constitution and supported by a large majority of its citizens. The reality in Thailand is that the majority of the eligible electoriate will not support overthrowing the government, especially in violation of the Constitution.

Some TV readers dispute that Russia invaded Crimea because the Russian military was already in the Crimea by invitation.

If I invite you into my house, you don't become the owner. If I lease my house to you, you don't become the owner.

Ukraine never granted Russia jurisdiction or sovereignty over any part of Eastern Ukraine, including Crimea.

-In 1991 after the collapse of the USSR, the Crimea became part of independent Ukraine. At that time Ukraine had on its territory what was the third largest strategic nuclear weapons arsenal in the world.

-In 1992, the major part of the personnel, armaments and coastal facilities of the Fleet fell under formal jurisdiction of the newly independent Ukraine as they were situated on Ukrainian territory.

-In 1994 In Ukraine, the United States of America, Russia, and the United Kingdom signed the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, pledging to respect Ukraine territorial integrity in return for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons.

-In 1997, Russia and Ukraine signed the Partition Treaty, wherein Ukraine agreed to lease major parts of its new bases to the Russian Black Sea Fleet until 2017, including the Russian occupied portion of the Ukrainian seaport of Sevastopol. .

-In 2009 the Yushchenko Ukrainian government declared that the lease would not be extended and that the Russian fleet would have to leave Sevastopol by 2017. In 2010 the Russian leasehold was renegotiated with Ukraine for an extension until 2042 and an option for an additional five years until 2047.

-In 2014 almost immediately after the impeachment of Ukrainian Yanukovych and his escape to Russia, Russian armed forces moved to “secure” all Crimea. Putin now admits unmarked uniformed armed men and military vehicles that captured Ukrainian government buildings and bases were Russian armed forces.

.......Feb. 24 Russian warships blockade Ukrainian warships in Sevastopol and Novoozerne; Russian amored vehicles move out of Sevastopol to occupy Yalta on Feb. 25th.

.......Feb. 27 "Masked" gunmen seize government buildings in Simferopol

.......Mar. 1 Russian troops take control of Kerch ferry port and surround Ukrainian military until they surrender; Russian armored vehicles arrive in Armyansk and start digging trenches

.......Mar. 3 Russian warship blocks Ukrainian naval base in Feodosiya; Russian troops take civilian airfiled at Dzhankoy

.......Mar. 8 Russian troops arrive in Chonhar and start installing boundary pillars

.......Mar 9 Russian troops capture Ukrainian missle deport in Chornomorske

Does this sound like an "invitation?"

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

I think the signal was raised when they invaded Ukraine. But that's probably not the only thing that you have missed.

They invaded Ukraine? Really? do you mind providing your source?

Before Russia annexed Crimea it moved its troops into Crimea that at that time was part of Ukrainian soverneighty allegedly to assure pro-Russian Ukrainian citizens' safety. When a foreign nation enters into another nation with a military force without permission, that is usually referred to as "invasion." I doubt Russia would not call it an invasion should the US military enter Russia to protect the safety of pro-American Russian citizens.

Russian forces were already in the Crimea, they have a base there.They were invited there by the Ukranians.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

The US and all of NATO has a solemn commitment to protect Poland and several other nearby countries. Russia is signaling a desire to expand its territories again.

Putting some US troops on the ground is merely a good chess move. Russia might mess with Poland, but if it messes with even a couple of hundred US troops it's a game changer.

Other than having nukes, Russia is a paper tiger. Russia spends just 10% of what the US spends on military, and is far behind in technology. LINK


44e4c.png

May be i missed it, but when did Russia signaled it was interested in expanding to Poland?

You want signals?

How about when by its invasion of the Ukrainian region called Crimea that Russia had no respect to international agreements whereby Russia recognized and respected a country's sovereignty. When Putin says he will go into ANY country whose pro-Russian citizens feel threatend by that country's government. When during WW2 and afterwards during the Cold War Russia annexed countless countries at or near its western and southern borders; when Russia annexed parts of Georgia after it invaded and fought with Georgia armed forces.

Many of the recent NATO countries like Hungary, the Czech Republic, Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania still have citizens who are pro-Russian. The Russian excuse to invade Ukraine could apply to all of them. If someone breaks into your neighbors house to burglarize it, and announces he has the right to do so any anyone else's house, that sends a very strong signal that you better be prepared.

US President Obama will be visiting the major ASEAN countries to plan security of their regional resources. Nations included in his vists are the democratic countries of South Korea, Malaysia, Philippines, and Japan. You'd think Thailand having a long security and trade partnership with the US would also be on Obama's itinerary - but it's not. The US Vice President Biden is in Ukraine where there is serious political crisis. But no Thailand. That's because of Thailand's current political crisis is toxic to democracy. A statement issued by the ASEAN on Thailand's political crisis will just be a further distancing of those nations from Thailand's deterioration of democracy.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Maybe Thailand doesn't need a government ,

it the government that causes the problems !

They steal and rob the country !

Kick them all out and it will be a lot better .

Rules are not followed anyway,never were .

Let the country free for a year , it can't go worse ! alt=coffee1.gif width=32 height=24>

And without a functioning immigration division, all foreigners in Thailand will have to leave. Thai people themselves cannot leave the country nor re-enter because of the lack of any border control. Without a functioning customs division all exports and imports will cease. Thailand's international representation, ie., UN and ASEAN, will cease. All internarional and domestic common carrier activity will have to cease. Public financed education, housing, healthcare, and domestic mass transportation will have to cease. Flood and agricultural management will cease. Revenue collection will cease. Law enforcement will cease.

However, since they have their own separate funding, independent agencies like the Privy Counsel, Armed Forces, Courts, EC, and NACC will continue to operate, albeit in the vacuum of absence of a government. Given Thailand's political history, those independent institutions will become the government. And Thailand becomes even a greater mess.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Good thoughts would love to see it happen BUT. TiT

Sent from my Z130 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The only way you will see it happen is if Thailand gets the reforms needed which is why the PDRC has massive support, because most of the people know that this is the only real opportunity Thailand has ever had of seeing this ideal of change come about.

But then again.... there are those who want zero change..... strange how those people are supporters of the most vile and corrupt regime Thailand has possibly seen in its entire history.

That includes the red farang on here too..... They want no change, they want nothing good for Thailand, they prefer to keep the Thais held back so they can feel somewhat superior to them, because of their own social deficiencies.... Must be frustrating to be a social misfit to the point you want an entire nation of people suffer to feel better about yourself.

If the PDRC has such "massive" public suport, why does it fear an election right now? Why does it instead blockade election stations and prevent oppoisition party candidates from registering for the election?

The frustration lies with the PDRC because despite all its rhetoric about government corruption and needs for immediate reforms, IT CANNOT GET ELECTED. Suthep and this article sites the reason that Democrats will once again lose the election: the electoriate is "uneducated" and not deemed eligible to vote correctly. When a party blames the electoriate for its failure to be elected, that party either needs to do better to deliver its message to the public or reform itself. But the idea of shutting down elections, instituting a one-party unelected government, and establishing an electoriate process that will guarantee election of the PDRC cannot be said to sustain or improve a democratic framework of government. Thus, the frustration lies with the PDRC because it FEARS democracy.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Dr. Bruce stands correct.

"So, the EC didn't 'completely' ignore the constitution."

Dr. Bruce is correct.

The Constitution required elections to be held within 60 days after the dissolution of the Parliament. That meant according to the Constitution the elections were to be held no later than December 1, 2013. It does not address any alternate election schedules beyond that timetable.

So what followed were challenges by the EC against the government to have elections within the 60-day period (October-November 2013)because it wasn't prepared to do so - in violation of the Constitution. When the administration cited the Constitution 60-day timetable for the election, the EC went to the Constitutional Court for a ruling. The Court accepted the EC filing that automatically moved the election date beyond the constitutional mandate; essentially the Constitutional Court also violated the Constitution.

So then the EC and the Government agree to a February 2, 2014 date for the election that gave the EC three months to prepare. In March 2014 the Constitutional Court nullified that election, setting up another election. But apparently after having being involved in the electorial process for six months, the EC is still incapable of delivery an election within 60 days; the ONLY reference in the Constitution for rescheduling elections. So the EC continues to violate the Constitution with its own ineptness to be kind and with its own political agenda to be unkind.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

pheu thai and red shirt child killers are at it again the only thing they know is violence and intimidation

Yes, Facebook postings can be so life threatening. But somehow Monk Issara shows up unchallenged and unharmed. He must have drawn more respect than Abhisit.

Abhisit has a good heart and means well in what he says. He is obviously intelligent and personable; he appears to lack the political superego that drives many politicians to extreme positions. Unfortunately, he has lost creditibility by his unwavering commitment to Suthpe's leadership and ideology. Abhisit wants to vote in the election to show his commitment to the constitution and Suthep says "no." Abhisit wants to attend the 64-party election meeting to discuss election procedures to show his commitment to the constitution and Suthep says "no"; meanwhile 63-parties do have representation. Furthermore, Abhisit is tarnished by criminal proceedings for premeditated murders that does give the public pause about his integrity. Such charges make the dereliction of duty charges against PM Yingluck S. seem trivial in comparison.

Suthep operates on an "all or nothing" strategy to retreive power lost that does not tolerate concessions nor facilitate sincere negotiations. Abhisit has not and probably cannot demonstrate INDEPENDENT statesmanship that would differentiate his leadership from Suthep's leadership so long as Suthep is the leader of the Democrat party. To that end Abhisit cannot be taken seriously in the determination of Thailand's democratic future.

If the Democrat Party and Abhisit want to gain majority public support that can win them elections, it is time now to thank Suthep for bringing reform issues to the forefront of Thai politics, and reformulate a political platform away from Suthep's radical conservatism and elitism (to put it kindly) that can appeal to the majority of the Thai electoriate. Democracy functions best, albeit messy and loud, in an atmosphere of political dialog presented by two or more opposition parties with full public transparency.

Just as a side note: Even if there were independently verified and actionable threats against Abhisit, that is typical for many world leaders. You might imagine that leaders like President Obama gets daily threats; but if you want to lead a nation you have to have courage to do so despite the threats.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

He is just another politician from another country, geez Australia doesn't go into paranoid panic mode when our P.M's travel. What is it with these Americans when the self appointed King of their imaginary world travels. You have the next KING & Queen of the Commonwealth freely wondering around Australia and they are far higher class than some lowlife American politician who, tomorrow will be a nobody. Geez America get off your holier than thou crap, he is just a politician and not royalty just another unemployed looser tomo

Americans don't worship their politicians like other people worship royalty, especially royalty that has no official government authority and only claim their royalty by birth. In fact Americans love to hate their politicians, makes for a vigorous democracy.

And just to keep a little perspective, Australia owes its freedom to have the next King and Qween of the Commonwealth wander around the Australian countryside to the American military power who defeated the Empire of Japan in the Pacific Theater and more specifically in the Battles of Guadacanal, the Coral Sea, and Savo Island off the coast of Australia. To give Australia credit, it did provide ONE battle cruiser in support of American landings.

Now the US cames back again to Asia to assist the ASEAN countries to protect their sovereignty and right of passage throughout the China Sea and adjacent Pacific and Indian Ocean areas against China's geopolitical expansion of its "inherent" right to waters that touch its soil. Nothing trivial or funny about that.

I hope Obama brings plenty of AWACS to detect unidentified aircraft that might fly into Malaysia airspace. We already know Malaysia doesn't know dickens about whether unidentified aircraft fly into its airspace until a couple days afterwards when it can gather a committee to reach a consensus on radar trackings. And of course as we've heard from the Mayalsian government, aircraft apparently only has to fly at 4,000-5,000 feet to evade Malaysia radar.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

The US President, Obama, feels very comfortable coming to a Muslim country...

Well, he admitted his muslim faith in a video. Just google: video obama admits he is a muslim and at 1:01 into the clip hear it in his own words.

No he did not say "he is a muslim." He said "he is one of them" FOLLOWING his satement made to Americans who know Muslims to be good people that he is one of those AMERICANS who knows so as well. Obama is an acknolwdged Christian. You have taken Obama's speech out of context. Obama is comfortable being in a muslim country because he harbors no religious discrimination, and the Malaysian government and its people have a high regard for the US, its President, and its people.

The step up the enforcement of policy on the value declarations of imported luxury cars, in order to prevent tax evasion, is a face saving effort at best. The laws have so many loopholes in them that I doubt anyone buying an imported luxory car is paying the full yaxes on it. Auto dealers can get tax waivers for "special promotion events." Government officials, police, and military may be able to get waivers as well for "official" business use. Cars can be shipped w/o steering wheel, battery, tires, etc. that qualifies them as unassembled autos not subject to the full fair of taxes that a completed auto would have. Cargo container manifests are mislabled to conceal autos inside. Some used parts are put on an auto to quaify it as a used auto for lower taxes.

The best way to have better enforcement is not to need it. Thailand might better consider some specialized trade agreements with nations like UK, Japan, Korea, US, etc. that would keep import taxes at a government-to-government level, rather than at customer/dealer-to-government level. For example, equal offset taxes for equal value but dissimilar commodities being exported and imported. Say Japan places a bevy of taxes on Thailand rice while Thailand places a bevy of taxes on Japan autos. Where the sum of taxes between Japan import of Thailand rice and export of Japan autos are equal, inurement of taxes on both sides would be offset. Where there is no offset, payment of taxes is made at the government level, recouped by taxing the manufacturer/distributor.

At least we know the military wasn't involved. Out of the 20 rounds of bullets they would have hit the truck twice instead of once.

This is great news. The lawsuit will draw the attention of the UN Human Rights Commission, ASEAN, and US concerns over Thailand's ever increasing inability to deal with human trafficking by continuing to deny it it exists. And maybe we the public will finally see the full Reuters report that until now remains elusive. Thank you Navy!

I'd think that, given the nonphysical and non-nationalistic nature of the bitcoin is to cross domestic and international borders without regulatory constraint and accountability, its developers could be more creative for its symbol than borrowing from known currency symbols. Giving it the baht monetary symbol doesn't steel Thailand's identity, it detracts from the bitcoin identity.