stephen tracy

1 hour ago, yellowboat said:

Fall guy about sums it up.  Can't help by think there are others way at the top in the military and high society that are guilty.  Wonder if they had to pay him to take the wrap and keep his mouth shut.

That and the promise of a pardon soon enough

2 hours ago, hansnl said:

I am afraid for you, his grasp of reality is much better and more informed as your grasp can ever be.

He realises very much this business is not good for the image of the army.

That is why he is trying to minimise the fallout for the army and the country

Any good politician should do that.

In order to exercise effective damage control one must have a basic understanding of PR, which the PM does not.  Instead he his just trying to pass the buck. 

On ‎7‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 5:00 AM, ukrules said:

Hard to keep up with this story, it's just moving so fast.

 

Didn't the government announce a new law (one of many 100's I believe) stating that the statute of limitations only applies for time while you're inside Thailand if you do something wrong and are wanted ?

 

Only if you're Thaksin Shinawatra

29. Civil engineering work including design, quantity surveying, organization, research, testing, looking after the progress of work, and giving advice (exception: specialist work)
 

What about the high-speed railway?

3 hours ago, JAG said:

I really don't relish the idea, but I am increasingly convinced that this regime will resort to such violence when something happens to make it feel threatened.

 

There are a number of possibilities, student unrest is one of them.

 

Maybe that will be the catalyst...

 

Well, they're not buying tanks, armoured vehicles and helicopters for nothing.

3 hours ago, Emster23 said:

While they are "at it" how about tougher laws for military?

There's no need because, unlike civilian politicians, when the military robs the public coffers this is not corruption, it's Thainess. You just don't understand Thailand.

18 minutes ago, transam said:

Who has gone for a pee in someones place and suffered the soggy socks syndrome...

It didn't happen in Thailand but one time on a flight from Kuala Lumpur to Buenos Aires, that happened to me mid-flight.  Even though I removed the urine-laden wet socks, I could not get the feel of piss off my feet for the rest of the njourney, and right through to the immigration process.  I still suffer from PTSD to this day.  I know this response isn't entirely relevant to the discussion here, but I do think it might add some depth to it.  My feet are fine now.

1 minute ago, transam said:

So you think folk ain't got dirty feet going into a residence cos they take footwear off...

It kind of stands to reason that in taking off your shoes and opting for socked feet in a household is going to be much cleaner than walking through someone's house with your shows on that have walked through everything an anything outdoors.  I don't think scientific experiments would be required to establish that. 

At the end of the day, I think using the term "scumbag" for someone that neglects, for whatever reason, to remove their footwear when entering a household reflects the level of intelligence, or lack of it, of the person who uses it.  I would also argue that  using the removal of footwear to gauge someone's academic qualifications is faulty at best.

1 minute ago, transam said:

You been in folks toilet with no shoes on to come out clean.......?

 

You wanna argue with my Verrucas.....?

Lol! No, I don't wanna argue with your Verrucas.  Well played sir.

1 hour ago, Ridler said:

I hate taking my shoes off going into people houses, and more so into offices. 

All a bit uncivilized, I mean why do you have to take your shoes off? 

My shoes are clean, I don't walk through muddy fields and I wear shoes and not open backed sandals and it is a pain taking them off all the time and I would imagine my shoes are worth more than the furniture in the house

If you have been walking outside in them, then they are not clean.  It's called basic hygiene 101. Would you be willing to lick the heel of your shoe?

11 minutes ago, Ace of Pop said:

Certainly is not,just shows your limited knowledge of Social Circles.?


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

My limited knowledge of social circles?

37 minutes ago, garbolino said:

yes but my arse would be WET....

Hence the toilet paper

17 hours ago, giddyup said:

Wiping a wet arse with the tissue paper that poses as toilet paper, sounds messy.

You clean yourself with the spray and then dry yourself with the toilet paper.  It's far more hygienic than rubbing excrement round your ring.  It's not just done in Thailand or East Asia (the Japanese have it down to a fine are), it's also done in the Middle East and North Africa. 

17 hours ago, lovelomsak said:

In Canada only rurals and uneducated or no class people take off their shoes. I have been t houses with expensive persian rugs on the floor and people come into the house straight from the rain with shoes on. If you took your shoes off to go into those homes you would not be welcome back because you had no class. To take off your shoes is just not done. We leave that to other less refined people.

What utter nonsense

sing

Quote

 

As always... speak first, think later.

8 hours ago, soalbundy said:

still better than him singing though

Give it time.

Dear Junta/Prayuth supporters , would you care to comment on this latest bit of insanity?  It is, of course, very easy to urge poor people to be resilient when you're obscenely rich.

22 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

 

Absolutely not. You can bet he does the bidding for some, who are far more powerful than the little man. And you can tell from time to time, that they reign him in. He was installed, not self appointed, as they would have you believe. And he was installed to protect the status quo, the elite, the wealthy, those in power, and the connected. Those are his chief duties.

Exactly right.

58 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

I thought he had been instructed by the higher powers to stop insulting foreigners, blaming everything that is wrong with Thailand on foreigners, and behave himself. Here he goes again. His ignorance knows no bounds. 

One wonders what these guys are thinking. Are they thinking? Do they want us out? Are they deliberately trying to discourage us from living here? Sooner or later many of us will move on. A lot of foreigners who live her, bring alot to the table. They contribute to their communities on alot of levels. Whether it be through business, a different perspective (that this place so desperately needs), or just the income they spend here, they are enriching Thailand with their presence, in my opinion. And a smart, forward thinking, and visionary government would take that into account, and make things easier, not harder. Granted there are some here who are undesirable. But, there are ways of screening them, without putting the burden on most of us, who are hard working souls, or retired individuals, who lead good, honest lives, and do not bring harm to anyone in the process.
 
To the new commissioner, and Little P., I have this to say: Get a life, and try to peer outside of that ridiculously tiny box of convention that you live within. There is a whole world out there. Repeat after me 100 times. Thailand is not the center of the universe.

I don't think he was talking about foreigners.  I think he was speaking about anyone that is technically speaking Thai but that doesn't agree with him and love his poems. I think he must already know that foreigners and those pesky Thai expats that live abroad think he's a clown.

9 minutes ago, joeyg said:

Well said.  I toast this "Sing" to you... 

And I give you (wait for it)... the drinker who disagrees with the sale of drinks. Because he's - apparently - I Buddhist, no less.

5 minutes ago, Thai Ron said:

You're being obtuse and I've no time to discuss these matters with someone who believes that repetition is a credible substitute for reason

 

 

You have been unable to answer how the Thai economy, and therefore society, would benefit from an annual 3-month prohibition law.  The reason you have been unable to do so is that you have no answer because you are aware that what you are proposing would fail miserably in numerous respects but are unwilling to admit that it is a ridiculous idea.  Answer the question and stop deflecting. 

2 minutes ago, joeyg said:

BTW opened a very nice bottle of Shiraz to share with my girl at lunch.  Out on the balcony.  Beautiful breeze and view of Pattaya Bay and down town from Naklua.  Got a few ice cold "Sings"  in the fridge sounds pretty good about now.  Think and plan ahead... 

So you participated in a "sinful" act. In your opinion, the seller committed a sin, but you can't sell something without a buyer, meaning the entire transaction is a sin. Enjoy!

3 minutes ago, Thai Ron said:

Well, it is because you don't think laws should impinge on someone's choice to buy what they want.

Where do you draw the line?

Alcohol, narcotics, assault rifles? Explosives, perhaps??

 

First, I think you ought to have a look at the definition of "anarchy". Second, what one chooses to do with oneself in terms of consuming alcohol, cigarettes or recreational drugs is up to oneself.  No one has the right to impose their personal beliefs on others in that regard.  Do I have the right to impose my personal beliefs on you with regards to how you choose to live your life, providing you are not harming anyone else?  If the answer to that is no, then you have no argument.