sambum

I think we are using the same hymnbook but different pages! :- "Lèse-majesté refers to defaming the Head of State" which is not exactly the same as "treason" (to advocate for the abolition of the Monarchy)

Yes - you're an "Alien"!

Just Googled it! :- "Before asking why a law exists, you should have asked if such a law exists. Lèse-majesté refers to defaming the Head of State - whether or not they are a Monarch. And guess what, no such law exists in the UK. We're free to say whatever we want against the King, and no one can stop us.Sep 9, 2566 BE"

Correct, and they should be in Government now, but guess what - they don't have tanks and soldiers as back up- nothing to do with their leader owning shares in a defunct company, as has recently, (but purposely too late!) been proved! The last "democratic Government" was obviously acquired illegally by the Army, and this one is not so obviously run by the Army, and they are not going to relinquish power easily. As has been proved already, they will even change the law to suit their own agenda. Why don't they change the numbers of their Senators from 194 to 250 - or even 500, and be done with it?

Absolutely correct! And what kind of a "democratic Government" appoints by its own authority and choosing, 150 Senators that will vote as they are told to on future proposals?

Yes, my op took about 40 minutes - totally painless procedure, and the best money I ever spent. It was like looking at things in a room with a 40 watt bulb and swapping it to a 100 watt bulb!

I had my cataract surgery done at a Private Hospital in Surat Thani, and they gave me the choice of an overnight stay or not. I opted to stay - just in case there were any complications the nurses and doctors were on hand to resolve them, and I had to have a post op check the next morning anyway.

I saw an article on TV a few years ago about an American "redneck" who actually wanted to get MARRIED to his horse - "because they were both so much in love!!" Now THAT is weird!

I would have thought that Business Travellers were also among the travelling "elite"?

But, but, - but you said in an earlier post that I said "there was no-one in danger of dying as you claimed earlier." Bit different to "insinuating that he could have caused someone's death"!

Apparently you don't!

Obviously you need to post the same information multiple times to get your point across! 🙂 (3 times and counting!)

Is one post not enough for you?

"I have simply been stating facts as they have been reported." As I said in an earlier post (and most of the posters on this thread seem to agree" :- "Bull***t"!!!!

Do you not understand English? "Insinuating" that something may happen is not the same as saying that something will happen!

NO YOU DIDN'T! What part of "may be" do you not understand?

Personally, I have made no suggestions as to what punishment this man should receive, but from his previous behaviour, he would appear to be of the type that indulge in all kinds of bad behaviour without any repercussions, so he has set himself up to all kinds of suggestions regarding his "come uppance"!

If you are going to quote somebody at least have the decency to quote them correctly - I did not claim that "someone was in danger of dying" - what I said was:- "Yes, anybody who acts as he does is a threat to society - from kicking a woman in the back, to impeding an ambulance that may be a contributing factor in causing someone's death." So he refused to apologise, then he did, he cut in front of an ambulance, thereby impeding it, but you claim he did not impede it? Are you a friend/relative/legal representative of this guy? Because you certainly seem to be going out of your way to justify his despicable behaviour!

Maybe the earlier reports had some kind of "difficulty in translation"? "Mistaken identity"? If he did have licences, why is he being charged for not having licences? :- "......face charges of illegal possession of firearms and carrying firearms in public."

I think I read that somewhere too, but I didn't want to post that to Mr MeeSeeks because I had no proof!

"He said that the Swiss national, whose visa was revoked yesterday, will face charges of illegal possession of firearms and carrying firearms in public." I presume that "illegal possession" means that he DIDN'T have a licence? From Wikipedia:- "The Thai laws applicable to firearms regulation are the Act Controlling Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, Fireworks and Imitation of Firearms, B.E. 2490 (1947)[4][5] and Amendments to the Act Controlling Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, Fireworks and Imitation of Firearms, B.E. 2490 (2017).[6] Gun ownership in Thailand is restricted to Thai citizens Unless he is a Thai citizen, can we stop with the lies and exaggerations, please?

Bull**t! Cutting in front of ANYBODY is "impeding" them:- From the Oxford Dictionary Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more im·pede /imˈpēd/ verb gerund or present participle: impeding delay or prevent (someone or something) by obstructing them; hinder. "We don't know the Swiss guy's side of the story either." Then why did I see a picture of him giving a bouquet of flowers to the ambulance driver by means of apology? "Can we please stop with the lies and exaggerations, please?" I think you might want to rethink that one!!!

Much more of a threat to society than the majority of overstayers who are hounded for the same reason!

Yes, anybody who acts as he does is a threat to society - from kicking a woman in the back, to impeding an ambulance that may be a contributing factor in causing someone's death.

"Women"? (Plural?) This guy assaulted one female doctor, and the firearms charge is not for carrying a gun/guns when he attacked her! He probably wasn't carrying a gun when he impeded the ambulance either!