Diablo Bob

All of you Americans on TV should be ashamed of your country. Execution of murderers is something that went out 30 years ago in civilized countries . Add to that your gun carrying fixation from the days of the Wild West and one starts to understand why when you criticize how the rest of the world should behave, no one listens.

2. Execution while legal in America is not legal in every state (I think 32 out of 50 states have the death penalty as well as the Federal Government) and in many states while legal, they tend not to execute. The big three are California, Texas and Florida. Much of America opposes the death penalty if not out some kind of morality because it is expensive. Due to our lengthy appeals process it costs more to sentence someone to death and go through the appeals process than to just lock them up for life. Execution was actually abolished in America in 1972 but reimposed in 1976 (both by the Supreme Court). Our history of execution and guns is actually a holdover from our English roots and our revolution and split from England. The execution process was handed down via English law and due to having a tyrant on the throne in England which we revolted against, the second amendment to the constitution was passed so the people could rise up against any other tyrant who may come to power. Both are outdated, we know that.

kamahele,

The big three are not what you state..... Texas, Oklahoma and Virginia are the big 3. Florida comes in 4th and California makes the 17th position.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/number-executions-state-and-region-1976

Your statement that much of America opposes the death penalty is FALSE. The last Gallup poll I can find showed 60% in favor of the death penalty and 37% opposed.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/1606/death-penalty.aspx

Your statement about the Supreme Court abolishing the death penalty is false, see Furman vs. Georgia. But to make it brief:

"In a 5-4 decision, the Court's one-paragraph per curiam opinion held that the imposition of the death penalty in these cases constituted cruel and unusual punishment and violated the Constitution.^[3]However, the majority could not agree as to a rationale and did not produce a controlling opinion. In fact, none of the five justices constituting the majority joined in the opinion of any other." so "The Court's decision forced states and the US Congress to rethink their statutes for capital offenses to assure that the death penalty would not be administered in a capricious or discriminatory manner.^[4]

In the following four years, 37 states enacted new death penalty laws aimed at overcoming the court's concerns about arbitrary imposition of the death penalty. Several statutes mandating bifurcated trials, with separate guilt-innocence and sentencing phases, and imposing standards to guide the discretion of juries and judges in imposing capital sentences, were upheld in a series of Supreme Court decisions in 1976, led by Gregg v. Georgia. Other statutes enacted in response to Furman which mandated imposition of the death penalty upon conviction of a certain crime were struck down in cases of that same year.

America is soon to be an energy exporter in a couple of years. For many years

Mideast policy was about maintaining peace in the area to ensure the flow of

oil. Now that is no longer true. So here is what I propose. Every last soldier in

the middle east should be pulled out. Every last dollar of aid should be stopped,

and diverted to repairing the infrastructure of crumbling America. Let them fight

among themselves until they reduce themselves to where they started, driving

camels around the desert. Not one more drop of American blood spilled there.

The world will cheer, and umpteen billion dollars will be saved. Win win.....

Regarding the export of terrorism, with America gone from the area, there should

be no need for that. And if a country wants to be vengeful and maintain the jihad,

simply inform them that if America is attacked again, in the future instead of

war planes in the sky, they will see tactical nukes headed their way.......

Do you mean like this.....

This is how it's done these days......

More people die in motor vehicle "accidents" but the governments want to keep people driving when they have absolutely no idea of what they are doing. Maybe we should ban cars as well ?

Judging by the intelligence of the electorate in this country, not many people should drive.

JMHO

The topic is death due to gun violence, not motor vehicle accidents. Both are problems, but are completely unrelated, as are the solutions to these problems. Surely you can see that.

It's pretty obvious where you stand on the gun control issue. Do you think there is any correlation at all between the availability of guns in America and death/injuries due to guns? Just a yes/no answer would suffice.

Recent Harvard Study: Gun Control Is Counterproductive. http://theacru.org/acru/harvard_study_gun_control_is_counterproductive/

It's been proven over and over. The cities/nations with the most stringent gun control laws have the highest rates of murder by guns. The answer is to deal with the mentally ill, not gun owners. Period.

You convieniently forgot this bit from the link you provide:

"It is important to note here that Profs. Kates and Mauser are not pro-gun zealots. In fact, they go out of their way to stress that their study neither proves that gun control causes higher murder rates nor that increased gun ownership necessarily leads to lower murder rates"

Hope you aren't a real lawyer...

Interesting...... even more interesting is the conclusion drawn by Prof. Kates and Mauser:

"

CONCLUSION

This Article has reviewed a significant amount of evidence from a wide variety of international

sources.

Each individual portion of evidence is subject to cavil—at the very least the general objection

that the persuasiveness of social scientific evidence cannot remotely approach the

persuasiveness of conclusions in the physical sciences.

Nevertheless, the burden of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal more death

and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially since they argue public policy ought to

be based on that mantra.

To bear that burden would at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with

more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have

achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide).

But those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared across

the world.

Over a decade ago, Professor Brandon Centerwall of the University of Washington undertook

an extensive, statistically sophisticated study comparing areas in the United States and Canada

to determine whether Canada’s more restrictive policies had better contained criminal violence.

When he published his results it was with the admonition:

If you are surprised by [our] finding, so [are we]. [We] did

not begin this research with any intent to “exonerate”

handguns, but there it is—a negative finding, to be sure,

but a negative finding is nevertheless a positive contribution.

It directs us where not to aim public health resources.

Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

When I used to drive between Chiangmai and Buriram, we used to stop at the Topland Hotel. Not necessarily cheap (1000 Baht/night), but they had a fantastic breakfast and dinner buffets. Well worth the additional cost of the room.......

Consider Western Wholesale Meat Company (WWMCo) in Jomtien.

http://www.wwmco.asia/

Last April, I ordered 500g (18 oz) Ribeye steaks and 600g (21 oz) T-Bone steaks from their web site. The meat was very tender.

The order was sent via bus in a cooler with dry ice and arrived on the day I asked for it to arrive.

I also ordered their Gammon (Ham) from the cooked meat section along with 350g Pork chops and 300g Pork steaks....... awesome.

I will order from them again.

Sound like a good idea. Where are you located?

I am in BFE Nong Bua Lamphu near Loei. I have ordered stuff from BKK before and got it the next day. I am sure it was sent in the morning or came over night. Just wondering how logistics would work for me.

Buriram......

They sent on the night bus, sent me a text on the arrival time and which bus company. Showed up at the bus station and I put the order in the car and went home and started BBQ'ing!

Why go to all that hassle?

Have you not heard of the Burirampieman? Google him.

What hassle...... the only hassle is for WWMCo, they have to package and ship the order. I just need to stop and pick it up while going to Big C to do my normal shopping!

Oh, I too use Google when I need to.

Consider Western Wholesale Meat Company (WWMCo) in Jomtien.

http://www.wwmco.asia/

Last April, I ordered 500g (18 oz) Ribeye steaks and 600g (21 oz) T-Bone steaks from their web site. The meat was very tender.

The order was sent via bus in a cooler with dry ice and arrived on the day I asked for it to arrive.

I also ordered their Gammon (Ham) from the cooked meat section along with 350g Pork chops and 300g Pork steaks....... awesome.

I will order from them again.

Sound like a good idea. Where are you located?

I am in BFE Nong Bua Lamphu near Loei. I have ordered stuff from BKK before and got it the next day. I am sure it was sent in the morning or came over night. Just wondering how logistics would work for me.

Buriram......

They sent on the night bus, sent me a text on the arrival time and which bus company. Showed up at the bus station and I put the order in the car and went home and started BBQ'ing!

I am guessing Wang Saphung or Loei would be best for me. Nong Bua Lamphu might be a possibility. Thanks.

Another option......

Chern Chim Steakhouse in Udon carries WWMCo products. http://chernchim.com/

Worth an order just to see if you like their products!

Consider Western Wholesale Meat Company (WWMCo) in Jomtien.

http://www.wwmco.asia/

Last April, I ordered 500g (18 oz) Ribeye steaks and 600g (21 oz) T-Bone steaks from their web site. The meat was very tender.

The order was sent via bus in a cooler with dry ice and arrived on the day I asked for it to arrive.

I also ordered their Gammon (Ham) from the cooked meat section along with 350g Pork chops and 300g Pork steaks....... awesome.

I will order from them again.

Sound like a good idea. Where are you located?

I am in BFE Nong Bua Lamphu near Loei. I have ordered stuff from BKK before and got it the next day. I am sure it was sent in the morning or came over night. Just wondering how logistics would work for me.

Buriram......

They sent on the night bus, sent me a text on the arrival time and which bus company. Showed up at the bus station and I put the order in the car and went home and started BBQ'ing!

Consider Western Wholesale Meat Company (WWMCo) in Jomtien.

http://www.wwmco.asia/

Last April, I ordered 500g (18 oz) Ribeye steaks and 600g (21 oz) T-Bone steaks from their web site. The meat was very tender.

The order was sent via bus in a cooler with dry ice and arrived on the day I asked for it to arrive.

I also ordered their Gammon (Ham) from the cooked meat section along with 350g Pork chops and 300g Pork steaks....... awesome.

I will order from them again.

Have you ever tried to buy a gun in the US?

Obviously not.

Which one of the 20,000 gun control laws would have prevented these murders by STABBING and Gun fire deaths?

3 stabbed to death, 4 shot to death, including the instigator.

Yet the anti-gun yahoos are already dancing in the blood of the dead in an attempt to push their misguided anti-gun laws on the books.

Why no calls for stricter knife laws?

There's a movie I saw once about a Country where only the military and police were allowed to have guns. It was really educational. It was called "Schindler's List". I think you could still get it on Netflix.

Im blessed to have been born and raised in the UK where Im fortunate enough to have lived the 61 years of my life without the thought of owning a gun ever entering my head! Still In Britain today, only the military are allowed to have guns plus a small (mostly) strictly controlled number of police officers. And its real life in Britain! Not a semi-delusional fictional Hollywood-movie created gun-fest world where most US citizens sadly seem to dwell. Aldous Huxley once said that everyone is trying to be their favourite character in fiction. Nothing personal, but in the US this seems to mean that men are culturally pressurised to cultivate a movie hero's arrogance and ego, and must own a gun or 2 or 3 or 4. When will y'all wake up and see that Hollywood has been just as effective on 'you guys' as the nazi propaganda was on the Germans.

Sorry to burst your bubble of bliss concerning the safety of the UK with their stringent gun control.....

The following is from a paper presented in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy (Attached) properly foot noted and this is an analysis of most data available through 2008::

To gun control advocates, England, the cradle

of our liberties, was a nation made so peaceful by strict gun

control that its police did not even need to carry guns. The

United States, it was argued, could attain such a desirable

situation by radically reducing gun ownership, preferably by

banning and confiscating handguns.

The results discussed earlier contradict those expectations. On

the one hand, despite constant and substantially increasing gun

ownership, the United States saw progressive and dramatic reductions

in criminal violence in the 1990s. On the other hand, the

same time period in the United Kingdom saw a constant and

dramatic increase in violent crime to which England’s response

was ever‐more drastic gun control including, eventually, banning

and confiscating all handguns and many types of long guns.22

Nevertheless, criminal violence rampantly increased so that by

2000 England surpassed the United States to become one of the

developed world’s most violence‐ridden nations.

You have not burst my bubble as I did not make any claims about levels of violent crime in the UK or the USA, which is the subject of your quote. I stated fact about who can legally 'bear arms' in the UK, and simply and truthfully gave you my life experience. Im fortunate to have lived half my life in a small English city and half in a large English town. I feel very safe in the town where I live half the year when not in Thailand. If I'd lived in a large UK city, where the violent crime increase alluded to in your quote was focused, my experience and opinion might have been different. Also note that your quote is about 'violent crime' and not 'homicide' levels. Murder is the topic here, not all violent crime. I agree with one of your authors later conclusions that any statistical national comparisons are very difficult and therefore maybe worthless because levels of gun crime depend on a complex mix of social, economic, and CULTURAL influences. And this brings me to the 3rd point that I was trying to make. My opinion is that the US has a gun worshipping culture. It was understandably born of their relatively recent violent gun toting emergence as a nation and history, but since then it has been unconsciously nurtured and fed by a national love and obsession with movies and gun-toting movie heroes who have been and maybe still are the main role models in the US. It is now obviously also nurtured not so unconsciously by the thriving US gun manufacturing and sales industry. Sometimes I flick thru the movie channels on a hotel TV and its usually a very short time before the guns come out, if they r not out already, and the blood starts to flow. Nearly every movie situation involves guns and is resolved by a hero with a gun. As I said, I believe Hollywood has a lot to answer for.

The quote is from a paper chalenging the mantra of the gun control advodates of More Guns means More Death and Less Guns means Less Death. It analyzes all the statistical data available at that time used in murder, violent crime and suicide.

You stated (Had to remove) "I dont hate the US, only the gun control..............or rather lack of it." This paper used England as one of many glaring examples of the failure of gun control to change human behavior.

Table 2: Murder Rates of European Nations that Ban

Handguns as Compared to Their Neighbors that Allow Handguns

(rates are per 100,000 persons)

Nation Handgun Policy Murder Rate Year

A. Belarus banned 10.40 late 1990s

[Neighboring countries with gun law and murder rate data available]

Poland allowed 1.98 2003

Russia banned 20.54 2002

B. Luxembourg banned 9.01 2002

[Neighboring countries with gun law and murder rate data available]

Belgium allowed 1.70 late 1990s

France allowed 1.65 2003

Germany allowed 0.93 2003

C. Russia banned 20.54 2002

[Neighboring countries with gun law and murder rate data available]

Finland allowed 1.98 2004

Norway allowed 0.81 2001

Notes: This table covers all the European nations for which the information

given is available. As in Table 1, the homicide rate data comes

from an annually published report, CANADIAN CENTRE FOR JUSTICE

STATISTICS, HOMICIDE IN CANADA, JURISTAT.

This study points out that in the USA on average, almost 90% of all convicted murderers had an average arrest record of more than 5 felonies prior to being convicted of murder. By law they couldn't purchase a weapon legally (Gun control) but were able to obtain them through illegal means.

Gun control doesn't control the segment of the population that is the problem!

I dont hate the US, only the gun control..............or rather lack of it.

Have you ever tried to buy a gun in the US?

Obviously not.

Which one of the 20,000 gun control laws would have prevented these murders by STABBING and Gun fire deaths?

3 stabbed to death, 4 shot to death, including the instigator.

Yet the anti-gun yahoos are already dancing in the blood of the dead in an attempt to push their misguided anti-gun laws on the books.

Why no calls for stricter knife laws?

There's a movie I saw once about a Country where only the military and police were allowed to have guns. It was really educational. It was called "Schindler's List". I think you could still get it on Netflix.

Im blessed to have been born and raised in the UK where Im fortunate enough to have lived the 61 years of my life without the thought of owning a gun ever entering my head! Still In Britain today, only the military are allowed to have guns plus a small (mostly) strictly controlled number of police officers. And its real life in Britain! Not a semi-delusional fictional Hollywood-movie created gun-fest world where most US citizens sadly seem to dwell. Aldous Huxley once said that everyone is trying to be their favourite character in fiction. Nothing personal, but in the US this seems to mean that men are culturally pressurised to cultivate a movie hero's arrogance and ego, and must own a gun or 2 or 3 or 4. When will y'all wake up and see that Hollywood has been just as effective on 'you guys' as the nazi propaganda was on the Germans.

Sorry to burst your bubble of bliss concerning the safety of the UK with their stringent gun control.....

The following is from a paper presented in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy (Attached) properly foot noted and this is an analysis of most data available through 2008::

To gun control advocates, England, the cradle

of our liberties, was a nation made so peaceful by strict gun

control that its police did not even need to carry guns. The

United States, it was argued, could attain such a desirable

situation by radically reducing gun ownership, preferably by

banning and confiscating handguns.

The results discussed earlier contradict those expectations. On

the one hand, despite constant and substantially increasing gun

ownership, the United States saw progressive and dramatic reductions

in criminal violence in the 1990s. On the other hand, the

same time period in the United Kingdom saw a constant and

dramatic increase in violent crime to which England’s response

was ever‐more drastic gun control including, eventually, banning

and confiscating all handguns and many types of long guns.22

Nevertheless, criminal violence rampantly increased so that by

2000 England surpassed the United States to become one of the

developed world’s most violence‐ridden nations.

Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

Firstly, how do you know anything about the Taliban?

I remember when they were fighting the Soviets and the Americans (and all her lackeys) called them great freedom fighters and broadcast reports of how human, loving and just they were. I saw a report of how they were always laughing and making jokes.

Once they became the enemy the same media who betrayed them as great fellows began betraying them as horrid creatures who do the things you wrote in your post.

Which version is true? Have you been there to see yourself?

As for any of the acts you claim in your post none of them are Sharia.

Oh ... I see ... you're the only one with credible information here. The Taliban consider it Sharia law under their particular brand of Muslim religion. And you did say "They are free to exercise whatever religion they want." So I ask again, do you also think the Taliban are also "free to exercise whatever religion they want." Or will your "answer" again be that I don't know what I'm talking about, but you do?

No, I never said they are free to paractice whaterver......... you can't even understand this forum so please, stop trying to understand the world. Now finish your beer, pat your belly and let the big boys ponder politics.

healthbkkbkk,

Prior to posting memoirs, you should really check to see if your memories are correct!

1) You never saw the Afghan Taliban fighting the Soviets! The Soviet backed government & the Soviets were removed from power in 1992, the Taliban came into existence in 1994.

2) The freedom fighters you refer to were Masood & Hekmatyer, both Afghans. When the Soviets were replaced, Rabbani was made president. All the warlords involved in throwing out the Soviets supported Rabbani with the exception of Hekmatyer, the resulting civil war ended when the newly formed Taliban took control of the country.

For what it is worth, the USA never knowingly supported Osama Bin Laden, his financial support came from Saudi Arabia. The Taliban ideology is also from Saudi Arabia mainly their religious education was based upon the Wahabi teachings.

And before you ask, yes, I was there for many years and knew one of these characters personally.

So the word slope has now been hijacked by the "racist" movement just like the word gay has been hijacked by homosexuals.

The world has gone mad.

Has anyone considered that the bridge may not have looked level?

Asian people didn't choose the word slope it's derogatory....it was racists.

Gay is only derogatory when spat out by homophobes

Just to throw a wrench(s) into your argument:

1) Not all Asians are of the same race. Many are caucasian and some are of African origin. Using the term Asian people only applies to what continent they are from, not their race.

2) The term slope is commonly used in the road/bridge building professions. The camber of a road is expressed as the percent slope. Where in my country we use the term camber, my Indian engineers just use the term slope.

3) The gradient of a road is generally expressed as percent slope,

So, the term Slope is no more derogatory than the word Gay, it just depends on how the words are used.

You want to pick on J Clarkson? How about the time he reviewed a new Cadillac and made the comment that only Old People and Pimps would own one..... great one liner, loved it!

"Budhist monks should stay out of politics and remain neutral, as they represent a spiritual holiness for the country, but in Thailand and Burna, Budhist monks always get involved in politics, which resulted in them being beaten and even executed; especially in time of crisis. Religious figures must remain neutral, in order to be respected by all sides. This is a wisdom that most religious figures do not comprehend or understand."

"Tell that to Archbishop Desmond Tutu and the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King."

. . . And let's not forget Thich Nhat Hahn in Vietnam, not to mention the legion of monks in Burma and the Saffron Revolution.

"Sathien Wipornmaha, secretary of the Buddhist Association of Thailand (Bat), an non-government organisation (NGO), said that while monks have feelings like everyone else, sangha regulations prevent political expression...."

"Director general of the [National Office of Buddhism], Nopparat Benjawatananun, said joining a political protest is a breach of Buddhist discipline"

Source: Thailand's Bad Boy Monk Buddha Issara Keeps Getting Worse http://www.establishmentpost.com/thailands-bad-boy-monk-buddha-issara-keeps-getting-worse/#ixzz2wzdZv2hA

[Note, however, we don't know what the monk in this case said to incense the crowd].

Exactly my point, this is not Vietnam nor Tibet and neither are the same school of Buddhism as Thailand. The Theravada sangha directive is not to get involved in politics at all.

This dosnt excuse an attack on the guy at all of course, it is just wrong but he should also not be having any political involvement or opinion at all. It is unlikely this would ever have happened id Issara was not so publicly involved in political protests and sending the message out it is ok to be involved in politics here whilst wearing a robe... It is not.

Issara has a lot to answer for.

What my research has produced so far:

While Thailand is currently a constitutional monarchy, it inherited a strong Southeast Asian tradition of Buddhist kingship that tied the legitimacy of the state to its protection and support for Buddhist institutions. This connection has been maintained into the modern era, with Buddhist institutions and clergy being granted special benefits by the government, as well as being subjected to a certain amount of government oversight.

In addition to the ecclesiastic leadership of the sangha, a secular government ministry supervises Buddhist temples and monks. The legal status of Buddhist sects and reform movements has been an issue of contention in some cases, particularly in the case of Santi Asoke, which was legally forbidden from calling itself a Buddhist denomination, and in the case of the ordination of women- monks attempting to revive the Theravada bhikkhuni lineage have been prosecuted for attempting to impersonate members of the clergy.

What type of government does Thailand have right now? Oh, that's right a pro-Red Shirt supportive government. That's why Nopparat Benjawatananun, said joining a political protest is a breach of Buddhist discipline, most likely becuse the target of the protest was his government.

In 2007, calls were made by some Thais for Buddhism to be recognized in the new national constitution as a state religion. This suggestion was initially rejected by the committee charged with drafting the new constitution.^[7] This move prompted a number of protests from supporters of the initiative, including a number of marches on the capital and a hunger strike by twelve Buddhist monks.

Gee, a hunger strike by 12 Buddhist monks in Thailand for a political issue......

The Sangha Supreme Council also declared the same prohibition, pursuant to its Order dated 17 March 1995.^[13] At the end of the Order was a statement of grounds given by Nyanasamvara, the Supreme Patriarch. The statement said:^[13]

It seems that the specific prohibition has to do with supporting a candidate or running for an office but I guess if you protest you will be shunned, disrespected and condemned in various manners but it doesn't prohibit political protests (See above Hunger strike).

Can't seem to find any sangha regulations that prevent political expression, help!

Thailand & Burma????

Buddihst monks have been involved in politics almost as long as I can remember and in other countries.

South Vietnam 1963 protests against the Diem regime,Thích Quảng Đức self immolated (Lit himself on fire)

THCH_Q~1.JPG

Recently in Tibet, more self immolations of monks protesting against China.

I would think, Monks, as you say, represent a spiritual holiness, a purity and when they see coruption or a tainted government it is their obligation to lead their followers not sit on the sidelines and observe.

And this is why Monks are advised and directed to stay out of politics, whilst wearing the cloth they are supposed to remain neutral and not to engage in laymen distractions like politics. In case you didnt have the entire story he decided to get involved and have a go about the dismantling of a PDRC stage. Really there was no need for him to get involved at all as a monk and no one has any idea what was said but seems it was not polite, people dont just jump a monk for nothing here.

Shameful and disgraceful was the physical attack absolutely but every action has a reaction, as a Monk he should understand this. Not a very wise Monk if you ask me.

Really?

You had better inform the Dalai Lama then, he has been up to his eyes in politics for decades......

His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama seems to think otherwise or maybe you don't know as much about Buddism as you think you do.

Yes, I had the entire story, unlike most posters, I actually read the OP and all the responses before deciding to comment.

The Dalai Lama belongs to a different school of Buddhism governed by its own rules. Please refer to my post directly above.

Sorry, doesn't seem to make a difference to me......

They ALL follow the teachings of the same man, Buddah.

The fact that an NGO is quoted that supposedly represents ALL the followers in Thailand is a laugh. Were they elected? If so, by whom? What is the origon of this NGO's funding?

In Thailand, you can find many different temples from different schools of Buddism... at least one school, probably more, allows monks to participate in politics, is in Thailand.

Pardon my scepticism, but I spent 10 years dealing with these self serving organizations (NGO's). A lot like expert witnesses, whoever pay's the bill dictates the content of the testimony/report.

Budhist monks should stay out of politics and remain neutral, as they represent a spiritual holiness for the country, but in Thailand and Burna, Budhist monks always get involved in politics, which resulted in them being beaten and even executed; especially in time of crisis. Religious figures must remain neutral, in order to be respected by all sides. This is a wisdom that most religious figures do not comprehend or understand.

Thailand & Burma????

Buddihst monks have been involved in politics almost as long as I can remember and in other countries.

South Vietnam 1963 protests against the Diem regime,Thích Quảng Đức self immolated (Lit himself on fire)

THCH_Q~1.JPG

Recently in Tibet, more self immolations of monks protesting against China.

I would think, Monks, as you say, represent a spiritual holiness, a purity and when they see coruption or a tainted government it is their obligation to lead their followers not sit on the sidelines and observe.

And this is why Monks are advised and directed to stay out of politics, whilst wearing the cloth they are supposed to remain neutral and not to engage in laymen distractions like politics. In case you didnt have the entire story he decided to get involved and have a go about the dismantling of a PDRC stage. Really there was no need for him to get involved at all as a monk and no one has any idea what was said but seems it was not polite, people dont just jump a monk for nothing here.

Shameful and disgraceful was the physical attack absolutely but every action has a reaction, as a Monk he should understand this. Not a very wise Monk if you ask me.

Really?

You had better inform the Dalai Lama then, he has been up to his eyes in politics for decades......

His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama seems to think otherwise or maybe you don't know as much about Buddism as you think you do.

Yes, I had the entire story, unlike most posters, I actually read the OP and all the responses before deciding to comment.

I hope the state of the track is better than the appalling state of many of the roads in Buriram, Chidchop has a monopoly on road maintenance in the Province, I'll bet he cares more about his racing circuit than he does about the roads we mere mortals have to travel on.

Chidchop might have the monopoly on mainenance but he doesn't control the budget allocated out of Bangkok....... he can only maintain with the funds received from Bangkok.

Blame Bangkok not Chidchop!

Interesting topic.....

What if you never had a bridge to burn?

I left the USA when I was 6 months old then spent the next 15 years living in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Thailand and the Philippines before returning to the USA.

Finished High School in one state, went to college in another state, then spent the next 10 years working in my profession in two other states.

Finally went the expat route and worked/lived in Central America, South America, Middle East, South Asia, Southeast Asia and a few islands between the continents.....around 35 years.

I do not feel comfortable in my birth country, never have.... I have always believed that the initial 15 years pretty much set my future in motion.

maybe they're franchised to Ryan Air.

Cheap beer: but ....'that'll be 50p for the glass sir".

You want to sit down sir? One pound please.....

On that note......

No Frills Airlines.wmv

A Barbeque, like a Weber Q200.......

In Thailand 29,600 Baht

In the USA around $200 or 6400 Baht

Even if they tax you 100% inport fees you are money ahead......

"Thanks for your info, I imagine the pad was built in the usual Thai.way, A large Bon was dug 3 meters deep and the sub soil a mix of sand and clay was used and I imagine the only compacting was from the lorrys and the machines leveling it.

Is there any simple way of testing the % of compaction ?"

In the US, soil is considered compacted if it has been in place for at least 2 years. Still, it is always tested.

The way it is tested is with a small electrical box of some sort. A steel stake is driven into the ground and attached to this machine. The machine puts out some kind of signals (don't know what but I've seen it done) through the steel stake and will give a meter reading as to the % of compaction.

Clay is another story and isn't used because it expands and contracts as it gets wet and then dries. Over time this can allow a structure to sink into it. In my area, there is always at least 2 feet (2/3 meter) of crushed rock put down and compacted when the clay is very dry and hard. This compaction is done with a machine (sheepsfoot vibratory roller) to lock the crushed rock together and form a solid base.

Sheepsfoot roller

PS You can tell if your soil is expansive clay by getting a handful of it when it's dry, and adding water to it. Mix it thoroughly with your hand until wet. If it forms a single sticky lump it is clay. If it is wet but will still break apart easily in your hand, it isn't expansive. If it is already wet, do the same test with a handful but you don't need the water. Even engineers do that.

I don't know what part of the states you come from, but in my experience it doesn't matter how long fill has been in place, the question is "Is it documented?" Soil mechanics principles dictate the soils properties, and subsidence is not compaction.

The "Electrical box" is a nuclear gauge. It uses a cesium source for density determination and an Americium source for hydrogen determination (Water). While the newer machines will give you a compaction value, they still require the Maximum density to be entered into the machine. These machines are not capable of determining the Maximum density of a soil. As a matter of fact, no machine is capable of determining the maximum density of a soil. The laboratory still needs to prepare the soil, adjust the moisture content and compact the samples.

The determining factor on wether to use clay in a compacted fill has nothing to do with the clays expansion potential. It is a basic cost calculation! How much will it cost to bring in a different fill material? How much will it cost to use the on-site materials and change to a foundation/slab design that will deal with the expansive soils? Whatever is cheaper is what will be used!

While your test for clay is relatively accurate, it fails to identify expansion potential in a clay. Clay with calcium ions are relatively low to no expansion, whereas a sodium ion clay is a different story. Both clays but with totally different properties. What you are describing is what we refer to as the atterberg limits. Liquid limit, plastic limit, Plasticity Index. High Plastic Limit with a Low liquid limit gives you a HIGH Plasticity Index, both Calcium and Sodium clays fall into this category. Expansion potential is not a factor.

Thanks for your info, I imagine the pad was built in the usual Thai.way, A large Bon was dug 3 meters deep and the sub soil a mix of sand and clay was used and I imagine the only compacting was from the lorrys and the machines leveling it.

Is there any simple way of testing the % of compaction ?

Simple answer, NO, there is no simple way to perform this test.

First off, it is actually 4 tests leading to the Percent compaction determination. They are:

1. Proctor (Maximum density/ Optimum moisture) Wet densities and incremental moisture contents, plotted as dry density vs. % moisture, the apex of the curve yields the maximum density and the optimum moisture.
2. In-situ density and moisture content. Expressed as dry density and moisture content.
3. In-situ density/Maximum density = Percent compaction

Testing methods for in-situ can be Drive cylinders, Sand cone or Nuclear gauge. The first two tests would require a scale (Balance) along with calibrated cylinders (Drive) or a calibrated cone(Sand cone). The sand cone would also require a calibrated reference sand. The nuclear gauge is faster, but in Thailand few engineering labs have them due to cost and licensing requirements.

You are better off hiring a laboratory to run these tests......

Here is an example why every western country does not recognise anything from Thailand to do with medical, mental health or any other educational institutions... probably one of the most epic failures, to go with a host of others, in coming out with a factual investigation. Absolute garbage... and the blind trying to manipulate a fast awaking and seeing public.

Why is it that UC Berkley, Stanford, UCLA & USC medical schools send their eye doctors to Thailand to study Lasik surgery?

Because Thailand is using technology that won't be introduced into the US for a few more years...... they are one of the world leaders.

Oh, Thailand also has a fantastic reputation with Plastic surgeons....... they have done some amazing work.