Jump to content

RustBucket

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    597
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RustBucket

  1. Absolute rubbish.

    How did the shenanigans on the streets of BKK pre coup have any effect on an SME?

    It is all about how much money the consumer has in the pocket.

    More like the last government withholding 120 Billion baht from farmers slowed down local economies in rural Thailand. That's about it.

    But goes to show just how fragile the Thai economy is doesn't it.

    Imagine what will happen when the Chinese economic bubble bursts and the US economy tanks at the same time Thailand is entering the AEC. Next year is promising to be a very interesting year in economics.

    • Like 1
  2. Yet another astounding display of human rights abuse from the Thai authorities.

    Keep it up guys. UN sanctions are on the way next year and you are so dumb you don't realize it.

    Why the hell would anyone claim to be Thai?.... This is the typical Thai self image of superiority. They don't even realise almost all those migrant workers are proud to be what they are as a nationality.... Claiming themselves to be Thai is definitely going to scare the tourists off, because most probably already know not to trust a Thai.

  3. It's all a bit dictatorial don't you think?

    I personally think it is a good idea as long s it is 100% politically neutral and not something being set up by a certain individual with a political agenda.

    It is a minor form of checks and balances or a reform policy debating society.

    I think as a PM he is showing he is not as strong as people make out, a bit of a political pussy cat if you ask me, that he can get so intimidated by something so benign.

    • Like 1
  4. never refuse to accept any passenger, and always use the meter. Hahahaha never will happen, need a number to immediately report violations and have license of driver revoked, that will work.

    That won't deter anyone, the taxi driver will find a way to get hold of another in someone else's name somehow.

    What would work though is a 'three strikes and you're out' rule on a three tier basis. and I am not talking about the driver, I am talking about the car.

    Irrespective of who owns the car or who is driving it at the time.

    Tier 1

    Each infringement goes against the car number in the database. As soon as it receives three strikes, the car is seized without argument and impounded. The registered owner must pay 10% of the value of the car for its return. The car then becomes a tier two.

    Tier 2

    Same as above, it gets allowed three strikes in tier two and after the third strike the car is impounded again and the owner is hit for 30% the value of the car to get it back.

    Tier 3

    As above but the car is crushed without argument.

    You have a dedicated team of say 15 officers in plain clothes with hidden recording equipment who just go around hailing taxis and reporting all those who break the rules. The fines cover those costs with plenty to spare I would say.

    Pretty vicious system, but they will fall into line, because we all know the taxi drivers don't give a damn about the police, but the owner of the car?.... I guarantee they will be very afraid of the geezers who own the taxis.

    Job sorted.

  5. Nothing so sure, Thai mantra is money!

    Don't fall off your high horse!!

    If you were seriously ill, and 300k baht could save your life, can you honestly tell me that you would not consider this option??

    Disgraceful comment.

    Just because he is against organ harvesting and exploitation of the poor and needy doesn't put him on his 'high horse'.

    If you agree with this disgusting practice of exploitation just to save your own ass, and rant off at someone with moral decency, is actually putting YOU on the 'high horse' here.

    You have to understand that not everyone is as unscrupulous and selfish as you. Some actually prefer to wait for a legal and more natural replacement.

    If you ever need it done, I hope your body rejects the kidney. Because in my view, you don't sound like someone worth saving.

  6. If you or I run a business that losses money we go bankrupt , why should banks be any different, if they cant make money with all the advantages they get they should shut their doors,

    Because it will affect many depositors who have their savings in those banks, or investors who have shares, or pension fund managers who have people's pension investments in such banks. Or the people who the banks employ who will lose their jobs.

    It should be up to the sovereign nation's government where the bank is registered and paying taxes to, to have the say in whether the bank is made insolvent or not.

    These are clearly small banks who were hit the hardest during the last banking crisis. The small banks were ignored while the big banks were allowed to be bailed out by western tax payers. The small banks were left to struggle through it. So of course they are taking longer to recover.

    It is the big banks bailed out so they can continue to pay their executives who made all the mistakes in the first place, six figure bonuses.

    I have had a business that struggled through the last crisis. It started losing money but it recovered eventually. It wasn't forced into bankruptcy. That would have only happened if I could no longer manage the company debts.

    These banks failed a stress test, they are not struggling to pay creditors, so they should not be forced into bankruptcy. If they get in the crap and struggle to pay their creditors, it is up to their respective governments what should happen.... Not the EU superstate overlords who are made up of pure cronyism unelected stuffed shirts....... And run by Germany.

  7. I have this suspicion that the DNA matches are less than conclusive. And that's being charitable.

    If there is a DNA match at all, why do you think it would not be conclusive?

    I assume there are 2 and they are conclusive.

    So why no prosecution?

    In any other country, conclusive DNA evidence is all that is required.

    Wrong. The DNA results in and of themselves prove sex not rape or murder.

    Edit to answer your edit. You need to work on those critical thinking skills and look into DNA evidence limitations particularly regarding legal issues.

    Hahahahaha.

    You are now totally floundering.

    DNA in this case does not prove rape or murder?

    Can others in this thread comment on this just to make sure I am right to be laughing my head off now/

  8. I have this suspicion that the DNA matches are less than conclusive. And that's being charitable.

    If there is a DNA match at all, why do you think it would not be conclusive?

    I assume there are 2 and they are conclusive.

    So why no prosecution?

    In any other country, conclusive DNA evidence is all that is required. That is logical

    Your 'assumption' is actually illogical.

  9. What is the first thing a trial lawyer learns?

    Never ask a question you don't know how the client will answer. Corollary is never announce a test you don't know the results of.

    Your logic fails

    BTW

    You claimed a fact. You said the RTP blocked the DNA samples. Support the claim.

    Now you are really embarrassing yourself.

    end of conversation. (to save you further embarrassment).

    LOL

    Sorry I popped your illogic bubble!!

    Whatever.

    We will just let the other readers in the thread make up their minds on that one.

    • Like 1
  10. What is the first thing a trial lawyer learns?

    Never ask a question you don't know how the client will answer. Corollary is never announce a test you don't know the results of.

    Your logic fails

    BTW

    You claimed a fact. You said the RTP blocked the DNA samples. Support the claim.

    Now you are really embarrassing yourself.

    end of conversation. (to save you further embarrassment).

    • Like 1
  11. name="RustBucket" post="8588586" timestamp="1414339341"]

    You're missing their purpose entirely & have outlined something that falls within the remit of the Burmese authorities & Interplod.

    Interpol has no jurisdiction. The Burmese men's lawyers could get samples though.

    So why havn't they and why have the UK authorities not requested they ask for them to be sent to the UK?

    Because they are being blocked by the RTP. That's why.

    International standards my a***!

    LOL

    Yet another conspiracy theory! Yeay!!

    We don't know what the defense attorneys have done but we can be sure they have not been blocked by the RTP.

    No.

    There is a vast difference between logic and conspiracy.

    Logical = Lawyers request DNA samples of their clients.

    Illogical = Lawyers don't request DNA samples from their clients.

    Logical = UK police request lawyers obtain DNA samples from their clients.

    illogical = UK police are not interested in requesting lawyers obtain DNA samples of their clients.

    Fact = Lawyers have not been reported to have yet requested DNA samples from the clients.

    Logical = RTP refusing allow anyone to take DNA samples as it will destroy their fake DNA results.

    illogical = RTP allow lawyers to take DNA samples and allow it to destroy their own fake DNA evidence.

    No conspiracy there, just basing my opinions on what is logical and illogical.

    Rusty...

    Flawed on so many levels. The major one being lawyers meet with their clients alone.

    To think that they would announce they had taken samples before they had results to disprove the RTP claim is insane. If the results do not disprove the RTP claim they would never mention running Independent tests. That is also why they would not involve the UK cops.

    You think the UK cops would be there if they knew via background DNA tests that the RTP were completely correct?

    Flawed indeed.

    The fact you said 'lawyers meet with their clients alone' I don't recall saying that and anyway whether they do or do not, can you please send us a link telling the public that lawyer visits are with or without the police presence. That would help.

    If you can't find that link, then you shouldn't really be posting it as a fact.

    Please do prit things and then call them 'my' flaws.

    Huh? Let me understand this. You can claim anything with no evidence that it is true (or even logic) but can demand links from me?

    LOL

    I think the UK cops are there to slow the boil politically in the UK.

    So why would the defense announce they had taken samples before they could know the results would not put a needle in their clients' arm?

    ( I will look for the link as it was reported on TVF)

    I base my thoughts on logic, and I can't exactly supply a link to 'logic'. It is thee who is coming out with things that are based on supposed information on the investigation.

  12. You're missing their purpose entirely & have outlined something that falls within the remit of the Burmese authorities & Interplod.

    Interpol has no jurisdiction. The Burmese men's lawyers could get samples though.

    So why havn't they and why have the UK authorities not requested they ask for them to be sent to the UK?

    Because they are being blocked by the RTP. That's why.

    International standards my a***!

    LOL

    Yet another conspiracy theory! Yeay!!

    We don't know what the defense attorneys have done but we can be sure they have not been blocked by the RTP.

    No.

    There is a vast difference between logic and conspiracy.

    Logical = Lawyers request DNA samples of their clients.

    Illogical = Lawyers don't request DNA samples from their clients.

    Logical = UK police request lawyers obtain DNA samples from their clients.

    illogical = UK police are not interested in requesting lawyers obtain DNA samples of their clients.

    Fact = Lawyers have not been reported to have yet requested DNA samples from the clients.

    Logical = RTP refusing allow anyone to take DNA samples as it will destroy their fake DNA results.

    illogical = RTP allow lawyers to take DNA samples and allow it to destroy their own fake DNA evidence.

    No conspiracy there, just basing my opinions on what is logical and illogical.

    You say 'we can be sure they have not been blocked by the RTP.' Please, will it be too much to ask you to please tell everyone here exactly WHY we can 'be sure'. You must have some very tangible evidence for us all to 'be sure'. Or re you just basing your opinion on the fact that we all know that the RTP have a glowing history of competence and non-corruption that is the envy of the entire policing world.

    Thought the coroner could request the samples not the UK police or Lawyers?

    The UK coroner has no standing to initiate any requests.

    See the information JLCrab's posted regarding the limitations of what the UK can do. All from gov't sources.

    He didn't even say anything about UK coroner.... he said 'coroner'.

    There you go again twisting people's words.

    You are breaking forum rules with every post you make.

  13. You're missing their purpose entirely & have outlined something that falls within the remit of the Burmese authorities & Interplod.

    Interpol has no jurisdiction. The Burmese men's lawyers could get samples though.

    So why havn't they and why have the UK authorities not requested they ask for them to be sent to the UK?

    Because they are being blocked by the RTP. That's why.

    International standards my a***!

    LOL

    Yet another conspiracy theory! Yeay!!

    We don't know what the defense attorneys have done but we can be sure they have not been blocked by the RTP.

    No.

    There is a vast difference between logic and conspiracy.

    Logical = Lawyers request DNA samples of their clients.

    Illogical = Lawyers don't request DNA samples from their clients.

    Logical = UK police request lawyers obtain DNA samples from their clients.

    illogical = UK police are not interested in requesting lawyers obtain DNA samples of their clients.

    Fact = Lawyers have not been reported to have yet requested DNA samples from the clients.

    Logical = RTP refusing allow anyone to take DNA samples as it will destroy their fake DNA results.

    illogical = RTP allow lawyers to take DNA samples and allow it to destroy their own fake DNA evidence.

    No conspiracy there, just basing my opinions on what is logical and illogical.

    Rusty...

    Flawed on so many levels. The major one being lawyers meet with their clients alone.

    To think that they would announce they had taken samples before they had results to disprove the RTP claim is insane. If the results do not disprove the RTP claim they would never mention running Independent tests. That is also why they would not involve the UK cops.

    You think the UK cops would be there if they knew via background DNA tests that the RTP were completely correct?

    Flawed indeed.

    The fact you said 'lawyers meet with their clients alone' I don't recall saying that and anyway whether they do or do not, can you please send us a link telling the public that lawyer visits are with or without the police presence. That would help.

    If you can't find that link, then you shouldn't really be posting it as a fact.

    Please do prit things and then call them 'my' flaws.

×
×
  • Create New...