placnx

Move Forward should now state clearly their program regarding 112 and put this matter in abeyance until an election when they gain a majority (not counting any coalition partners) .

I've had a UK bank account for many years and never been resident in the UK.

Yes, it started when Paris was besieged by Germans in 1870. Maybe people even ate rats then.

No problem for Coney Barrett and Alito to get a job at the Heritage Foundation or Federalist Society.

Did you read the quote I posted? The Framers were aware of how things can go wrong if the apparent majority in a state or locality, i.e. "the people", through their legislatures can enact intemperate or unjust laws that violate basic rights. Are you aware of the Texas take on anti-abortion, a real travesty! I did read the Alito draft, essentially the same thing as the decision. As I explained in previous posts, it goes against logic to give the states a say over such fundamental rights as a woman's right to choose what to do in regard to a not yet viable fetus. As you may know, this right developed from the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, so not something that even the Supreme Court should tamper with. If the Dems got big majorities again, maybe they should impeach the liars on the Supreme Court, those who lied in their confirmation hearings.

Did you read your link? An excerpt: "Most of the Founders agreed that the people were capable of governing themselves without the aid of a class of nobles. But they also knew that the people can screw things up. By acting intemperately or unjustly, they can trample on the rights of a minority or overlook the national interest. Indeed, the Founders experienced this on an almost daily basis in the 1780s, as the state governments legislated imprudently and even maliciously, even though, by the standards of the time, they were extremely sensitive to shifts in public opinion."

The Consitution is there to organize the rule of law in which the rights of individuals are protected from oppression including by the "majority". It makes no sense to have basic rights vary from state to state, since such rights are not determinable by some local majority.

Right, several justices are reactionaries. Perhaps they take precedent from the Old Testament where lying to achieve "good" ends was acceptable.

Yes, the Dems were remiss in not codifying Rowe when they had the majority in both houses.

We should blame Obama & Co for being so lackadaisical as the Dem majorities shrank with each election after 2008.

There is a limit to how far a Court can reasonably infer how the mentality of the 18th Century framers of the Constitution should determine how the Court rules today. In particular, bringing back states' rights to set local rules regarding abortion flies in the face of women's rights which logically cannot be different state-to-state. The concept of an unviable fetus having personal rights is more a theological concept than a constitutional one. Then again, the right to bear arms could be subject to limitation by local rules when not subsumed by the militia provision of the Constitution.

The military governments of Taiwan and S Korea were quite repressive, yet they eventually yielded to the popular will.

I would call the present Court an echo chamber for reactionaries. The machinations of McConnell et al to engineer this majority are a subversion of democracy.

But who's name is on the share register?

It seems that the complainants are basing ownership listed on the share register of the defunct company. In the US there is a market (pink sheets) for delisted shares.

Apparently he did divest himself of the shares, but there was and is no way to record that on the share register. These were his father's shares, so I guess his dad's name was and is still listed as owner.

S. Korea and Taiwan changed. Why not Thailand?

Sorry, I was talking about a newer CT scanner (as an alternative to a MRI machine).

It was explained that due to the company being inactive, the shares cannot be traded on BSE and the company register cannot be altered to reflect any transfer of ownership. The other MP possessor of iTV shares is said to have created a document giving his shares to a relative, and Pita may have done something similar.

The device is just a ring not more than 15 cm thick as I remember. How could anyone experience claustrophobia with that?

This reminds me of the naivete of Obama. After the big victory in 2008, he became overconfident and complacent and soon after lost his 60 member supermajority in the US Senate.

Years ago I had a CT scan (abdomen) with a CT device that was just a doughnut ring. It took seconds. How could that be claustrophobic? Maybe a hospital here has one like that.

There was a Panorama program on BBC about such a scam operation in Sihanoukville where they got women in the US to part with $ millions. The scam workers were Chinese lured to Cambodia as described here.

This year a group was asking for Crestor to be removed from the US market, but apparently that has not happened. What's odd is that the group was complaining about a recently approved Crestor. Maybe that concerned an approval for a new pediatric treatment which Astra Zeneca was claiming would entitle it to prolong it's exclusivity for adult usage, but the FDA rejected that gambit. Crestor has actually been around since around 2003. It is the brand product of the drug rosuvastatin. I just bought Crestor in a pharmacy in CM.

So is Bangkok Bank continuing to offer internet banking? Now I'm using SCB, but have not received the termination notice yet.