Etaoin Shrdlu

Earthquake is an insurable peril, although coverage can be limited or more expensive in some high risk areas due to lack of insurance capacity. So far, most insurers in Thailand have offered property insurance including earthquake coverage up to the full value of the sum insured for buildings and contents. We'll see if Friday's event changes that in the future.

I think most juristic entities take out property insurance for the building and any other common property of a condominium development. Thai insurers do offer property "all-risks" insurance policies that include the peril of earthquake. Any juristic entity that did not take out such a policy would be negligent. Individual unit owners can take out homeowners' insurance that includes earthquake coverage. Some do, some don't. Insurers in Thailand rely heavily on offshore reinsurance for catastrophic perils like earthquake, flood and windstorm. How well and how quickly some of the claims get paid may depend upon the adequacy of each insurer's loss reserves and the nature of their reinsurance agreements. I'm wondering what the OIC may say about this event as I expect there will be questions.

The building wasn't complete, so the cost to replace the property destroyed in the quake will be less, and possibly much less, than the total contract value. Some cost items, such as architects' fees or profit margin won't be recurring, further reducing the cost to replace. Ital-Thai will likely be on the hook for the cost to re-build regardless of whether shoddy materials or faulty design or workmanship is involved. A main contractor is usually responsible for the entire project unless the principal separately contracted out specific elements. It would be up to Ital-Thai to pursue any subcontractors if they were negligent. This should not affect the government's rights under the contract with Ital-Thai. Earthquake is an insurable peril under construction "all-risks" policies. Ital-Thai could have insured this risk if they wanted to. I suspect government contracts may not require contractors to take out this coverage and Ital-Thai quite possibly did not. Some force majeure perils in construction contracts may be limited to excusing the contractor from paying liquidated damages in the event the project is delayed. Insurable perils, such as earthquake, are often not considered force majeure events with respect to the contractor's liability to re-build following a loss unless the project is abandoned by the principal. Political aspects aside, I think Ital-Thai will be on the hook for this one.

Here's a good analysis: https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/5218181-signal-chat-violates-espionage-act/

It isn't about inviting the journalist. It's about using an insecure channel to discuss classified information. Signal isn't approved for discussing classified material.

Every single government official included in that chat should be fired and criminally charged. Not one of them said "hey, this is an insecure channel and we aren't supposed to be discussing this kind of thing". They were all negligent.

I suggest you check. All persons in the US, regardless of their immigration status, have the right to due process. Foreigners in the US on student visas are entitled to appear before an immigration judge prior to deportation.

They still have the right to go before an immigration judge before deportation.

If they broke the law, then charge them, and if convicted, deport them. They are still entitled to due process.

Look up the Brandenburg Test.

Student visas don't contain conditions that prohibit engaging in speech protected under the US Constitution.

As unpopular as that may be, it is likely protected speech.

Supporting a terrorist organization is spelled out quite clearly in statutes. They describe actions, not speech.

There are terms under which a student visa can be revoked, but exercising free speech isn't one of them.

What specific condition in their visa are they being charged with violating?

Spreading hate? I can think of someone else who's a master of doing that and gets masses of Americans to buy into it. Antisemitism? Some of those protesting are Arabs, who are themselves semites. Protesting against Israel's policies isn't anti-Jewish or hate speech. It's protected speech under the Constitution. Supporting Hamas? Not illegal unless it contravenes one or more of the very prescriptive laws that define support for terrorist organizations. These laws criminalize specific actions, not speech. I haven't seen any of the students charged with contravening any of those statutes. Occupying universities? Universities can expel students for prohibited conduct and can charge outsiders with trespass. Expulsion would cancel a student visa, but a misdemeanor trespass may not always be enough to get a foreigner deported. But again, some of the students are bing deported without being charged with any crime.

If a foreigner on a student visa breaks the law, then charge them and if they are convicted, deport them. The problem is that some foreign students are being deported without being charged with any crime and are thus deprived of their right to due process under the Constitution. You do support the US Constitution, don't you?

No, freedom of speech does not extend to breaking the law. But some of the students are being deported without being charged with breaking any law.

Even foreigners on student visas are subject to the provisions of the US Constitution that guarantee free speech and due process. There are no conditions on student visas that state that the holder of the visa is not entitled to protection under the US Constitution.

Yes, because they clearly broke the law and were charged with crimes, unlike many of the students who are being deported without being charged with any crime.

We don't need violent MAGAs storming the capitol and threatening to hang Mike Pence, either. Yet not only has Trump pardoned most of them, but now wants to compensate them for their time in prison.

Not to mention "hang Mike Pence". And now Trump wants to compensate this scum for their well-deserved time in prison.

https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/trump-tariffs-automaker-prices-warning-928bc7a9?st=dPeEAq&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink So much for those who thought Trump was a free-market capitalist.

Mrs. Shrdlu and I were processed together in the non-citizen channel last year when we visited the US, We attempted to use the US-citizen channel as we had on previous occasions, but this time we were directed to use the non-citizen channel.