4 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

My answer to your question "But would have they put the resources into this over something that happened some years ago if it wasn't Trump.", is yes they would, and white collar crime for the most part is never printed in papers, but prosecutions do occur and unfortunately those with less money than Mr. Trump do jail time.  My Daughter as a Honors Business major and MBA student did her thesis on white collar crime. It was recommended by the University she graduated from that she send it out to be published as a small book which they could use for classes in the future for Students studying on business crimes as part of the syllabus. 

That's reassuring and hopefully they can communicate that message a bit more to the people. It still could be there's a bit more to come out too and I am being unduly pessimistic. 

1 hour ago, Drumbuie said:

"And justice for all.." 

Nobody should be above the law. 

 

What brought down Al Capone wasn't his career as a mobster, it was tax evasion. Those who don't understand history - or accountancy - are doomed to repeat it. 

 

That's the type of opinion that is problematic in my opinion. 

I agree in some ways that seeing him get charged is a bit of the Emperor's new clothes and people see he's a mere mortal and not above the law.

But I don't see Trump as an Al Capone, not as clever or as criminal truth be told, and from the point of view of the average voter, perception is important, and opinion might sway his way, if they see that this is for offences from years ago, that wouldn't have been faced by most others. 

I would hate for this to backfire and lead to four more years. Unlikely but possible. 

I think the other charges are more likely to get him fair and square and will be seen to be fair too. 

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Is falsifying business records in the first degree a crime?

This case breaks what is only a convention of not indicting a former President.

 

Bringing more indictments against the Defendant just got a whole lot easier, a whole lot more certain. 

I am not saying it is not a crime or that in an ideal world charges are not appropriate. But would have they put the resources into this over something that happened some years ago if it wasn't Trump. Not sure. It certainly gives the right ammunition to suggest he is getting special treatment. That is if my interpretation of what has come out is correct. 

19 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The immediacy is there right in front of you, I’ll grant you the Defendant hasn’t kicked off with his usual whinny histrionics, even he seems to have grasped the gravity of the situation he’s put himself in.

 

I’m hopeful your wish with respect to other investigations the Defendant faces will meet your wishes and tgen some.

This case is open to being interpreted as being followed up for political purposes - given the time the alleged acts happened and the substantiveness of the issues.

I had looked to whether the facts, for the basis and reasoning of proceeding with the case, would put it beyond doubt that that it was not done for those reasons. The argument for the case indicates it is a thing, and is I guess likely laws were broken, but it seems the right WILL have a basis to say this was done for political reasons. It may be that more will come out to justify these actions over time. 

As others have said, the other cases appear to be much more serious, and the argument to take matters further against a former president more substantive. 

A tad underwhelming. It is what it was likely to be but no more. 

Though this is a thing, put this on the back burner, and see if other investigations have a bit more immediacy and substance. 

I am there shortlyish. First proper look in ten years. Two nights in Patong will do and two nights in Phuket Town that looks like a fun place to be on the weekend. Then off to beaches off the island. 

4 minutes ago, vandeventer said:

Are they Democrat experts? So Soros is clean? This must be a first!

Soros the bogeyman. Can you lay out why you and republicans put him on the pedestal of evil? Yes he supports democracy, and pushes back against despots, and backs liberal causes that may not be your cup of tea, but I have never quite heard exactly what it is he proven to have done, except have a different point of view to Republicans and some money to back his causes. If you read his Wiki page you'll see his done some positive things even from your viewpoint I should think. 

My prediction is these charges tomorrow are going to be at the higher end of expectations as I doubt they would have otherwise proceeded. 

8 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

Here is a very good video explaining what Kundalini is and how it works.
I'm still hoping for a more scientific explanation from our materialistic friends here, but they have all gone quiet.

PS: Dismissing it as a fantasy is not going to make you look smart.

 

It's hard to know how to approach this. If someone says they experienced this thing, and they can show others experienced a similar experience, then the happening may require a look.

Of course, the feeling of something bigger than ourself could be a connection to the other, or a connection within oneself. Based on available information I would say the latter is likely and nothing here provides proof of a spiritual world at all, except the subjective sense or feeling, which is not nothing. 

If some advanced beneficiaries have psychic powers, genius, greatness in different forms of art, resulting from this, there must be examples of it's exponents showing such new powers that they did not have before. Psychic powers are of course purely theoretical. One might say an exponent would not advertise the fact, let alone bring themselves fame, as they are above that but it does not help that proof is lacking. 

I am not in a position to, or do I desire to, dismiss this. 

42 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Went to Ban Krut today (60 kms & 1 hr away), for a coffee/pastry & dinner.   I do that, lite munch, a few times a week. 

 

Dine out, at least a few times a month, somewhere between Hua Hin & Ban Krut, 170 kms stretch of surfside venues.

 

Would that be allowed ... I think not.   Wonder if there would be time limits to your time away.   Passed on a swim, though surf was looking inviting.   But would want to overnight and didn't plan on it.

 

No surf that I'd swim in within 15-45 mins 'drive' that I'd swim in, let alone be 15 min walk or bike ride.

 

Not even sure I could make it to the local surfside restaurants in 15 minutes, and they're < 5 kms away. 

 

Car yes, walk or bike it ... NO

 

So the powers to be, would like me to:

... Eat

... Sleep

... Work (if employed)

... troll AN

... watch 'approved' media

... AND be thankful I'm allowed to do even that.

 

Hell Yea ... Sign me up ????

17 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Yea ... people seem to be adding quite a bit to fit 'their' spin.

 

I lived in a 15 minute city ...  until I was about 12 or 13 years old, then I realized there was a whole world an hour or 2 away on my bicycle.

 

OMG ... discovered even more interesting things available to see & do when having a motorized vehicle.

 

Damn if they didn't put wings on a bus, and you could fly and see other cultures and FURTHER YOUR EDUCATION IN ALL THINGS.

 

Why would anyone want to restrict people's movement and ability to communicate with other cultures & LEARN.

 

Just think if I never traveled, I'd think Philly PA USA was the center of the Universe .... or .... the USA was the greatest of everything, and everyone loved Americans from the United States.

 

Mushrooms ... feed them Sh!t & keep 'em in the dark.

Your response is understandable because of the way the original post was couched in terms of laws and regulations. Normally this concept is put in terms of simple urban planning so that people can get what they need within 15 minutes rather than being told they can't go beyond a distance travelled in 15 minutes.

That's where sometimes right wing media can be so depressing because they take what could be a good smart idea, find someone with an extreme version of it that would take away personal freedoms e.g. limit people's ability to travel etc, and throw out the baby with the bathwater i.e the good basic idea that maybe cities and towns of the future can be built around this worthwhile concept without stopping you travelling further if you wish to do so. 

This may have been addressed previously in pages 2 to 8 in which case please disregard this post. 

1 hour ago, KannikaP said:

Nanker /Phledge was the pseudonym for The Rolling Stones and Loog Oldhams early songs, and I didn't neet ChatAI to get that, I knew it.

The Hollies wrote under the name of L Ransford.

Percy Thrillington, Bernard Webb, Apollo C Vermouth, Clint Harrigan and Paul Ramon were all used by Sir Paul Macca.

Heard the other day that's where the Ramones got their name. Old news for some but for me it was a fun fact. 

19 hours ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

Had one trip from Hawaii cross country to Boston but nothing that noteworthy. Liked Memphis and New Orleans and Washington and New York and all the usual places.  Highlight I suppose were the big tree forests and wild beaches east of Seattle and Bainbridge Island where family lived. Not long after Snow Falling on Cedars came out set in the same beautiful area. 

Should be west. No one cares but 

1 hour ago, LaosLover said:

As long as I'm killing time waiting for my cab to the airport, let me ask (again) about one of life's great mysteries:

 

Why do brits and commonwealth types care so much about US politics?

 

The last brit controversy I felt the need to have an opinion on was Oasis versus Blur (I voted Oasis, but I was a heavy drinker back then).

 

I've long given up on asking "why do you turkeys voting for Christmas love someone who wouldn't deign to spit on your chav self and would take away your healthcare in a heartbeat?".

 

Always radio-silence on that one.

Couldn't get the plaudits for Oasis. Blur, Pulp, Supergrass so much better from that era.

As an Australian I suppose we see many similarities with the United States way of life, big open spaces, and can see little sprouts of right wing Trumpism popping up here and there.

Of course Murdoch is an Australian and he has influenced his newspapers, with some success though not so much recently, to turn voters to the right. There is an Australian version of Fox News being Sky News in Australia that has failed to gain much traction. Australian politics has it's own issues but generally it is relatively civil and sensible and it is harder to get away with telling a lie without being held to account. Think the UK could be similar.

Of course much of our entertainment and news comes from the US. 

So what the big dog America does is always of interest, and one can wonder as to if it can happen in the US, can it happen in Australia.

I actually think Australians in general are a bit more down to earth and level headed politically, and seeing what is happening in the US may have actually helped the Labour party in Australia point out the games the right plays, albeit in a much less extreme way than in the US. 

Had one trip from Hawaii cross country to Boston but nothing that noteworthy. Liked Memphis and New Orleans and Washington and New York and all the usual places.  Highlight I suppose were the big tree forests and wild beaches east of Seattle and Bainbridge Island where family lived. Not long after Snow Falling on Cedars came out set in the same beautiful area. 

27 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Everyone is already free to celebrate what they like, but i am starting to think that you'd be happier if religion, or belief in supernatural, was banned ???? 

Is that a recipe for a better society? I have serious doubts. 

No. Happy for people to think their way. Funny though how over time people are becoming much more agnostic and atheist yet traditions continue for all. Some stage maybe let Christians celebrate Christmas and the rest of us can get a day off for some other reason e.g. call it Summer solstice in Australia. Fine if it stays how it is but who knows in the future. 

37 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

I really hope that you are joking, but you are probably being serious ????

I think there's a lot of believers who see the world through christian or new age spirituality or whatever eyes and see atheists or agnostics as an anomoly, or, because they don't believe, that they are kind of a nothing. He made the point that if there is Easter and Christmas for all why not a day to celebrate or consider a life from the point of view of someone who doesn't believe there is this other thing - maybe a day to consider what life might be like if what you see is what you get.  Not probably needed in Australia as it is a bit like that now but the United States and Thailand may benefit. 

Some good points on Bill Maher's New Rules on Youtube for 31 March 2023 asking why there is no Atheist's day. A third of American's do not identify as believing in a god so how about all the believer's spend some time considering and respecting a different opinion on the issue. 

9 hours ago, dotcalm said:

How Trump could reap $100M windfall from Stormy Daniels indictment

https://nypost.com/2023/03/31/trump-could-reap-100m-windfall-from-stormy-daniels-indictment

 

The left, always a day late and two or more steps behind.

I believe Trump is loving this.

If so a lot of Democrats will be happy. A diminished , or further diminished, candidate has the funds and passion from the maga punters, to win the Republican candidacy but then loses in a landslide when the average person can't fathom having 4 more years of that. 

I like this song about jail.

Hello Dad ... I'm In Jail - YouTube

I have often felt cemeteries are an anachronism in these times. Taking up real estate near cities.

I don't see a point going out to a cemetery to see the dead. Particularly in the age of photos, video, and online tributes. To me the person is no more in the cemetery than elsewhere and the gravestone or marker has no particular significance.

Many go for the big stone or even a mausoleum. Competition to impress can make it to the afterlife. 

Fair enough that due to religious beliefs and other reasons many feel differently. It might be good if there can be a change in mindset so that it is not seen as disrespectful to disconnect the link between the person and some bones in the ground. Could have a time limit of say 100 years so that it is there only while people who knew you are alive not dead. 

Delete