Liverpool Lou

They were, he's in custody.

No. He was installed by his peers in the senate he stacked. He was an outsider who never ran for office. If you think he was elected your wrong....appointed is not elected. There was no general election in Thailand in 2019 that the people voted in, is that what you're saying?

Wasn't Prayut elected in 2019?

https://cars.carithai.com/cars/camper There's a few there.

No sense of humor in your post either. There wasn't meant to be any humour in my comment, it was a serious (and accurate) observation.

Sadly, even though not one single of them has any hint of originality or humour.

It is.

Like they did in 2019.

Thaivisaness again. Why would you hope that racism can be seen in the story? That appeals to you? There's no indication of the husband displaying racism, neither deep, nor underlying. I suspect, though, that there may be some, not so latent, racism in your mind.

Because a regular inspection should take place of all licensed premises. How frequently are those inspections supposed to take place?

It did have a licence when it started as a restaurant, a restaurant licence. Subsequently, it was extended, illegally

The "pubic"? Interesting.

No one likes anyone killing someone else.

I understand the concept. If it's not what I ordered then I don't accept delivery, it's as simple as that. You claim that the driver will be charged in such a case. In my opinion that's not fair, I asked why and you respond because it's cod? You do understand the concept, right? "I understand the concept. If it's not what I ordered then I don't accept delivery, it' as simple as that" No, COD is not "that simple" in your example. After you've paid COD and received your delivery the driver leaves, he doesn't wait around to ensure that you like the order. Delivery drivers for Lazada orders do not offer a returns service, if you're unhappy with your order you return it though the Lazada return channel. It is as simple as that. " You claim that the driver will be charged in such a case". No, I did not make that claim. "You do understand the concept, right?" Yes, I understand the COD concept. It's you that understands your private concept of the process, not the actual process. Here's the real COD process... 1) Driver arrives. 2) You pay the COD amount to the driver. 3) Driver gives you the package. 4) Driver leaves.

Already exists. Obviously, unusable seat belts are not, by definition, seat belts as required by law.

Cars registered before 1st January 1988 are exempted.

Takes all sorts!

But, then, the Daily Mail's report doesn't have the same tone as the OP suggesting that it was deliberate.

The author was a Thai Daily News journalist, I'm sure that he will appreciate your appreciation of his thoroughness.

The link in the OP states it happened yesterday, the evening of September 4th.

And maybe none of those!

No, it's news because it was apparently a deliberate act, not an accident that the majority of the 65 to which you refer are.

What was your thought process that enabled you to come up with that gem...anything logical or rational?

No.

Based on what, if he was not at fault?