Liverpool Lou

Where has it been credibly reported that the Pata Zoo "cannot take good care of the ape"?

???? The owner has since stated that claim was false, that the animal is not for sale and no offers are being considered.

You mean the "cruelty" of a zoo just like the zoos that exist in your country also?

But the animal is not being kept in particularly unsuitable conditions, it's in a legal zoo.

Exactly what "despicable, brutal treatment" is the ape experiencing? It is in a licenced zoo.

You think that there are no zoos in the UK?!

Transport it to where? Another zoo?

The animal is in a licenced zoo, what is there for it to be "saved" from when the only alternative for it would be another zoo?

How? The ape lives in a licenced zoo that has not done anything illegal nor does it mistreat the animal.

Zoos throughout the world own gorillas

The animal is in a properly licenced zoo.

It's a radio station frequently monitored by taxi companies abd drivers.

No understand. No surprise. Just try reading the OP more slowly.

Perhaps the cabby, as with most people, doesn't check his bank balance every five minutes?

why not just contact your bank, have them contact his bank, etc..... Why? Because the radio station has easier access to the taxi driver (the passenger's bank doesn't) and, even if the bank did contact him, the bank cannot demand that he returns the money that the passenger voluntarily sent to the driver. The potential publicity from the radio station is much more effective and guarantees good publicity for the driver that the bank wouldn't provide.

Nonsense, Chinese cars have been on the market for decades, worldwide, so their reliability can be judged very easily as can their resale values in the markets that they have been available in.

The last resort of so many posters, the "Ignore" list has the savagery of a toothless sheep and has no effect, whatsoever, on anyone except the ignorer!

It is in the opening post of this topic: My point exactly, that's the only place that the clearly mocking "Pee" was used, "Pee" was not used in the original article.

P. Ef. Where was it reported as "Pee Ef"?

No more "worthless" than any other normal car.

As safe as any other time of day. And that's safe.

Yes.

you don't understand ...... it is a ridiculous sentence 192 years without suspension....see the joke of it No, it's who doesn't understand; he faced 77 charges, 5 years for each charge and 192 years is not what his actual sentence is, that's 50 years, before any commutation.

Yes, I do. Putting the concept into practice might be an idea, then.

Not quite as "outrageous" as the 77 counts of fraud that he committed. That's the way that judicial systems work worldwide.