DezLez

Where are they? I've not seen them in this thread! I am sure the world would love to read your practical solutions, but without searching for them (if they exist!) And where are the answers to my two questions? All you have done so far is to have responded to my posts with obfuscation without actually answering the questions!

So it can take off and let peace loving owners or fare paying passengers get what they paid for! I suppose you would just get off the plane and join them would you?

Sorry I cannot agree to such barbaric behaviour as it might damage the plane! ????

You did not answer the two questions I asked you! What are the answers?

So why make the posts/quotes you did? Please come up with some practicable comments/solutions not just headline grabbing meaningless hot air posts!

"Eliminate frivolous air travel" and eliminate the majority of the Thai Tourist economy! Ask your Thai family/Thai friends if they agree!

Are you in Thailand? If so how did you get here?

And as said earlier it would be much more helpful to all if you put a topic and not your avatar in the topic/subject/title box!

So do most countries!

I Totally agree with you! Here is some background info. The earliest instance of the quote occurs in Hall’s 1906 “The Friends of Voltaire,” a biography of the French writer and philosopher originally published under Hall’s pseudonym S.G. Tallentyre. In the passage where the quote appears, Hall discusses Voltaire’s reaction to news that the government had condemned and burned fellow French philosopher Claude-Adrien Helvétius’ book. Voltaire, according to Hall, did not find the substance of Helvétius’ work particularly impressive but was still dismayed by French Parliament’s actions. “‘I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,’ was his attitude now,” wrote Hall. FACT CHECK: Did Voltaire Say, ‘I May Disapprove Of What You Say, But I Will Defend To the Death Your Right To Say It’? | Check Your Fact

The problem, as proven in the SK stampede, and as reported and I believe, admitted by the SK authorities, was the lack of police planning and control!

"your social commentary leaves a great deal to" Commend! Well done Rooster, please just ignore the curmudgeons as I do.

Anusarn market is up and running again but the "Thai European" bar is long closed and is unlikely to reopen!

It would help if a reference was made in the post as even you say "I think" but obviously do not know what the post was referring to!

What rule change in 2013 are you referring to?

Read your own posts! You stated in an earlier post; "BUT , I cannot prove what people were thinking at the time . Things like that cannot be proven, pointless asking really" I rest my case!

Then why post something as an apparent fact when it is only, as you now state, just your opinion dressed as a fact?

Or do not have one; as in the UK! The Constitution of the United Kingdom or British constitution comprises the written and unwritten arrangements that establish the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as a political body. Unlike in most countries, no attempt has been made to codify such arrangements into a single document, thus it is known as an uncodified constitution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom

Please, not another one; Thailand's 20 or so constitutions and charters can be categorized into three groups: Evolution of Thai constitutions since 1932 Elected legislatures: The legislature is completely elected. This included the 1946 Constitution where the elected House selected the Senate and the 1997 Constitution where both the House and Senate are elected. The prime minister is either a military leader or a figurehead of the military or the palace. This includes the 1932 constitution (after 1937), the 1947 Charter, the 1949 Constitution, the 1952 Constitution, the 1968 Constitution, the 1974 Constitution, the 1978 Constitution, the 1991 Constitution, the 2007 Constitution, and the Pending 2016 Constitution. Absolute executives: The executive has absolute or near absolute power, with either no legislature or a completely appointed legislature. The prime minister is usually a military leader or a figurehead of the military or the palace. This includes the 1932 Charter, the 1932 constitution (before 1937), the 1959 Charter, the 1972 Charter, the 1976 Constitution, the 1991 Charter, the 2006 Interim Charter, and the 2014 Interim Constitution.

So why make the "un-provable statement" in the first place?

Are they the same illegal criminal migrants that have realised they were sold a pup by their handlers to break into the UK?

I wonder if all the moaners/BREXIT op-posers with no answers or solutions would care to either agree with the above or make positive alternative proposals without spouting the usual BREXIT/Labour/election alternative?

Only just re-appointed!

But the EU are still bound by it and not obeying it! It makes it even more pertinent because we are NOT in the EU and the first thing a so called "asylum seeker" should do is seek asylum in the first country of entry! They are NOT allowed to move between countries! More obfuscation and lack of willing to actually answer facts. I am finished trying to respond to you!

So what is your simplistic solution?