Alf Witt

As long as lawyers in Thailand are not responsible (accountable) for their advice the risk is 100% for the client.

Is that a fact? Thai lawyers are not responsible for their advice? I'd be interested to know your basis for that statement.

Lets see, who's names are on the contract?

There is your answer.

Wouldn't there be a few hundred or thousands of lawsuits for the advice given in the past. (Company formation to own land).

If it would work the same as in western countries there wouldn't be many law firms left.

Khun Jean,

I was dubious about your statement. Now I am doubly confused by your explanation. To what contract and names are you referring and what does that have to do with lawyers' liability for wrongful advice? Either they are liable in law or they are not. I would be very surprised if they were not liable but you have stated as a matter of fact that they are not. On what, please are you basing that statement or is it just a bar-stool opinion.

To answer your question about lawsuits. No there wouldn't be lawsuits because the ownership of land by a Thai company is legal and the farang shareholding issue, as far as I am aware, remains a grey area which has still not been clarified 100% and probably never will be.

As long as lawyers in Thailand are not responsible (accountable) for their advice the risk is 100% for the client.

Is that a fact? Thai lawyers are not responsible for their advice? I'd be interested to know your basis for that statement.

Reading recent press reports (Bangkok Post and Nation) about the evidence that is stacking up against Mr. T re his offshore shareholdings etc. I was wondering whether there is such a thing as a sub judice law in Thailand. Does anyone know?

I've just seen the post "50 mistakes men make when having sex" see: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?sh...=131575&hl=

Which makes me think that the biggest mistake a man could make when having sex is to partner with a woman who has a list in her head of 50 things you can do wrong before you even start.

I told him last night, if he does it again I will leave.......

Mmm. Could it possibly be that's why he keeps doing it?

You were lucky. We lived for three months in a paper bag in a septic tank. We used to have to get up at six in the morning, clean the paper bag, eat a crust of stale bread, go to work down t' mill, fourteen hours a day, week-in week-out, for sixpence a week, and when we got home our Dad would thrash us to sleep wi' his belt.

Luxury. We used to have to get out of the lake at six o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of 'ot gravel, work twenty hour day at mill for tuppence a month, come home, and Dad would thrash us to sleep with a broken bottle, if we were lucky!

Well, of course, we had it tough. We used to 'ave to get up out of shoebox at twelve o'clock at night and lick road clean wit' tongue. We had two bits of cold gravel, worked twenty-four hours a day at mill for sixpence every four years, and when we got home our Dad would slice us in two wit' bread knife.

Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o'clock at night half an hour before I went to bed, drink a cup of sulphuric acid, work twenty-nine hours a day down mill, and pay mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad and our mother would kill us and dance about on our graves singing Hallelujah.

And you try and tell the young people of today that ..... they won't believe you.

I have never used it before but I'll make an exception this time. In the time honoured phrase of half the posters on this forum - "IF YOU DIDN'T LIKE IT WHY DIDN'T YOU PACK UP AND GO BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME FROM?"

OK, Mr. Hippo, I get the joke now. Your post is entitled "I just don't believe it", so, no matter what evidence is presented to you to prove you wrong you are not going to believe it.

So, to that extent the joke is on all of us (if that lets you save face).

Otherwise you remind me of the guy who admitted that he was wrong only once. That was the time when he though he had made a mistake but, in fact, he hadn't.

If you keep it going we've just got to assume that you are quackers.

Having a bad day, Rosie?

Not particularly, my little finger is broken, I've got Giardia, I haven't had a good crap in 3 days and the Metronidazole that I've been taking for the last week has made me nauseous 24/7 for the last 24 hours X 7.

My husky is shedding her entire undercoat - everywhere, I've been meaning to drop off papers at Immigration for the last 3 days but the grumbling in my stomach has kept me from doing so and the threat of that monster crap that always looms when it hasn't happened has kept me indoors for days. My wife still insists on putting food to rot in the magic cabinet and then she eats while telling me it won't kill me to do the same.

My cat barfs twice a day because he steals the dog's food and it doesn't sit well with him. My housekeeper throws away any paper that is important but leaves crap that isn't.

My neighbor has gotten into a do it yourself kick and has recently been doing construction. The faceless workers behind my house are still doing construction on the new house behind mine and now I can't walk around naked anymore for fear of shaking it at some 14 year old painting.

My dog ate the boy's toys out of the stroller and made <deleted>&$&$& mince out of the mosquito netting so now he comes back the other day with bites on his face. I've got tremendous gas that should require a no smoking sign and I'm fearful if someone lights a match or turns on the stove. My wife glares at me when I fart in bed and every fart is of the uncertain variety where you're just sure you should do it or not but not doing it becomes less of an option with each passing second.

How are you doing?

Hi Jeffrosner,

Is this diatribe copyright?

I'd love to use it on the next Indian tailor who grabs my hand and say's "How are you today, Sir?"

Just another point. Even if your assertion that the use of "a duck" in your statement can only refer to a specific duck the answer would be 5, not 3.

There are 2 ducks in front of "a duck" (so its position in line is now fixed at position 3 from the front). There are 2 ducks behind "a duck". If, as you insist that is the same duck being described, then we have 5 ducks and the "a duck" must be the duck in the middle.

Your argument is defeated even by your own "logic".

Three ducks have been described and we know what position that they are in.

If three ducks have been described and we know what position they are in where is the riddle? It becomes a meaningless statement. The riddle lies in the fact that, if you don't think logically about it, but just respond with your first impression you fall into the trap of thinking that there can only be three ducks in total.

Most people, when their error in thinking is pointed out, realise their mistake and that's where the "fun" (for want of a better word) lies.

However, the fun here is that you still don't get it, Mr. Hippo. (Or, I hope, you are still pretending not to get it).

What is it in the wording of your OP that makes you think that only 3 ducks have necessarily been described?

There are 2 ducks in front of a duck (OK, so far that is three ducks, I agree)

There are 2 ducks behind a duck (NB. you don't say "that duck") so that could now be a total of 3 ducks, 4 ducks, 5 ducks or 6 ducks because you don't specify that the duck in the second statement is the same duck as the one in your first statement. In fact it could be an infinite number of ducks becuse you do not specify how many ducks are in front of the second described duck. There is nothing in either English language or mathematics that necessarily requires the second duck you describe to be the same duck as the one described in your first sentence or phrase.

There can be a duck in the middle with any amount of ducks as long as the total is an odd number.

Just think of men running in a race. The man in third place is going to be thinking "Hey, there are two runners in front of me". The man who is third from last in the race is likely to be thinking, "Hey, there are still two runners behind me". So we have a situation where there are two runners in front of a man and two runners behind a man. Both individuals can be described as "a man", because that's what each individual is. But they are not the same man. If there are an odd number of runners in the race someone is in the middle. He is also a man because the race is only for men.

If you don't get it now, I give up.

There are two riding schools in Phuket, one between Chalong and Nai Harn not well run with scraggy horses and one at Laguna which I think is a bit better.

About a couple of hours run from Bangkok there is an area called Kao Yai national park where there is a very well run western style riding school. I think its called "Bonanza".

You should be easily able to find somewhere to keep a horse (or horses) pretty much anywhere in Thailand (except Bangkok).

*sigh* Ok,, kids here is your primer on what the whistle blowing means. I have lived through years of this in the parking garages of BKK:

1. Acknowledgment. a sharp blast or two to let you know he is on the job and has your back.

2. The approach. intermittant short blasts with slightly longer blasts to let you know your have lined up your back up approach to the parking spot. If you have erred, he will blast hard and long to let you know to start over.

3. The insertion. After you have a good line of sight into the parking spot, he will first start with slow and low blasts in regular intervals.

4. The buildup to finish. As you approach nirvana, he will blow hard and fast regular blasts, increasing in speed until a continuous blast is sustained.

5. The finish. After you've reached the right point, he will quit the furious blasting, give you one friendly toot and extend white gloved hand as he opens your door.

Got it?

I almost had an orgasm reading this explanation. Are you sure you get out enough, Chinthee?

So, you hear Patong is very gay? What does "gay" sound like?

On second thoughts, don't answer that. I don't think I want to know.

OK, whatever fancy explanation you use there is still an anomaly between the left/right perception and the up/down perception.

Just to make it more bizarre, try this. You look in the mirror and left seems to be right, but up is still up and down is still down. Now lie on your side and hold up a bottle of beer (or whatever) in your left hand. It now looks as if it is in your right hand, yes? This is so even although your vertical image did not change when you were standing upright and looking in the mirror. OK so far? So what's going on? Also, according to your earlier experience of "left" when viewed in the mirror appearing to be "right" your head should now be at the opposite side of the mirror, but it isn't. Why?

I'm reluctant to criticise powerful individuals in Thailand, especially if they could become Prime Minister, but I have to make an exception here.

This is the guy who thought his role as Interior Misister was to visit night-clubs and bars "in person" and close them down for minor breaches of his puritanical views. Instead of being the man who makes policy he wanted to be the man in jack boots kicking the doors in.

On one occasion in his role as Interior Minister he travelled south to Phuket from Bangkok, visited a very respectable "no-nonsense" music venue and closed it down. Why? Because a farang couple were moving to the music. Not "dancing", just "moving" in rhythm to the music and the place did not have a dancing licence. If he ever becomes Prime Minister there won't be a farang left in Thailand and Thailand as we know it will be a thing of the past, not only for farangs but for Thais also.

Put him in charge of a corrections home for delinquents or something. In charge of a country? No way.

I have never subscribed to the "if they do this I'll go" mentality, but if this man ever becomes Prime Minister I'll be on the next plane out after 12 years here.

Tell me its a joke someone, please.

My pet peeve is sitting in a bar in Soi 7 and having a finger jabbed in my back by eiether a toothless shoe-shine bloke or 3 year old kid selling chewing gum every 10 minutes.

You're not the only one. How do you think he became toothless?

Some people are taking this all a bit too seriously.

Weho............you are winning.

.....and he's making me chuckle too John. Keep it up Weho, you are right in what you've just said. Your comments are so apt and erudite.

I don't know about "erudite", but its certainly some form of "..ite". But, hey, the whole interchange is funny. It's good to read through a whole thread with a smile on your face and sometimes a chuckle. It takes a special talent to have strong feelings about a basket on another individual's motor cycle. Yeh, keep them coming Wacko, sorry Weho. I'm a fan (that's an enthusiast by the way, not one of those round things that blow air at you).

P.S. I guess if you are a smoker you also look for a motorcycle with an ashtray?

Weho, why are you living in Pattaya, if indeed you are?

All of your posts are negative in some way about the place, the food, the people in fact just about everything.

I agree Weho- all of your posts are compaints about almost every aspect of Thailand.

Is there anything indigenous to Thailand that you DO like? Besides Sizzler, Fuji and Roast Beef sandwiches, which you could find in your own country?

Pray tell- what was it about Thailand that made you decide to move here?

Could it have been the supermarket baskets in Carrefour?

it's a reflection, not an inversion.

The eye perceives the light reflected by the mirror.

The mirror does not reverse images, it reflects them.

That's my stab at it......After reflecting for a while.

That is just semantics. Whatever you call the phenomena why does it work from left to right but not from top to bottom?

There are a lot of intelligent minds on the forum so lets see who knows the answer to this one.

When you look in the mirror your image is reversed. If you hold something in your left hand it appears to be in your right hand in the mirror image. So why don't you also see your image upside down?

No, actually only the middle of the middle duck is in the middle.

Don't you have to have all your ducks in a row?

OK, lets settle this with something even Mr. Hippo should be able to understand. Replace the letter "D" with the letter "F". If you say I had a @uck last night and a @uck tonight is the same @uck?

A Duck can only mean one thing

Yup.

If it looks like a duck, if it walks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, it must be a duck!

Except in this case it's a turkey.

Just have to add this:

If you have one large father duck on the right, and one large mother duck on the left, and three baby ducks lined up between the mother and father duck, as per the following configuration:

M Baby 1 D

o Baby 2 a

m Baby 3 d

Is there not two ducks in front of baby 3? Are there not two ducks behind baby 1? Is not Baby 2 in the middle? Are there not five ducks total? Why is this not a solution to your puzzle?

Edit to add, someone will say that Baby 1 and Baby 3 are also in the middle, so that makes three ducks, not one duck in the middle. In this case, consider that they are flying in this formation but that Mom, Dad, and Baby 2 are all level with each other, while Baby 1 and Baby 3 are flying above and below the plane of the others, thus they are no longer technically in the middle, but Baby 2 would still be in the middle.

No, actually only the middle of the middle duck is in the middle.

There were two ducks in front of a duck, two ducks behind a duck and a duck in the middle. How many ducks were there?

A Duck can only mean one thing, 1 Duck, IMHO he's right, and therefore so was I

Of course, "a duck" can only mean I duck but that applies if you say it only once. if you say "a duck" and again say "a duck" in the same sentence without qualification it does not follow that you are talking about the same duck. If I say I have a pen in my left hand and a pen in my right hand would you think I was referring to the same pen? You can have an infinite number of ducks as long as its an odd number of 3 or more.

Will someone please tell me why I am bothering about this?

Check out Koh Naka Retreat. www.onlyyouknowwhere.com