Srikcir Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 9 hours ago, webfact said: Prayut should set a political standard - Abhisit No! A political standard applies to a Thai-Style Democracy and is typically set by the "good people." As such, a political standard can have little or no relevance to laws because it is backed by custom and heritage. Prayut should instead abide by the standard called the "rule of law" as set forth by the Constitution and laws! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramrod711 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 9 hours ago, webfact said: Srisuwan also said that if Prawit insisted on his claim, the NACC should summon all of the supposed owners to make sure that the watches were customised for them. What an abuse of credibility, not even the most avid believer in the government believes this. Prayut faces a choice, admit that they are no better than the slime before them, or throw his crooked buddy under a bus. Either way Thai people would be better off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardColeman Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 9 hours ago, rkidlad said: If the official outcome is that Prawit borrowed the watches and no wrongdoing was committed, that will surely massively hurt their image. It's obvious they're corrupt. And did their owners declare them if they are officials is the next question ? that might be the stalling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unblocktheplanet Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 Wait... Prawit has B.O.?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khun Han Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 9 hours ago, Bob12345 said: The watches are most likely just bought in Thailand (Paragon for example) and VAT has been paid. In many cases no names are registered as this is not necessary for anything (guarantee comes from the brand, not the shop). Insurance might be purchased later but this is not mandatory so whoever stands up as "owner" can just say he had the watch uninsured (so there is no evidence). It's quite normal (but not mandatory), where even moderately expensive consumer goods are purchased, for the customer to register their purchase with personal details such as name, address, email, etc. Higher end retailers really push this aspect of a sale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lamyai3 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 22 hours ago, webfact said: their owners would not allow others to wear them and taint them with sweat and body odour... ...along with toxic secretions that may be dangerous to humans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chama Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 On 1/17/2018 at 8:16 PM, canuckamuck said: If Prayut threw Prawit under the bus on this one he would actually gain a shred of credibility. Anything is possible in an election year. The Toad may know too many insider secrets that could hurt Prayut. In the end the Toad will hop away unscathed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.