2 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Why bulldoze the new building when the original one has already been removed?  Have the operators of this new business been shown to have done anything illegal, yet?  The land is privately owned, who has the authority to erect a shrine on someone else's property?

The court! Like has been suggested it is likely the old foundation's have been used as the time frame is very unlikely to have been long enough for new foundation's and cement pouring. 

3 hours ago, KannikaP said:

Using the same foundations I'll bet.

Using the same brown envelopes to the same powers that be (PTB)!

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

In Thailand ??.....    Do any of the clubs, restaurants, bars or even major shopping malls, or any public places have any of this ?

 

He, or us (foreign readers)... He (owner) seems to know everything he needs to to circumnavigate laws and get illegal business running again...  Its us who haven’t learned anything if we expect anything else. 

 

This will be an exercise of wash and repeat.... Raid... pay off the BiB, re-open... stay open for a few months, raid, pay off the BiB... and so-on...   If its profitable, then it works - its only about the bottom line. 

I don't know the answer to your question. Or was it rhetorical? You'd need to check with the licensing departments at city hall to find answers. Who knows, there may well be properly licensed premises. Of course, that in itself won't guarantee your safety. So, always check your exits immediately upon arrival.

I wouldn’t patronize the new place with the history….

What a joke....disgraceful. I hope that nobody ever sets foot on that land.

12 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

 who has the authority to erect a shrine on someone else's property?

The Shriners?

It is business and it is money. And this is what the world keeps on turning. You cannot bring back the dead. It they don't do the business, anotherone will do. Suck it up.