Jump to content
BANGKOK 21 February 2019 12:31

Misterwhisper

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    2,468
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8,128 Excellent

About Misterwhisper

  • Rank
    Platinum Member

Previous Fields

  • Location
    Bangkok

Profile Information

  • Location
    Bangkok

Recent Profile Visitors

9,243 profile views
  1. That loathsome excuse for a human being has just been convicted of a horrific murder and sentenced to IMPRISONMENT FOR LIFE. Yet the Appeals Court is currently "considering" whether this monster should be set free on bail. What in god's name is there to consider??? She should be locked up pending her appeal. Set her free and she will surely abscond abroad -- like so many many others before her. I have never really understood that malpractice of granting bail on convictions as serious as murder. In my opinion that disgusting system is actually encouraging these criminals to do a runner.
  2. If true, this is outrageous. There is no legal justification whatsoever why a national government would demand a "substantial share" of a business deal between what I must assume to be two private entities, i.e. a film studio and the Thirteen Tham Luang Co Ltd that reportedly was registered by the boys' families. That this alleged profit-napping cannot be above board and is not transparent at all is already indicated by this: Why would there be any "possible reprisals" if everything was kosher?
  3. I am not really sure what this amendment to the Forest Act is supposed to achieve and how it "encourages" land owners to grow rare tree species, because the wording is so confusing: Okay, so you start plant a rare species on your land, which entices a land tax of only 0.01% per annum (based on what? the land's assessed value?). But then the trees begin growing and will need years if not decades to reach maturity before they can be harvested. That means that during all that time the tree will remain "unused", which of course would "subject land owners to a land tax rate of 0.3 to 0.7 per cent a year" -- unless they immediately cut down the newly planted saplings in order to "use" them and thus secure themselves the lower land tax rate. Am I missing something? And of course as soon as this new amendment comes into effect, frantic logging of rare trees standing on privately owned land will commence as permission no longer must be sought. The only effect I can see is that those species will be driven to extinction at an even faster rate. So what's the true purpose of this rather strange amendment?
  4. I don't think it is restricted to the poster !  Well, perhaps not an actual hole; more like a vacuum where the brain usually would be.
  5. "Soon" in Thailand means "in about 10 to 20 years". Didn't you know that?
  6. The very term conjures up images of backward, old-fashioned and archaic mindsets that no longer should have a place in a modern society. The fact that Gen. Apirat mentions this tune at all only goes to show what outdated dinosaurs he and many of his fellow top brass are and that the army is trailing almost 50 years behind the country's democratic development.
×
×
  • Create New...