Toronto Escorts

Victims Sue Thailand, U.S., Accor Over Tsunami

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
It was just a matter of time, like the Eagles said "let's kill all the lawyers, let's kill them tonight"

OTB

VIENNA (Reuters) - U.S. and Austrian lawyers have filed a lawsuit demanding Thailand, U.S. forecasters and the French Accor group answer accusations they failed in a duty to warn populations hit by December's Tsunami disaster, a lawyer said Monday.

The lawsuit was filed Friday at a New York district court on behalf of tsunami victims by lawyers including U.S. attorney Edward Fagan, internationally renowned for 1990s lawsuits against Swiss banks over Holocaust-era accounts. It demanded an account of their actions on Dec. 26.

"We expect a hearing within 30 days," Austrian lawyer Gerhard Podovsovnik told Reuters.

"We don't earn any money on the lawsuit. We want to help people," he said. "We are suing to get information."

The disaster left about 300,000 people dead or missing in Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India, Thailand, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Maldives, Bangladesh and East Africa. Hundreds of thousands lost their homes.

The text of the lawsuit is available on the Web site www.tsunamivictimsgroup.com.

The U.S. and Austrian lawyers filed the lawsuit on behalf of around 60 named plaintiffs from Austria, Germany, France, Netherlands and elsewhere. Podovsovnik said they were also acting on behalf of at least 40 more not named.

The lawsuit suggests the Thai government and the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which operates a Tsunami Warning Center in Hawaii, failed to issue the requisite warnings.

SLOW WARNINGS

"Respondent NOAA did not notify all involved countries which lay in the tsunami's path. From public information it appears that ... NOAA failed to issue an alert that would notify countries where the tsunami hit that the deadly wave was coming," the lawsuit said.

"Published reports emerged that upon receipt of the NOAA alert and other data, the seismological and oceanographic experts of Thailand spent more than one hour talking about what the risk may or may not have been, instead of immediately issuing a warning to their population," it said.

It also accused Thailand of failing to notify Sri Lanka that a tsunami wave was headed its way.

Among the charges leveled against Accor, the owner of the Sofitel hotel chain, was failure to equip its luxury resort and spa in Khao Lak, Thailand with state-of-the-art seismic detection and warning systems, despite its location "in an earthquake and tsunami fault zone."

Last month, Accor issued a statement denying media reports of possible negligence in connection with the tsunami disaster. "The allegations concerning Accor are completely unfounded," Accor said on its Web Site.
 

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,533
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
onthebottom said:
"let's kill all the lawyers, let's kill them tonight"

OTB

I realize it would take too long to sort them out. So let's run with your idea.:D
 
Y

yychobbyist

papasmerf said:
I realize it would take too long to sort them out. So let's run with your idea.:D
For those of you devoid of Shakespearian knowledge I offer you the following quote regarding the infamous "let's kill all the lawyers"

"Even a cursory reading of the context in which the lawyer killing statement is made in King Henry VI, Part II, (Act IV), Scene 2, reveals that Shakespeare was paying great and deserved homage to our venerable profession as the front line defenders of democracy.

The accolade is spoken by Dick the Butcher, a follower of anarchist Jack Cade, whom Shakespeare depicts as "the head of an army of rabble and a demagogue pandering to the ignorant," who sought to overthrow the government. Shakespeare's acknowledgment that the first thing any potential tyrant must do to eliminate freedom is to "kill all the lawyers" is, indeed, a classic and well-deserved compliment to our distinguished profession."

And you know, Bill Is right. We would have no freedom today were it not for lawyers.

That having been said, there are a number of lawyers who you just wanna drown sometimes aren't there?
 

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,533
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
Bill was a plagiarist and needed the lawers. :rolleyes:
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
yychobbyist said:
For those of you devoid of Shakespearian knowledge I offer you the following quote regarding the infamous "let's kill all the lawyers"

"Even a cursory reading of the context in which the lawyer killing statement is made in King Henry VI, Part II, (Act IV), Scene 2, reveals that Shakespeare was paying great and deserved homage to our venerable profession as the front line defenders of democracy.

The accolade is spoken by Dick the Butcher, a follower of anarchist Jack Cade, whom Shakespeare depicts as "the head of an army of rabble and a demagogue pandering to the ignorant," who sought to overthrow the government. Shakespeare's acknowledgment that the first thing any potential tyrant must do to eliminate freedom is to "kill all the lawyers" is, indeed, a classic and well-deserved compliment to our distinguished profession."

And you know, Bill Is right. We would have no freedom today were it not for lawyers.

That having been said, there are a number of lawyers who you just wanna drown sometimes aren't there?
Solders provide freedom and democracy, lawyers are supposed to provide justice - an act that many of them are wholly lacking in.

Have you herd research scientists have replaced lab rats with lawyers, apparently there are some things even rats won't do. :D

OTB
 
Y

yychobbyist

onthebottom said:
Solders provide freedom and democracy, lawyers are supposed to provide justice - an act that many of them are wholly lacking in.

Have you herd research scientists have replaced lab rats with lawyers, apparently there are some things even rats won't do. :D

OTB
Soldiers can also do wonders for tyrants and despots. In fact, without soldiers, a tyrant and a despot is nothing. Lawyers do so much good work they never ever get credit for. Remember, your guy is in power because of the successful arguments of good lawyers.

And justice? It's provided by judges. Not lawyers. Lawyers aren't after justice - they're there simply to serve their clients. If justice is achieved as a result of that service well then all the better but such is not always the case.
 

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,533
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
onthebottom said:
Solders provide freedom and democracy, lawyers are supposed to provide justice - an act that many of them are wholly lacking in.

Have you herd research scientists have replaced lab rats with lawyers, apparently there are some things even rats won't do. :D

OTB

I once met a great lawyer. No lies passed his lips. I walked away wondering how he was before he died.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
yychobbyist said:
Soldiers can also do wonders for tyrants and despots. In fact, without soldiers, a tyrant and a despot is nothing. Lawyers do so much good work they never ever get credit for. Remember, your guy is in power because of the successful arguments of good lawyers.
Actually he's in power because he got 3.5 million more votes, at least this election.

yychobbyist said:
And justice? It's provided by judges. Not lawyers. Lawyers aren't after justice - they're there simply to serve their clients. If justice is achieved as a result of that service well then all the better but such is not always the case.
Good point, so they're whores then?

OTB
 
Y

yychobbyist

onthebottom said:
Actually he's in power because he got 3.5 million more votes, at least this election.



Good point, so they're whores then?

OTB
I meant the first election.

Lawyers have to determine who to work for and who not to. Most lawyers have taken on clients who they disliked and have fought for causes they personally did not believe in. The law is a profession of service. If you want to call them whores that is your prerogative. Lawyers have fought for your right to call them whores.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
yychobbyist said:
I meant the first election.

Lawyers have to determine who to work for and who not to. Most lawyers have taken on clients who they disliked and have fought for causes they personally did not believe in. The law is a profession of service. If you want to call them whores that is your prerogative. Lawyers have fought for your right to call them whores.
And now they've sued the US for a natural disaster......

OTB
 
Y

yychobbyist

well, some have yes. And some will likely successfully defend the action. And?
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
yychobbyist said:
well, some have yes. And some will likely successfully defend the action. And?
Such a waste of time - now we're becoming post count sluts...

OTB
 

Hard Idle

Active member
Jan 15, 2005
4,959
23
38
North York
Culture of absurdity

yychobbyist said:
Meaning what exactly?
If you read that article to a normal person 30 years ago, they would have thought it to be a draft of a Monty Python sketch.

The very fact that somebody could conceive such a case is eveidence of how abusrd the the legal systems have become in the Western world. The criteria for what can go to court began to part ways with reason in the 80's and is now a complete joke.

What allowed it to hapen was the philosophy that somebody has to be responsible for anything & everything that happens. Closely related to the belief that just about everything can be prevented, and the unnatural idea that there is some sort of "right" to compensation or remedy for every adverse experience.

Even though there is allegedly no financial claim here (we'll see), If this isn't tossed out immediately I fear it will help push back the boundaries of reason even further, allowing lawyers to dream even bigger and more perverted dreams.
 
Y

yychobbyist

But you know what, back in the days when Nellie Mclung and her group claimed that thay were "persons" many men and many lawyers who fought that claim thought the argument that a woman was a person and had legal rights to be ludicrous. Now we feel differently. The law evolves, civil law pushes boundaries at times and sometimes the boundaries push back.

In my view, the simple fact that a claim is brought is completely irrelvant. What is relevant is the reason behind claims either winning or losing. Those of you who argue for tort reform or slag lawyers should keep that in mind.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts