11 Ways to Completely Revamp Your Letselschade Advocaat Amsterdam

This article analyzes the incorporation procedures for companies in the United States and Thailand.

™

US law and the laws of Thailand are very different bodies of jurisprudence. However, there are some parallels in the field of corporate law. In this post we will briefly examine the rather minor dissimilarities between the two systems.

In the United States of America, one of the most common entities used to conduct business is the limited liability company (also referred to as an LLC). This type of entity was created in order to provide a relatively easy means for individuals and groups to organize a company with limited liability at a relatively low cost and with relatively little in the way of supporting documentation compared to incorporated entities such as a "C Corp" or an "S Corp". That being said, an American LLC still requires upkeep as records must be kept up to date and the activities of the company must comport with the law of the jurisdiction in which it is incorporated. Therefore, many alien nationals decide to retain the advice of an American lawyer when setting up an LLC. Notably, a registered agent in the United States may be required if the principal parties involved in the LLC's activities are not routinely present in the jurisdiction in which incorporation took place.

In Thailand, establishing a company is, in many ways, not as straightforward compared to the USA. The Kingdom of Thailand doesn't actually have legal provisions for any type of juristic person akin to the US LLC. Furthermore, limited liability is only granted under certain conditions and the conditions associated with such an endeavor are usually cumbersome. Another issue in Thailand is the Foreign Business Act. This legislation prohibits foreign companies from conducting certain types of business in Thailand. This can be a tremendous obstacle for those wishing to enter the Thai market. Although, through use of legal mechanisms such as Foreign Business Licenses, Amity Treaty Certificates, and/or Board of Investment Certificates a foreign company in the Kingdom of Thailand may be eligible to enjoy relative legal equality with its Thai counterparts. That said, Thai visas as well as employment authorization may still be necessary for the foreign employees of the company.

When it comes to visas and work authorization both the United States and the Kingdom of Thailand have strict rules and regulations regarding foreign labor. In the USA, certain visa categories such as the L-1 or H-1 may confer a restricted right to work in the USA depending upon the provisions of the visa itself. Those entering the USA as an Immigrant may be accorded unconditional permanent residence depending upon the category of the visa. In Thailand, the Immigration issues are seemingly more straightforward although the issue of work authorization can be far more complicated Letselschade Advocaat Amsterdam than the American rules regarding foreign work authorization. In any case, it is generally advisable to consult with a licensed lawyer from the jurisdiction where an individual wishes to conduct business. This helps ensure that the proper steps are taken at the outset of the company incorporation process.

Sin and crime go hand-in-hand in a pernicious 21st Century world and create an imminent need for the use of holy scripture for defining, reproving, and correcting common law crimes that are sins, and sins that are crimes. The latter days that are preceding the imminent return of Jesus to the earth, as the avenging lion to judge mankind, are as much in need of Christian voices crying "repent for the kingdom of heaven is nigh" as was the voice of John the Baptist was crying repentance just prior to the beginning of Jesus' personal ministry in the 1st Century. Basic human immorality is today frequently not equated with acts and practices prohibited by the Ten Commandments, such as lying, coveting, and adultery, since those three reprehensible acts are regarded by most human beings in the 21st Century world as merely instinctive human behavior and undeserving of judgment. People, especially politicians, will say that lying is necessary in a pragmatic world devoid of idealism in order to achieve political goals. Lying under a sworn oath is, however, a crime called perjury, which is hardly ever prosecuted in courts of law in an utterly juristic and legalistic society. Similarly, lusting after, or coveting something that does not belong to you invariably leads to, either, adultery, stealing, or fraud in order to obtain, by hook or crook, what does not belong to a person, and these cardinal sins are now regarded as, only, human nature. Then there are the sins against nature that were, and continue to be, so heinous that God probably thought that their shocking obviousness made it unnecessary for Him to include them in the written Holy law. I suppose God created man and woman, hoping that with the free will he gave them, they would choose through wisdom to refrain from behaviors that would bring pain, suffering, and reproach on them.

In the very beginning of the legislation of civil and criminal common law, as applied to human civilization, there were certain human acts, behaviors, and practices that were regarded as against natural law. Take, for instance, Hammurabi's Code of ancient Babylonia, created around 1760 B.C. The preservation of the natural heterosexual family was regarded as sacrosanct by Hammurabi, and was the most important part of his Code. Adultery, incest, and homosexuality were not tolerated to any degree. Why was this so? The rationale produced by Hammurabi was that such unnatural acts served to denigrate the family. If, therefore, a person committed adultery, incest, or homosexuality, he, or she, was punished with death by drowning. This might have been due to the effect that Hebrew law had on the ancient world 4,000 years before Hammurabi and, later, the birth of Christ.

A cogent parallel can be drawn quite distinctly between the cultural and legal changes that occurred in the pagan Greek and Roman civilizations after 325 A.D. Before the 3rd Century, Greece and Rome thrived, in decadence and carnality during their cultural years before the coming of Jesus, on humanistic deviations from natural law (the practice of pedophilia, homosexuality, sodomy, and bestiality according to unbridled lust). What occurred after Rome, Greece, and all of Europe were Christianized through the apparent conversion of the Roman Emperor Constantine to Christianity, around 325 A.D., was a blending of Judaea-Christian morality with pervasive Roman tradition, a not-so-holy union. Nonetheless, homosexuality, pedophilia, sodomy, concupiscence, adultery, and bestiality were outlawed, and the Judaea-Christian code, the Ten Commandments, was applied to existing civil and criminal law as heinous sins became crimes and crimes were regarded as sins. What we are now experiencing in the USA, in the early 21st Century, is a mind and soul-rending aberration of natural law that began to reoccur in the late 20th Century as a result of pagan philosophical humanism (as corrupt as it was in ancient Greece and Rome) stemming from the social apathy of a majority of American Christians and Jews. The ancient aberrant Greek and Roman philias stemming from unnatural lusts, such as pedophilia, bestiality, and a new psychosexual aberration called transsexualism (deriving itself directly from homosexuality) have, for nearly five decades, again become a sordid cultural binge for a society of apathetic Christians and Jews, who apparently regard these psycho-sexual pathologies as a "right of Americans to freely express themselves." This late-20th Century normalized regard for sin, and sexual crime, has caused a great many Christian preachers, ministers, and evangelists to refrain from calling sin what it is in the eyes of God in order to refrain from offending the sinners, and bringing human criticism on themselves. Perhaps this is what happened to the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah over hundreds of years as they became corrupt and wicked over time, to an inexorable point of no return to godliness, where total destruction by God was necessary.

So, how should 21st Century Christians respond to the perpetrators of age-old heinous sins, and the crimes stemming from such sin? To answer this question properly, let's begin with the basic unit of society, the family. Christian parents are told in the scriptures of the Holy Bible, especially the New Testament. to be godly examples unto their children by eschewing all evil, as Job did, as recorded in Job1:1 (NIV), "In the land of Uz there lived a man whose name was Job. This man was blameless and upright; he feared God and shunned evil." In the King James Version, Job is referred to as "perfect and upright before God," but, how do imperfect sinful human beings succeed in eschewing, or shunning, "all" evil according to the law of Christ? Well, first off, there aren't any perfect, sinless, people in the world in the 21st Century, and there have never been any such people upon the earth since the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. The Holy Law, comprising the Ten Commandments, was, before Christ, mainly a measuring stick according to outward human behaviors. For example, even though true honor for a father and mother, according to the Fourth commandment, always emanated from within the mind and heart of a person, the overt acts that a person did, prior to the death of Jesus, were those that only mattered to God according to the Holy Law at that particular time. In other words, a son or daughter might have actually despised their parents in their mind and heart, but, yet, if they acted as though they honored them by their outward expressions of honor, they were fulfilling the requirements of the law. As another example, take the sixth commandment, regarding adultery. The overt act of adultery has always started with a thought or desire, but the Sixth commandment, before the coming of Jesus, did not concern a thought process, but only a physical sexual one. A person could yearn continuously, in the mind and heart, for sexual satisfaction with someone other than a wife or a husband and not be guilty of adultery. Yet, when the mental desire turned into the physical act of sexual intercourse with someone other than a wife or husband, adultery was committed. There were two of the Ten Commandments, the Ninth and Tenth, that were based entirely on thought and emotion. These two commandments involved lusting and coveting. Coveting was, and is, based entirely upon the mental desires of the individual person, and lusting after, or for, a man's wife, or a woman's husband, or for money, power, or any physical possession is merely an extension of coveting, or wanting something for your own that doesn't belong to you.

In essence, Jesus the Christ will one day judge every saved Christian, and every other unsaved unchristian human being, for every idle thought and every intentional act they commit against the will of God, which is a much higher standard than that which existed for the people of the Old Testament world. This does not, in any wise, detract from the salvation from sin by grace offered by Jesus to all who believe in him. Jesus knows the content of all human minds and hearts, and he will judge all Christians accordingly. So here we are in a 21st Century world contending against the same heinous sins and crimes against nature which Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had to contend. In a nutshell, there has never been such a thing as a new morality calling age-old pernicious sin good and pleasurable. It has only been an old immorality raising its ugly head at much later times. As such, the 20th Century produced, in obscurely small but measurable increments, a degenerate nihilist society of humanists who grasped at the valueless garbage produced by such evil philosophers as Frederick Nietzsche and George Hegel to proclaim that good and evil do not exist, but only a substantive means for achieving pragmatic goals for heuristic purposes. And so came, with such ungodliness, a 20th Century world turned upside-down with the carnal sins against nature that had been abominations ever since Adam and Eve were driven from the Garden of Eden.

Nonetheless, along with these age-old sins and crimes reemerging into a modern century came their godless purveyors claiming that whoever dared speak against them was denying them their inalienable and natural right of free human expression. Especially in a republic, such as the USA, which was founded upon Judeo-Christian principles, the Ten Commandments, the 18th Century original independent nation that became the USA in 1789 guaranteed no such sins and crimes as the inalienable rights under nature's God. Homosexuality, transvestitism, transsexualism, bestiality, pedophilia, adultery and incest were regarded by the American people at that time as sins and common law crimes against nature. These abominations were regarded by moral government as crimes, punishable by imprisonment, until they were, by aberration, politically elevated from their base and bestial status to one of normality. From this legally permitted purveyance of evil was kindled further evil by declaration of the highest court in the USA, such as the legalization of abortion on demand; killing late-term unborn children for their body parts, the legalization of homosexual marriage and its relabeling as a viable lifestyle instead of as the psychosexual disorder it was known as for six-thousand years; along the official legalized labeling of a human being who abhors homosexuality as psychological pathology.

As I stated in the beginning of this article, I will reiterate. As the advent of the Savior Jesus into the 1st Century world demanded prophetic a voice, John the Baptist, preaching and calling sinners, regardless of earthly power, wealth, and position, to repentance, the 21st Century world, over two-thousand years later, demands that sinners, the opulent and the politically and socially powerful, be called to repentance openly and publicly. As John the Baptist boldly and publicly accused Herod Antipas the tetrarch, King of Judaea and Malthace, of adultery, not fearing for his life, as Nathan the Prophet boldly, in the name of God, accused David, the King of Israel, of murder and adultery, for his sinful taking of Bathsheba, are not Christian preachers, pastors, ministers, and evangelists today told by the Lord Jesus today to use scripture to declare sin when there is sin and to reprove those who are sinners? I believe that Jesus was speaking through the Apostle Paul, when that great Apostle told his young friend Timothy, in 2 Timothy 3:14-17 (KJV), "But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." Paul was earnestly trying to tell Timothy that losing his life for the Lord had no consequence in earthly terms; that dying for the Lord, as John the Baptist had done for preaching the truth, would take a Christian into the presence of the Lord Jesus to live forever with the Savior. As Paul said about himself, in 2 Timothy 4:6-8, "For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: Henceforth is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing," so every true disciple of Jesus can proclaim at the time of death.

Therefore, if presidents, kings, prime ministers, or queens need to be called to repentance, is it not the pronounced duty of those men set, by God, in the Church of the Lord Jesus (Ephesians 4: 11-16), prophets (teachers), evangelists, pastors, and teachers to publicly, and especially, accuse leaders of government of sin and crime arising from those sins, when their sins and crimes are hidden by their deceit from the public eye? Jesus taught his Gospel clearly and emphatically and told his disciples that they should recognize sin as the corrupt fruits of an evil tree. "By their fruits ye shall know them," Jesus stated in Matthew 7:16-17 (KJV), "Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit." Then in Matthew 7:19 (KJV), Jesus stated that, "Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire."

Now, let's get to specifics of sin,, and its purveyors, as the Apostle stated in Ephesians 6:11-12 (KJV). "Put on the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." Paul used the word "wrestle" in this particular scriptural context, making the opposition of evil by disciples of Christ a pro-active, almost competitive opposition, wherein sin is challenged by Jesus' holy gospel. Recently a young black Baptist pastor, whom I greatly admire and hold in high esteem, told me that I was evil and no longer his friend because I had dared state that Barack H. Obama was an imposter as a proclaimed Christian and a deviant homosexual Muslim (a real oxymoron). I had, further, stated to him that the publicly undisclosed facts, if ferreted-out and closely studied, reveal that Michelle Obama was not born as a woman, but as man, named Michael L. Robinson, in Chicago, Illinois, and subsequently chose to become homosexual and to reclassify himself as a woman sometime after 1985, claiming to be a transsexual. Moreover, those researchable facts also reveal that the two young women, claimed by Barack and Michelle Obama as their natural children, were not born to Michael (Michelle) Obama, but were adopted after Michael Robinson's and Barack Obama's marriage. I endeavored to explain to my young friend that the mainstream U.S. media have been complicit in covering-up these explicit facts, and that most of the American electorate (those U.S. Citizens over 18 years of years and eligible to vote) who had elected, and reelected, Obama as U.S. President would, through cogitative dissonance, refuse to believe that they had been deceived into electing a homosexual and a transsexual to the White House.

Yet, have there been publicly observable facts and behaviors that would lead a reasonable person to explore more deeply the conduct of a former American President, Obama, and his wife accused of heinous immorality? In 2008, a first in American history occurred. A man, a convicted drug felon named Larry Sinclair, an avowed homosexual, stepped forward at the National Press Club and admitted that he had been paid to have homosexual relations and engage in crack cocaine/cocaine use with Barack Obama, in a limousine in Chicago and in Sinclair's hotel room, when he was an Illinois State Senator in November 1999. This man, Sinclair, publicly accused Obama of hypocrisy in. The name of the man and the date of the occurrence are matters of public record, obtainable from an Internet search. Also, in a formal gathering of the U.S. military,