Yingluck's Secret Weapon: Nong Pipe

[pisico]

There's no "attack" on a child in my post. Simply stating the reality that she will have to file an asset declaration statement for him.

There's been plenty of deals she's been involved in over the years. Let's hope she remembers them all when she files her statement.

I might be wrong but I thought that a childs assets are considered those of the parents untill the child is an adult,therefore I should think that there is no need for a asset declaration for a 9 year old.

All political office-holders and high-ranking public officials must make full disclosure of all assets and liabilities, including those of their spouses and minor children.

Organic Act on Counter Corruption, B.E. 2542, § 32 (1999)

Is it possible that the "Powers That Be" have overlooked or ignored that?

Do you think that anyone in government reads your comments or cares about your knowledge of Thai's laws or what you have to say on the matter?

Thai Visa has a greater role in our lives than that of turning useful information for expats into ad hominem attacks simply because others do not agree with one's perception of the events.

To attack so vehemently is an exercise in futility and childish at best..., unless it makes the attacker feel good about himself.

[Buchholz]

Save your flaming and see above.

Don't confuse flaming with criticism

"criticism"....

that's as funny as when you tried to pass off your flaming as "banter"

[Buchholz]

There's no "attack" on a child in my post. Simply stating the reality that she will have to file an asset declaration statement for him.

There's been plenty of deals she's been involved in over the years. Let's hope she remembers them all when she files her statement.

I might be wrong but I thought that a childs assets are considered those of the parents untill the child is an adult,therefore I should think that there is no need for a asset declaration for a 9 year old.

All political office-holders and high-ranking public officials must make full disclosure of all assets and liabilities, including those of their spouses and minor children.

Organic Act on Counter Corruption, B.E. 2542, § 32 (1999)

Is it possible that the "Powers That Be" have overlooked or ignored that?

Do you think that anyone in government reads your comments or cares about your knowledge of Thai's laws or what you have to say on the matter?

Thai Visa has a greater role in our lives than that of turning useful information for expats into ad hominem attacks simply because others do not agree with one's perception of the events.

To attack so vehemently is an exercise in futility and childish at best..., unless it makes the attacker feel good about himself.

Simply posting the relevant law and its citation without any additional comment whatsoever is now "attacking so vehemently"???

more chuckles in this thread.

If you think that "what you have to say on the matter" is not worth discussing in an online forum, then why do you participate in an online discussion forum at all?

Is it to get information? I posted information and you're calling it "childish" and "futile."

.

Edited May 24, 2011 by Buchholz

[rubl]

I assume we'll not see much of Nong Pipe. Like all kids in Thailand he's got to go to school (chauffeur driven in his case probably). Going to Grade 3 at Harrow International School in Bangkok, he needs time to do his homework.

Anyway his mother doesn't have to worry she'll be 40B short for the school uniform

Edited May 24, 2011 by rubl

[sbk]

Is it possible that the "Powers That Be" have overlooked or ignored that?

Do you think that anyone in government reads your comments or cares about your knowledge of Thai's laws or what you have to say on the matter?

Thai Visa has a greater role in our lives than that of turning useful information for expats into ad hominem attacks simply because others do not agree with one's perception of the events.

To attack so vehemently is an exercise in futility and childish at best..., unless it makes the attacker feel good about himself.

Simply posting the relevant law and its citation without any additional comment whatsoever is now "attacking so vehemently"???

more chuckles in this thread.

If you think that "what you have to say on the matter" is not worth discussing in an online forum, then why do you participate in an online discussion forum at all?

Is it to get information? I posted information and you're calling it "childish" and "futile."

.

Agreed, posting the relevant law is not an attack. neither vehement nor chidlish.

And while the powers that be may or may not care what yours or Bucholz's opinions are, you are both certainly entitled to post them provided you stay within the rules. And name calling when you dont like a post is most definitely against forum rules.

If you can't have a discussion without resorting to name calling then I suggest you refrain from posting.

And that is the end of THAT discussion. Please stay on topic.

[Buchholz]

I assume we'll not see much of Nong Pipe. Like all kids in Thailand he's got to go to school (chauffeur driven in his case probably). Going to Grade 3 at Harrow International School in Bangkok, he needs time to do his homework.

Anyway his mother doesn't have to worry she'll be 40B short for the school uniform

Elite international schools are not eligible for the free education program so I'm afraid Yingluck will have to bear the cost of his uniforms and his 150,000 baht admission fee, his 552,840 baht tuition, and his 68,040 baht EAL fees.

I somehow think she can find it, however.

[OZEMADE]

I dont think all of your quote was fully used. what happened to the (sui juris.) in relation to a child capable of handling their own affairs.

[Buchholz]

I dont think all of your quote was fully used. what happened to the (sui juris.) in relation to a child capable of handling their own affairs.

Has Pipe been adjudged that status?

[OZEMADE]

I dont think all of your quote was fully used. what happened to the (sui juris.) in relation to a child capable of handling their own affairs.

Has Pipe been adjudged that status?

That is precisely what is unknown, but could be sorted out by transparent asset declaration statements by both members in a "marriage."

but then again, it's not to be expected as she will have plenty difficulty with filing just hers .

and oh yes, Nong Pipe's, as well.

Is this statement not involving him as well.

[Buchholz]

I dont think all of your quote was fully used. what happened to the (sui juris.) in relation to a child capable of handling their own affairs.

Has Pipe been adjudged that status?

That is precisely what is unknown, but could be sorted out by transparent asset declaration statements by both members in a "marriage."

but then again, it's not to be expected as she will have plenty difficulty with filing just hers .

and oh yes, Nong Pipe's, as well.

Is this statement not involving him as well.

Your replies and misused quoting can't be followed.

Please slow down and try again.

.

Edited May 24, 2011 by Buchholz

[OZEMADE]

I dont think all of your quote was fully used. what happened to the (sui juris.) in relation to a child capable of handling their own affairs.

Has Pipe been adjudged that status?

That is precisely what is unknown, but could be sorted out by transparent asset declaration statements by both members in a "marriage."

but then again, it's not to be expected as she will have plenty difficulty with filing just hers .

and oh yes, Nong Pipe's, as well.

Is this statement not involving him as well.

Your replies and misused quoting can't be followed.

Please slow down and try again.

.

Soooo you dont understand your own quotes and replies. I thought quoting your quotes exactly were sufficient for you to understand.

Or I have completely misread your quotes about her SON.

[Buchholz]

What quoting (without quotations) my earlier post has to do with my quoted reply to your post as shown above is confusing.

Can you separate what it is that you are attempting to communicate?

.

Edited May 24, 2011 by Buchholz

[sbk]

Soooo you dont understand your own quotes and replies. I thought quoting your quotes exactly were sufficient for you to understand.

Or I have completely misread your quotes about her SON.

Please use the reply button which inserts quote marks around a post instead of writing it in yourself, cheers

[OZEMADE]

Sui juris Of ones own right. Used to describe one who is no longer a dependent; having reached majority and having full civil and social rights.

Soooo you dont understand your own quotes and replies. I thought quoting your quotes exactly were sufficient for you to understand.

Or I have completely misread your quotes about her SON.

Please use the reply button which inserts quote marks around a post instead of writing it in yourself, cheers

Tried that but it went over the allotted anount of quotes allowed.

I think he gets the point he was wrong bringing the kid into the discussion and not fully quoting the Act, which should have included the sui juris.

(Sui juris Of ones own right. Used to describe one who is no longer a dependent; having reached majority and having full civil and social rights.

I think it was around Sec 14 of the Act, cant be sure now where this was omitted.

Edited May 24, 2011 by OZEMADE

[KRS1]

Didn't the Taliban and Al Queada members use female accomplices to shield them also?

[LivinLOS]

2500 sqm - not a bad sized playground for a 9 years old kiddy ... not bad, make her prime minister... she loves kids!

She could make it a policy promise - a 9,000 sq metre football pitch for very 9 yr old boy in Thailand, therefore reducing the gap.

Mister President, we cannot afford to have a football pitch gap.

[whybother]

...

I think he gets the point he was wrong bringing the kid into the discussion and not fully quoting the Act, which should have included the sui juris.

(Sui juris Of ones own right. Used to describe one who is no longer a dependent; having reached majority and having full civil and social rights.

I think it was around Sec 14 of the Act, cant be sure now where this was omitted.

Check the title of the thread. I think "the kid was brought into the discussion" a bit earlier.

And I assume the kid is not "no longer dependent" or has "reached majority", so it's not very relevant, is it?

[samurai]

Didn't the Taliban and Al Queada members use female accomplices to shield them also?

No. They were just killed and later the soldiers came up with that human shield bs.

[OZEMADE]

...

I think he gets the point he was wrong bringing the kid into the discussion and not fully quoting the Act, which should have included the sui juris.

(Sui juris Of ones own right. Used to describe one who is no longer a dependent; having reached majority and having full civil and social rights.

I think it was around Sec 14 of the Act, cant be sure now where this was omitted.

Check the title of the thread. I think "the kid was brought into the discussion" a bit earlier.

And I assume the kid is not "no longer dependent" or has "reached majority", so it's not very relevant, is it?

So what you are saying is that a 9yo is no longer dependent on it's family and they have reached civil and social rights like voting etc.

Give me a break

[MrChangers]

So this is yet another run-of-the-mill topic to bash the Shinawatra family.

The Pheu Thai are going to win the election people, get used to the idea..!!

of course it is not a Shinawatra bashing topic....

Sorry nearly chocked on my cuppa then.

A lot of election run ups worldwide involve the kissing of babies, younger family members, pet dog etc. I think Yinkluck will win this election and well done if she does, though I hope she is prepared for a forum bashing if it rains on sports day, the bike won't start, the papers are late and certain peoples beer is just a little too warm.

I'm voting for the central left right party!

[whybother]

Check the title of the thread. I think "the kid was brought into the discussion" a bit earlier.

And I assume the kid is not "no longer dependent" or has "reached majority", so it's not very relevant, is it?

So what you are saying is that a 9yo is no longer dependent on it's family and they have reached civil and social rights like voting etc.

Give me a break

When I say "I assume the kid is not 'no longer dependent' " that doesn't mean that I am saying that he is "no longer dependent".

How is Sui Juris relevant if he is dependent and has not reached majority?

[atyclb]

<br />

<br /><br />Yingluck's marriage to Anusorn Amornchart<br /><br />

<br /><br />Any plans for Yingluck to legally register the marriage?<br />

<br /><br /><br />

Why?

To not skirt the asset declaration laws for legal spouses.

.

Personally I'd have no problem in not having the legal framework as it can just mean big headaches in the future; lawyers, court, stress. @ people should be together for reasons OTHER than money, regardless of which one has more, less or the same. This tends to work better when both spouses are already well off.

[Just1Voice]

If I could vote, I wouldn't vote for any of them, even though Yingluck would get consideration from me simply on her looks. lol.

Nope, would start a write in campaign for Mickey Mouse. After all, who better to understand this "Mickey Mouse" operation of Thai politics?

With Goofy as Deputy PM or Foreign Minister. Oh, wait, those spots are already occupied by his clones. My bad.

[OzMick]

So the little bastard was born with a gold spoon in his mouth, and now gets dragged around the rallies like a pet dog to to try and influence the morons that she's worth a vote.

If she is so concerned with the thai people (sob, sob), why doesn't she build a few football pitches for the public? Don't Shinawat's like to mix with the hoi polloi?

IMHO she's not actually crying, it's just her eyes watering. A Michael Jackson style mask with a few drops of eucalyptus oil would solve the problem.

[Buchholz]

Sui juris Of ones own right. Used to describe one who is no longer a dependent; having reached majority and having full civil and social rights.

Soooo you dont understand your own quotes and replies. I thought quoting your quotes exactly were sufficient for you to understand.

Or I have completely misread your quotes about her SON.

Please use the reply button which inserts quote marks around a post instead of writing it in yourself, cheers

Tried that but it went over the allotted anount of quotes allowed.

I think he gets the point he was wrong bringing the kid into the discussion and not fully quoting the Act, which should have included the sui juris.

(Sui juris Of ones own right. Used to describe one who is no longer a dependent; having reached majority and having full civil and social rights.

I think it was around Sec 14 of the Act, cant be sure now where this was omitted.

What I said was that an asset declaration statement will need to be submitted for the child.

Then I cited the law under which that requirement is necessary.

I didn't quote the whole act because it's lengthy and irrelevant to the specific requirement that I was questioned about.

The child (which I prefer to use as opposed to your "kid") has not been shown to have been adjudged an independent child, so the relevant portion on that aspect is irrelevant.

I am glad, however, that after 3 attempts you were able to communicate what you were trying to say.

[Just1Voice]

So the little bastard was born with a gold spoon in his mouth, and now gets dragged around the rallies like a pet dog to to try and influence the morons that she's worth a vote.

If she is so concerned with the thai people (sob, sob), why doesn't she build a few football pitches for the public? Don't Shinawat's like to mix with the hoi polloi?

IMHO she's not actually crying, it's just her eyes watering. A Michael Jackson style mask with a few drops of eucalyptus oil would solve the problem.

Your terminology in regards to her son is both crass and rude, showing a remarkable lack of any social skills. Or perhaps it's merely a reflection of your own upbringing.

[OZEMADE]

- completely garbled quotes deleted -

What funds have been hidden by who, where and how much?

That is precisely what is unknown, but could be sorted out by transparent asset declaration statements by both members in a "marriage."

but then again, it's not to be expected as she will have plenty difficulty with filing just hers .

and oh yes, Nong Pipe's, as well.

.

This is what you actually said and bought the kid into it as well. I think you had better read your own quote above to see where you were mentioning Nong Pipe's name.

[PoorSucker]

"It was a good start for Yingluck Shinawatra, the first woman to be seen as a serious contender for the Thai premiership"

Do you think her brother has told her yet that she is not going to be the Thai PM ?.....

Do you know that The Nation didn't told you that the interview with her brother was two weeks old?

Denial denial denial.

I thought she was elected no-1 party/list candidate last week?

Read the article:

Yingluck is Pheu Thai's No-1 party-list candidate. So, you have decided to make her the next prime minister?

I am thinking about it. The prime minister does not need to be No-1 party-list candidate.

[Buchholz]

- completely garbled quotes deleted -

What funds have been hidden by who, where and how much?

That is precisely what is unknown, but could be sorted out by transparent asset declaration statements by both members in a "marriage."

but then again, it's not to be expected as she will have plenty difficulty with filing just hers .

and oh yes, Nong Pipe's, as well.

This is what you actually said and bought the kid into it as well. I think you had better read your own quote above to see where you were mentioning Nong Pipe's name.

still at it, are we?

What I said was that an asset declaration statement will need to be submitted for the child.

As noted by others, the child (AKA "kid") was "brought into it" in the OP.

.

Edited May 24, 2011 by Buchholz

[rubl]

Just to sum up and conclude, so we can proceed nicely:

If / When Ms. Yingluck is elected as MP and endorsed by the Election Commission she will have to file a full disclosure of assets and liabilities. The interesting aspects of Ms. Yingluck's legal standing (is she still entitled to be called NangSou rather than Nang only?) may need clarification. Does she have a legal relation with her 'life partner', is she legally in (co-)charge of her son?

Answers to these questions will be guidance to what she has to declare and what not. Of course like her big brother and example, she can always have an appearance in court and tearfully mumble it all to be a terrible, but honest mistake.

Edited May 24, 2011 by rubl