Lite Beer Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Office of Ombudsman drops complaints against Yingluck BANGKOK: -- The Office of Ombudsman Friday dropped two complaints against Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra on ground that there were no clear evidences that she had violated her political ethics. Rakkecha Chaechay, the spokesman of the Office of Ombudsman, said the panel of ombudsmen discussed and agreed that Yingluck had done nothing wrong for skipping a House meeting to perform her PM's duty at the Four Seasons Hotel. The ombudsmen also saw that there were no issue of extramarital affairs because Yingluck went to the hotel with many persons. The ombudsmen also saw that Yingluck did not commit a conflict of interest in the project to reduce taxes for first-time home buyers. The ombudsmen noted that Yingluck had resigned as executive of SC Assets so she would not benefit from the project. Rakkecha said the ombudsmen also saw that Yingluck did not violate the law against conflicts of interest by holding 0.85 per cent shares in SC Assets because the laws allowed a Cabinet member to hold up to five per cent of shares in a firm. -- The Nation 2012-07-13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Any of this come as a surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nickymaster Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 (edited) Yingluck, her family and friends are all real estate developers. The government has a policy to give subsidy to first-time home buyers. There was a study that this only offers a benefit to a few (home buyers) and cost the government relatively much money. This same money could have "helped" many more people on another policy. Was this policy introduced so that the Shinawatra clan can sell more houses? Was she discussing this policy at the four seasons hotel with this real-estate developer? The commerce minster was also present. 1+1=2 where I come from. Where Yingluck comes from it means 1+1= I can do what I want because I am the PM elected by the majority of Thais. I hold absolute power so don't ask me any questions. Just wondering.. Edited July 13, 2012 by Nickymaster 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moruya Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 and where id her shares in SC Assets go? Hairdresser? Burberrys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 (edited) If she was at the hotel for "PM's duty", why was it "not a meeting", then "a private meeting", and still there is no record of who attended or what the meeting was about. Edited July 13, 2012 by whybother Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MunterHunter Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 No point pinning these minor charges on her, when shes about to go into Exile like her brother after 2pm today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Resigned as executive of SC Assets. But I bet show still owns a large share as does the rest of the clan. Same BS argument Romney is trying. I'm not the official boss, so I can be blamed if my company benefits from my actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yunla Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 (edited) I don't doubt that the Ombudsmen have had unofficial visits regarding matters like ; home addresses, and how harmful it could be if those addresses were in the hands of a really angry mob, for example. Or how nice it is to receive billions to be quiet. Probably both. Coincidence this positive news story about "Yingluck is innocent" arrives today of all days? Coincidence also the computer tablets/happy smiling kids photo op #2 again in a few days time. Lot of serious 'positive' stories coming out during a time of crisis for her. Still want to know exactly who she met in the hotel and why, what was signed, why it could not have taken place openly on record, why the security tapes disappeared and why Yingluck's party denied she had even been at the hotel then admitted it. Edited July 13, 2012 by Yunla 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1weatherman Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Wouldn't you have to have ethics in the first place to be able to violate them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h90 Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Wouldn't you have to have ethics in the first place to be able to violate them. "her political ethics" her political ethics might be very different than our ethics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhizBang Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 She has ethics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 The only way is Ethics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richardjm65 Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 The only way is Ethics. I like thith. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbamboo Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 (edited) The best way to clear this up would be to publish a list of the shareholders of SC Assets so everything is open and above board. I wouldn't want any lingering doubts tarnishing the lovely Ms Yinglucks's reputation. Edited July 13, 2012 by bigbamboo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuneeTH Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Yingluck had done nothing wrong for skipping a House meeting to perform her PM's duty at the Four Seasons Hotel? Like seeing a married man in a private hotel suite performing her duty? Where are the sex video hinted in DEM Blue sky channel program? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellodolly Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Resigned as executive of SC Assets. But I bet show still owns a large share as does the rest of the clan. Same BS argument Romney is trying. I'm not the official boss, so I can be blamed if my company benefits from my actions. Same same as Chaney having nothing to do with Halburton any more. How ever they were awarded billion $ contracts with out having them go to bid. As far as the hotel goes. Well I think the only thing wrong was it gave newspapers sensation headlines and sold more papers. As far as I amconcerned if she was not meeting for business it is none of my business. A complete waste of time and money. Notice it is all over and nothing has changed except the news papers sold more isues. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferangled Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Yingluck, her family and friends are all real estate developers. The government has a policy to give subsidy to first-time home buyers. There was a study that this only offers a benefit to a few (home buyers) and cost the government relatively much money. This same money could have "helped" many more people on another policy. Was this policy introduced so that the Shinawatra clan can sell more houses? Was she discussing this policy at the four seasons hotel with this real-estate developer? The commerce minster was also present. 1+1=2 where I come from. Where Yingluck comes from it means 1+1= I can do what I want because I am the PM elected by the majority of Thais. I hold absolute power so don't ask me any questions. Just wondering.. Or was it simply a move to help Thai families get on the first rung of the property ladder, in tough economic times, which would generally help spur the economy in many related sectors not purely the developers, echoing similar policies in other countries... I'm sure no Democrats have any vested interests in real estate and all property developments in Thailand solely benefit the Thaksin family...? I guess it hasn't occurred that perhaps the whole complaint fiasco was simply another mudslinging tactic of the opposition... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuneeTH Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Yingluck, her family and friends are all real estate developers. The government has a policy to give subsidy to first-time home buyers. There was a study that this only offers a benefit to a few (home buyers) and cost the government relatively much money. This same money could have "helped" many more people on another policy. Was this policy introduced so that the Shinawatra clan can sell more houses? Was she discussing this policy at the four seasons hotel with this real-estate developer? The commerce minster was also present. 1+1=2 where I come from. Where Yingluck comes from it means 1+1= I can do what I want because I am the PM elected by the majority of Thais. I hold absolute power so don't ask me any questions. Just wondering.. Or was it simply a move to help Thai families get on the first rung of the property ladder, in tough economic times, which would generally help spur the economy in many related sectors not purely the developers, echoing similar policies in other countries... I'm sure no Democrats have any vested interests in real estate and all property developments in Thailand solely benefit the Thaksin family...? I guess it hasn't occurred that perhaps the whole complaint fiasco was simply another mudslinging tactic of the opposition... Mark is not in the property business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferangled Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Yingluck, her family and friends are all real estate developers. The government has a policy to give subsidy to first-time home buyers. There was a study that this only offers a benefit to a few (home buyers) and cost the government relatively much money. This same money could have "helped" many more people on another policy. Was this policy introduced so that the Shinawatra clan can sell more houses? Was she discussing this policy at the four seasons hotel with this real-estate developer? The commerce minster was also present. 1+1=2 where I come from. Where Yingluck comes from it means 1+1= I can do what I want because I am the PM elected by the majority of Thais. I hold absolute power so don't ask me any questions. Just wondering.. Or was it simply a move to help Thai families get on the first rung of the property ladder, in tough economic times, which would generally help spur the economy in many related sectors not purely the developers, echoing similar policies in other countries... I'm sure no Democrats have any vested interests in real estate and all property developments in Thailand solely benefit the Thaksin family...? I guess it hasn't occurred that perhaps the whole complaint fiasco was simply another mudslinging tactic of the opposition... Mark is not in the property business. And Mark is the only Democrat in Thailand is he? Doesn't own any property in Thailand? His family & friends don't have any vested interests in property? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asiawatcher Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 As always much to do about nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai at Heart Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 (edited) Yingluck, her family and friends are all real estate developers. The government has a policy to give subsidy to first-time home buyers. There was a study that this only offers a benefit to a few (home buyers) and cost the government relatively much money. This same money could have "helped" many more people on another policy. Was this policy introduced so that the Shinawatra clan can sell more houses? Was she discussing this policy at the four seasons hotel with this real-estate developer? The commerce minster was also present. 1+1=2 where I come from. Where Yingluck comes from it means 1+1= I can do what I want because I am the PM elected by the majority of Thais. I hold absolute power so don't ask me any questions. Just wondering.. Or was it simply a move to help Thai families get on the first rung of the property ladder, in tough economic times, which would generally help spur the economy in many related sectors not purely the developers, echoing similar policies in other countries... I'm sure no Democrats have any vested interests in real estate and all property developments in Thailand solely benefit the Thaksin family...? I guess it hasn't occurred that perhaps the whole complaint fiasco was simply another mudslinging tactic of the opposition... Mark is not in the property business. And Mark is the only Democrat in Thailand is he? Doesn't own any property in Thailand? His family & friends don't have any vested interests in property? They work for a small farming concern with a satellite tv company as a hobby. Edited July 13, 2012 by Thai at Heart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Yingluck had done nothing wrong for skipping a House meeting to perform her PM's duty at the Four Seasons Hotel? Like seeing a married man in a private hotel suite performing her duty? Where are the sex video hinted in DEM Blue sky channel program? Where are the sex video hinted in DEM Blue sky channel program? really??? ahahahahahaaaaaaa! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai at Heart Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Yingluck had done nothing wrong for skipping a House meeting to perform her PM's duty at the Four Seasons Hotel? Like seeing a married man in a private hotel suite performing her duty? Where are the sex video hinted in DEM Blue sky channel program? Where are the sex video hinted in DEM Blue sky channel program? really??? ahahahahahaaaaaaa! He should be more queued than her, she isn't married. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAJIC Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 (edited) I don't doubt that the Ombudsmen have had unofficial visits regarding matters like ; home addresses, and how harmful it could be if those addresses were in the hands of a really angry mob, for example. Or how nice it is to receive billions to be quiet. Probably both. Coincidence this positive news story about "Yingluck is innocent" arrives today of all days? Coincidence also the computer tablets/happy smiling kids photo op #2 again in a few days time. Lot of serious 'positive' stories coming out during a time of crisis for her. Still want to know exactly who she met in the hotel and why, what was signed, why it could not have taken place openly on record, why the security tapes disappeared and why Yingluck's party denied she had even been at the hotel then admitted it. Friday the 13th has been traditionaly an unlucky day,but Yingluck and the PTP have certainly had a very Lucky day,and this is what the Red Shirts want to see: winning everything in sight,with no argument from the opposition,otherwise we will harass you,the same as the scared Judges. Edited July 13, 2012 by MAJIC 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 I don't doubt that the Ombudsmen have had unofficial visits regarding matters like ; home addresses, and how harmful it could be if those addresses were in the hands of a really angry mob, for example. Or how nice it is to receive billions to be quiet. Probably both. Coincidence this positive news story about "Yingluck is innocent" arrives today of all days? Coincidence also the computer tablets/happy smiling kids photo op #2 again in a few days time. Lot of serious 'positive' stories coming out during a time of crisis for her. Still want to know exactly who she met in the hotel and why, what was signed, why it could not have taken place openly on record, why the security tapes disappeared and why Yingluck's party denied she had even been at the hotel then admitted it. Friday the 13th has been traditionaly an unlucky day,but Yingluck and the PTP have certainly had a very Lucky day,and this is what the Red Shirts want to see: winning everything in sight,with no argument from the opposition,otherwise we will harass you,the same as the scared Judges. if the judges were so scared then why didn't they rule that they shouldn't have taken the cases? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indyuk Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Yingluck, her family and friends are all real estate developers. The government has a policy to give subsidy to first-time home buyers. There was a study that this only offers a benefit to a few (home buyers) and cost the government relatively much money. This same money could have "helped" many more people on another policy. Was this policy introduced so that the Shinawatra clan can sell more houses? Was she discussing this policy at the four seasons hotel with this real-estate developer? The commerce minster was also present. 1+1=2 where I come from. Where Yingluck comes from it means 1+1= I can do what I want because I am the PM elected by the majority of Thais. I hold absolute power so don't ask me any questions. Just wondering.. Such vindictive remarks on the basis of an unfounded assumption border upon the libelous. Tread carefully brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAJIC Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 I don't doubt that the Ombudsmen have had unofficial visits regarding matters like ; home addresses, and how harmful it could be if those addresses were in the hands of a really angry mob, for example. Or how nice it is to receive billions to be quiet. Probably both. Coincidence this positive news story about "Yingluck is innocent" arrives today of all days? Coincidence also the computer tablets/happy smiling kids photo op #2 again in a few days time. Lot of serious 'positive' stories coming out during a time of crisis for her. Still want to know exactly who she met in the hotel and why, what was signed, why it could not have taken place openly on record, why the security tapes disappeared and why Yingluck's party denied she had even been at the hotel then admitted it. Friday the 13th has been traditionaly an unlucky day,but Yingluck and the PTP have certainly had a very Lucky day,and this is what the Red Shirts want to see: winning everything in sight,with no argument from the opposition,otherwise we will harass you,the same as the scared Judges. if the judges were so scared then why didn't they rule that they shouldn't have taken the cases? No problem taking the cases,if the result is favourable to PTP,easy to figure out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now