Yingluck urged to defy courts, independent agencies

[Crushdepth]

If she's going to defy the courts and independent agencies she might as well scrap Parliament too.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[casualbiker]

Let's tear this post apart, shall we?

First:

Allegations without substance. If you believe smugglers brought in rice (=high volume low profit) from across the border in any significant amount, then why don't the border farms show unrealistic rice yields?! These farms would have to be showing rice that's impossible to grow, and outside the Thai rice farm yield. They don't.

Claim that the allegations have no substance, when in fact the allegations of rice being smuggled to be sold under the scheme have been numerous and detailed:

Example A: Thon Virak, director of Cambodian state-owned rice exporter Green Trade, estimated up to 300,000 tonnes of paddy rice was smuggled into Thailand in 2012 and a similar amount in 2011.

(Note: BlueNoseCodger pay attention to what I'm doing here, I support what I say with citations.)

Example B: As much as 15 percent of Cam­bodia’s rice crop is illegally ex­ported to Thailand and Viet­nam

Example C: The Army has prosecuted three captains of Burapa Task Force for involvement in smuggling of paddy rice across Thai-Cambodian border, its spokesman Col Sansern Kaewkamnerd said Friday.

The revelation came one day after Rak Prathet Thai MP Chuwit Kamolvisit took the House floor to show four video clips depicting the smuggling of paddy,

(Note: Example C is not just an allegation, but actual prosecution of suspects)

Example D:

Boats loaded with what the smugglers coyly describe as “chicken feed” travel daily across the narrow stretch of the Moei River that separates Myawaddy in Burma from the neighbouring Thai town of Mae Sot.

On the outskirts of Myawaddy, The Telegraph watched as lorries pulled into a compound close to the river bank guarded by Burmese soldiers. Sacks of rice were swiftly unloaded and transferred to waiting boats.

“We started sending ’chicken feed’ to Thailand in big quantities a couple of years ago,” said the officer in charge of the soldiers. “It’s transported mostly at night. Generally, we’ll send 100 sacks at a time.

So that completely disproves the first part of your opening paragraph: "Allegations without substance."

The second part is a non sequitur on the back of a straw man:

If you believe smugglers brought in rice (=high volume low profit) from across the border in any significant amount, then why don't the border farms show unrealistic rice yields?! These farms would have to be showing rice that's impossible to grow, and outside the Thai rice farm yield. They don't.

You construct a straw man, that the smuggled rice HAS to show up as extra farm yields, then you proceed to declare that since farms are not showing unrealistic yields (without actually proving that to be based in actual facts) therefore there is no smuggling (a conclusion that doesn't follow the premise, AKA a non sequitur) and the other person is wrong... in your own head.

Next paragraph: Smugglers are not idiots, they smuggle high value small items, not low value bulk items!

Proven wrong previously with citations to news reports of smugglers smuggling rice into Thailand... in bulk.

Next paragraph:

"I assume the budget for the scheme that was 500 billion baht blew out to 770 billion"

My Google search on "government cost overrun" returns 4.9 million results, a cost overrun is not evidence of corruption.

Another non sequitur (man, you really love those don't you). Cost overruns from other countries say absolutely nothing about the Rice Scheme in Thailand. Besides which, using Google search result numbers as an argument is patently stupid. For example a search for "Blue Nose Codger pathetic debating skills" yields 4190 hits, which proves absolutely nothing at all.

Next!

"Chinese fake rice deals", even the NACC said they were genuine deals, it's claim is that it cannot prove the Chinese companies are authorized to buy by the Chinese government on the G2G scheme. The NACC could simply confirm it with the Chinese government, but chose not to.

Let's compare what you assert without offering any citation to an actual quote from the NACC:

"The NACC also ruled there was no evidence substantiating the government-to-government rice deals claimed by Yingluck's government"

Which directly contradicts what you claim, that the NACC acknowledges this particular deal as genuine.

As for the NACC asking the Chinese government, I don't know if it's within the powers of the NACC to conduct investigations outside Thailand, in any case it is the Thai government who should provide the information.

Next paragraph (if it can be called that):

Supa/IMF/WorldBank etc. an opinion on a policy is nothing to do with corruption.

It does have to do with corruption if the opinion is that there is corruption or the unchecked potential for corruption.

In the case of Supa she exposed the figures of the costs of the Rice Scheme as provided by the government to be false.

A government "cooking the books" is grounds for suspicion of corruption.

In this insightful talk by Afra Raymond Three Myths About Corruption, postulates Expenditure of public money + No Transparency + No accountability = corruption.

All those elements are a recurring theme of PTPs Rice Scheme.

And finally, your last paragraph:

14 tonnes of rice were burned in a warehouse fire, Bluesky made it sound like evidence was being hidden,

14 tonnes is 0.00007% of annual rice production, so their claim is just false.

First fallacy, that the instance you mention "14 tonnes burnt" is the only one reported I presume you are referring to this incident Mystery fire at Lopburi rice warehouse? I don't know because you don't support any of your allegations with citations. If it is that case the n you... ejem, misrepresent the facts with an intention to mislead, because while 14 tonnes was the quantity damaged directly by the fire, a larger quantity was further damaged by the water used to douse the fire.

"He also said that when water was sprayed into the gutted warehouse, all rice kept would be destroyed and could be hardly proved whether they were spoilt or rotten before the fire or not."

Second fallacy on that paragraph, that the amount damaged bears any relation to whether or not it was done to hide evidence, it is the same nonsensical argument as saying that destroying a document proving a fraud worth 1 million Baht was committed is false because it represents only an insignificant percentage of the total GDP of the country.

So... that took some time, and I'm sure you'll pay absolutely no attention to any of it and will continue to spout unsupported and demonstrably false allegations as you have been doing since joining up.

Rice production in Thailand for 2013 was 37.9 million metric tons.

The numbers don't correspond to the amount of rice

Wow. Thanks BNC.. I hadn't realised how much this government have been lying about the rice pledging. You have evidence of 37.9 million tons produced in just one year..

yet the government have said they have about 16-18 million tons in stock from 2 years production.

And USDA say " The government spent 689 billion baht ($21 billion) in the past two crop years buying from farmers at prices that were as much as 76 percent higher than current market rates. The USDA expects that Thai inventories will reach a record 14.7 million tons this year, compared with 6.1 million in 2010."

interesting read here: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-02-11/rice-tumbling-as-thailand-s-unpaid-farmers-demand-stockpile-sale

[cocopops]

They haven't convicted ANYONE for corruption or graft on the rice scheme yet.

I think even I as a non lawyer could defend her against this accusation. Is there one single proven complaint of corruption in the rice scheme nationwide?

So m'lord, there is no corruption.

Of course they haven't convicted anyone yet. No cases have gone through the court system yet and been judged.

It has been proved the DEM's have complained.

It has been proven Supa has complained.

It has been proven the IMF suggested restructuring the scheme due to corruption.

The list goes on.

As for proven corruption. There is ample evidence to suggest corruption and that is what the courts have to prove. It sounds like even if she is found guilty it won't matter. She will defy the courts due to no respect for the law. (Surprise surprise - A principle of democracy)

If there is anything else m'lord I suggest you refer to the below.

None of the hippy's "facts" have anything at all to do with corruption at the political level. They make it sound like the rice scheme is shit policy, which may be so. But this is not the same thing as corruption. Do you people seriously not see the difference?

Democracy has a built-in system for dealing with shit policy. Opposition politicians explain to the people why it is, in fact, shit policy, and the people then elect someone different.

Edited February 26, 2014 by cocopops

[Davidhere]

The defiance of the independent agencies and the courts is Pheu Thai/UDD/Thaksin in its purest form. It is the ultimate expression of their philosophy, and it will bring this crisis to a head. Indeed, without the independent agencies and the courts there is nothing that can ever evolve from that. That is the threat that this administration now poses. It has been nothing less than astonishing that - in the space of just four months - Yingluck has evolved from girl-guide-cookie statements - to open defiance of the judicial process. That's quite an evolution. And it shows the distressing influence her brother has had, to the detriment of the people.

You are referring to a constitution, the umpteenth one, written by yet another coup d'état government which had been ruling in military mutiny against legitimate civilian authority. In the subsequent referendum on the constitution, the military rulers established in law a prohibition of voting no on the jigsawed document, while simultaneously including in the referendum a pardon / amnesty of themselves and of their coup d'état military mutiny.

The same bogus agencies established by the illegitimate and reactionary military government's absolute constitution are at play here and also against the same people and their social movement.

A coup consists of the infiltration of a small, but critical, segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder.

http://thevelvetrocket.com/2009/11/14/coup-d-etat-an-operators-manual/

Didn't we have the NACC for a somewhat longer time already? At least in 1998 both Constitution Court and NACC were present and operational.

You've thrown him off with the factual reality that these checks and balances were in place with the 1997 constitution and there were no changes to them with the 2007 constitution.

[djjamie]

Let's tear this post apart, shall we?

First:

Allegations without substance. If you believe smugglers brought in rice (=high volume low profit) from across the border in any significant amount, then why don't the border farms show unrealistic rice yields?! These farms would have to be showing rice that's impossible to grow, and outside the Thai rice farm yield. They don't.

Claim that the allegations have no substance, when in fact the allegations of rice being smuggled to be sold under the scheme have been numerous and detailed:

Example A: Thon Virak, director of Cambodian state-owned rice exporter Green Trade, estimated up to 300,000 tonnes of paddy rice was smuggled into Thailand in 2012 and a similar amount in 2011.

(Note: BlueNoseCodger pay attention to what I'm doing here, I support what I say with citations.)

Example B: As much as 15 percent of Cam­bodia’s rice crop is illegally ex­ported to Thailand and Viet­nam

Example C: The Army has prosecuted three captains of Burapa Task Force for involvement in smuggling of paddy rice across Thai-Cambodian border, its spokesman Col Sansern Kaewkamnerd said Friday.

The revelation came one day after Rak Prathet Thai MP Chuwit Kamolvisit took the House floor to show four video clips depicting the smuggling of paddy,

(Note: Example C is not just an allegation, but actual prosecution of suspects)

Example D:

Boats loaded with what the smugglers coyly describe as “chicken feed” travel daily across the narrow stretch of the Moei River that separates Myawaddy in Burma from the neighbouring Thai town of Mae Sot.

On the outskirts of Myawaddy, The Telegraph watched as lorries pulled into a compound close to the river bank guarded by Burmese soldiers. Sacks of rice were swiftly unloaded and transferred to waiting boats.

“We started sending ’chicken feed’ to Thailand in big quantities a couple of years ago,” said the officer in charge of the soldiers. “It’s transported mostly at night. Generally, we’ll send 100 sacks at a time.

So that completely disproves the first part of your opening paragraph: "Allegations without substance."

The second part is a non sequitur on the back of a straw man:

If you believe smugglers brought in rice (=high volume low profit) from across the border in any significant amount, then why don't the border farms show unrealistic rice yields?! These farms would have to be showing rice that's impossible to grow, and outside the Thai rice farm yield. They don't.

You construct a straw man, that the smuggled rice HAS to show up as extra farm yields, then you proceed to declare that since farms are not showing unrealistic yields (without actually proving that to be based in actual facts) therefore there is no smuggling (a conclusion that doesn't follow the premise, AKA a non sequitur) and the other person is wrong... in your own head.

Next paragraph: Smugglers are not idiots, they smuggle high value small items, not low value bulk items!

Proven wrong previously with citations to news reports of smugglers smuggling rice into Thailand... in bulk.

Next paragraph:

"I assume the budget for the scheme that was 500 billion baht blew out to 770 billion"

My Google search on "government cost overrun" returns 4.9 million results, a cost overrun is not evidence of corruption.

Another non sequitur (man, you really love those don't you). Cost overruns from other countries say absolutely nothing about the Rice Scheme in Thailand. Besides which, using Google search result numbers as an argument is patently stupid. For example a search for "Blue Nose Codger pathetic debating skills" yields 4190 hits, which proves absolutely nothing at all.

Next!

"Chinese fake rice deals", even the NACC said they were genuine deals, it's claim is that it cannot prove the Chinese companies are authorized to buy by the Chinese government on the G2G scheme. The NACC could simply confirm it with the Chinese government, but chose not to.

Let's compare what you assert without offering any citation to an actual quote from the NACC:

"The NACC also ruled there was no evidence substantiating the government-to-government rice deals claimed by Yingluck's government"

Which directly contradicts what you claim, that the NACC acknowledges this particular deal as genuine.

As for the NACC asking the Chinese government, I don't know if it's within the powers of the NACC to conduct investigations outside Thailand, in any case it is the Thai government who should provide the information.

Next paragraph (if it can be called that):

Supa/IMF/WorldBank etc. an opinion on a policy is nothing to do with corruption.

It does have to do with corruption if the opinion is that there is corruption or the unchecked potential for corruption.

In the case of Supa she exposed the figures of the costs of the Rice Scheme as provided by the government to be false.

A government "cooking the books" is grounds for suspicion of corruption.

In this insightful talk by Afra Raymond Three Myths About Corruption, postulates Expenditure of public money + No Transparency + No accountability = corruption.

All those elements are a recurring theme of PTPs Rice Scheme.

And finally, your last paragraph:

14 tonnes of rice were burned in a warehouse fire, Bluesky made it sound like evidence was being hidden,

14 tonnes is 0.00007% of annual rice production, so their claim is just false.

First fallacy, that the instance you mention "14 tonnes burnt" is the only one reported I presume you are referring to this incident Mystery fire at Lopburi rice warehouse? I don't know because you don't support any of your allegations with citations. If it is that case the n you... ejem, misrepresent the facts with an intention to mislead, because while 14 tonnes was the quantity damaged directly by the fire, a larger quantity was further damaged by the water used to douse the fire.

"He also said that when water was sprayed into the gutted warehouse, all rice kept would be destroyed and could be hardly proved whether they were spoilt or rotten before the fire or not."

Second fallacy on that paragraph, that the amount damaged bears any relation to whether or not it was done to hide evidence, it is the same nonsensical argument as saying that destroying a document proving a fraud worth 1 million Baht was committed is false because it represents only an insignificant percentage of the total GDP of the country.

So... that took some time, and I'm sure you'll pay absolutely no attention to any of it and will continue to spout unsupported and demonstrably false allegations as you have been doing since joining up.

Terrific! Finally someone prepared to discuss it and back up their claims!

Lets look at the claimed size of this smuggling:

Example A: Thon Virak, director of Cambodian state-owned rice exporter Green Trade, estimated up to 300,000 tonnes of paddy rice was smuggled into Thailand in 2012 and a similar amount in 2011.

Rice production in Thailand for 2013 was 37.9 million metric tons. So even Thon Viraks claim is only 1% of Thai rice production, and he offers nothing to back his claim up. It would be the equivalent of 7500 40 tonnes trucks smuggled across the border.

How much of has been intercepted of all this rice, from your article:

Noppadol Thetprasit, head of a customs post in the Aranyaprathet district of Sa Kaeo, said he recently intercepted 30 tonnes of rice being smuggled from Cambodia, but he knows more must be getting through at smaller crossing points that lack his facilities.

Only 30 tonnes intercepted??? Must be more? What like 100 tonnes, 200? Tiny!

Example B: As much as 15 percent of Cam­bodia’s rice crop is illegally ex­ported to Thailand and Viet­nam

“I would estimate that between 5 percent and 15 percent of Cambodia’s rice crop leaves the country this way,” Ekin said.

Between 5 and 15%? Based on what?, ok lets go with 10%, Cambodia rice production is 4.9 million tonnes, 10% = 500k, half to vientnam and Thailand is 250k each, so in line with your Reuters claim of 300k.

Example C:

3 Soldiers caught and prosecuted for rice smuggling on vans. Yep that's how you enforce the law against smuggling.

Example D:

"“It’s transported mostly at night. Generally, we’ll send 100 sacks at a time.“Each sack is 50 kilos.”"

100*50* 365 (nights in a year ) = 1825 metric tonnes/year = tiny and easy to catch.

Note that all of these are smuggling crimes, not corruption in rice pledge scheme. The fix for cross border smuggling is to catch the smugglers, see link C, not set agricultural policy based on it. Smugglers concentrate on small high value goods because the risk of capture is low, and the profit is high.

You construct a straw man, that the smuggled rice HAS to show up as extra farm yields

I'm saying it doesn't show in ridiculous rice yields for areas next to the borders where smuggled rice would enter the system.

NACC from theNation:

The NACC also ruled there was no evidence substantiating the government-to-government rice deals

To be corruption, NACC has to have evidence of corruption, not lack of evidence it is government to government!

IMF:

IMF takes aim at rice pledging scheme.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has urged Thailand to drop its costly rice-pledging scheme and scale back other fiscal stimulus measures to achieve a balanced budget and make room for spending on projects that bolster economic growth.

And? They're suggesting switching from rice subsidy to capital projects. I expect the government to reduce the buy price on the rice pledging scheme and spend on stuff like railways. So? This is government decisions. It does not reflect corruption, it's fiscal policy.

14 tonnes at Lopburi, it is too small a quanityt to be significant in any claimed coverup, even with extra water damage.

So to sum up, you are alleging smuggling cross border. The numbers don't correspond to the amount of rice captured at the border, and even the hyperbole numbers don't count as corruption in the rice pledging scheme.

Kittirat telling white lies is wrong, but not illegal.

Claiming there to be GtoG deals is misleading, but probably not illegal. I can imagine that the GtoG deals may have been bogus, but to achieve it, would need to the complicit assistance of dozens of officials, customs people, local officials, etc. Why haven't they been rolled over?

People smuggling stuff across the border is illegal, but what would you have Yingluck do? Sit at the border herself?

Hanging her for corruption at a border post, oh my lord.

It isn't illegal to be crap at your job, yet....

Absolutely brilliant AleG.

Firstly, for you patience with these guys to explain it in great detail of which I have none when dealing with pigeons.

Secondly for your in-depth analysis that is irrefutable.

non sequitur on the back of a straw man:

At the end of the day what I appreciate most is your understanding of propaganda argument styles.

I would love to dissect "Thai at Hearts" comments (especially the yingluck sitting at the border comment), but you are on a roll and I do not want to steal your lime light.

Edited February 26, 2014 by djjamie

[AleG]

Absolutely brilliant AleG.

Firstly, for you patience with these guys to explain it in great detail of which I have none when dealing with pigeons.

Secondly for your in-depth analysis that is irrefutable.

non sequitur on the back of a straw man:

At the end of the day what I appreciate most is your understanding of propaganda argument styles.

I would love to dissect "Thai at Hearts" comments (especially the yingluck sitting at the border comment), but you are on a roll and I do not want to steal your lime light.

Thank you, obviously I wasn't very busy at work this afternoon.

[AleG]

Kittirat telling white lies is wrong, but not illegal.

Claiming there to be GtoG deals is misleading, but probably not illegal. I can imagine that the GtoG deals may have been bogus, but to achieve it, would need to the complicit assistance of dozens of officials, customs people, local officials, etc. Why haven't they been rolled over?

People smuggling stuff across the border is illegal, but what would you have Yingluck do? Sit at the border herself?

Hanging her for corruption at a border post, oh my lord.

It isn't illegal to be crap at your job, yet....

It isn't illegal to be crap at your job, yet...

Well, tell that to all the people that have been found guilty of criminal negligence.

If it can be proved that Yingluck was aware of corrupt practices in the Rice Scheme, in particular the alleged monkey business involving the GSSG chinese company and Arisaman's wife she can be held resposible for dereliction of duty at the least and actual collusion in acts of corruption at worst.

[Dogmatix]

But the PM accused the NACC of discrimination, saying that the agency had not made any progress with a corruption case against the Abhisit government, whereas it took only 21 days to investigate and press charges against her.

That may be true but the NACC has 25,000 pending corruption cases that she planned to wipe out with the amnesty bill, including those cases against Abhisit. So she obviously did feel Abhisit's rice case was very important at that time.

Anyway it is like a murderer saying he can't be put on trial yet because there are many murders that took place years before his crime that are still being investigated. If she is guilty, she should be prosecuted and convicted, regardless of any crimes of any other people.

[Dogmatix]

Kittirat telling white lies is wrong, but not illegal.

Claiming there to be GtoG deals is misleading, but probably not illegal. I can imagine that the GtoG deals may have been bogus, but to achieve it, would need to the complicit assistance of dozens of officials, customs people, local officials, etc. Why haven't they been rolled over?

People smuggling stuff across the border is illegal, but what would you have Yingluck do? Sit at the border herself?

Hanging her for corruption at a border post, oh my lord.

It isn't illegal to be crap at your job, yet....

It isn't illegal to be crap at your job, yet...

Well, tell that to all the people that have been found guilty of criminal negligence.

If it can be proved that Yingluck was aware of corrupt practices in the Rice Scheme, in particular the alleged monkey business involving the GSSG chinese company and Arisaman's wife she can be held resposible for dereliction of duty at the least and actual collusion in acts of corruption at worst.

The problem is that the g2g deals were actually sold domestically at B4-6k per tonne vs the purchase price of around B15k per tonne. That could mean a theft of up to B2bn in one shot.

The NACC's plan is probably to indict her for impeachment first, then follow up with criminal charges after they have formally charged the other 15 toads on criminal charges. They apparently have a lot of evidence and several of the 15 are singing to get their own charges reduced.

[Thai at Heart]

Let's tear this post apart, shall we?

First:

Allegations without substance. If you believe smugglers brought in rice (=high volume low profit) from across the border in any significant amount, then why don't the border farms show unrealistic rice yields?! These farms would have to be showing rice that's impossible to grow, and outside the Thai rice farm yield. They don't.

Claim that the allegations have no substance, when in fact the allegations of rice being smuggled to be sold under the scheme have been numerous and detailed:

Example A: Thon Virak, director of Cambodian state-owned rice exporter Green Trade, estimated up to 300,000 tonnes of paddy rice was smuggled into Thailand in 2012 and a similar amount in 2011.

(Note: BlueNoseCodger pay attention to what I'm doing here, I support what I say with citations.)

Example B: As much as 15 percent of Cam­bodia’s rice crop is illegally ex­ported to Thailand and Viet­nam

Example C: The Army has prosecuted three captains of Burapa Task Force for involvement in smuggling of paddy rice across Thai-Cambodian border, its spokesman Col Sansern Kaewkamnerd said Friday.

The revelation came one day after Rak Prathet Thai MP Chuwit Kamolvisit took the House floor to show four video clips depicting the smuggling of paddy,

(Note: Example C is not just an allegation, but actual prosecution of suspects)

Example D:

Boats loaded with what the smugglers coyly describe as “chicken feed” travel daily across the narrow stretch of the Moei River that separates Myawaddy in Burma from the neighbouring Thai town of Mae Sot.

On the outskirts of Myawaddy, The Telegraph watched as lorries pulled into a compound close to the river bank guarded by Burmese soldiers. Sacks of rice were swiftly unloaded and transferred to waiting boats.

“We started sending ’chicken feed’ to Thailand in big quantities a couple of years ago,” said the officer in charge of the soldiers. “It’s transported mostly at night. Generally, we’ll send 100 sacks at a time.

So that completely disproves the first part of your opening paragraph: "Allegations without substance."

The second part is a non sequitur on the back of a straw man:

If you believe smugglers brought in rice (=high volume low profit) from across the border in any significant amount, then why don't the border farms show unrealistic rice yields?! These farms would have to be showing rice that's impossible to grow, and outside the Thai rice farm yield. They don't.

You construct a straw man, that the smuggled rice HAS to show up as extra farm yields, then you proceed to declare that since farms are not showing unrealistic yields (without actually proving that to be based in actual facts) therefore there is no smuggling (a conclusion that doesn't follow the premise, AKA a non sequitur) and the other person is wrong... in your own head.

Next paragraph: Smugglers are not idiots, they smuggle high value small items, not low value bulk items!

Proven wrong previously with citations to news reports of smugglers smuggling rice into Thailand... in bulk.

Next paragraph:

"I assume the budget for the scheme that was 500 billion baht blew out to 770 billion"

My Google search on "government cost overrun" returns 4.9 million results, a cost overrun is not evidence of corruption.

Another non sequitur (man, you really love those don't you). Cost overruns from other countries say absolutely nothing about the Rice Scheme in Thailand. Besides which, using Google search result numbers as an argument is patently stupid. For example a search for "Blue Nose Codger pathetic debating skills" yields 4190 hits, which proves absolutely nothing at all.

Next!

"Chinese fake rice deals", even the NACC said they were genuine deals, it's claim is that it cannot prove the Chinese companies are authorized to buy by the Chinese government on the G2G scheme. The NACC could simply confirm it with the Chinese government, but chose not to.

Let's compare what you assert without offering any citation to an actual quote from the NACC:

"The NACC also ruled there was no evidence substantiating the government-to-government rice deals claimed by Yingluck's government"

Which directly contradicts what you claim, that the NACC acknowledges this particular deal as genuine.

As for the NACC asking the Chinese government, I don't know if it's within the powers of the NACC to conduct investigations outside Thailand, in any case it is the Thai government who should provide the information.

Next paragraph (if it can be called that):

Supa/IMF/WorldBank etc. an opinion on a policy is nothing to do with corruption.

It does have to do with corruption if the opinion is that there is corruption or the unchecked potential for corruption.

In the case of Supa she exposed the figures of the costs of the Rice Scheme as provided by the government to be false.

A government "cooking the books" is grounds for suspicion of corruption.

In this insightful talk by Afra Raymond Three Myths About Corruption, postulates Expenditure of public money + No Transparency + No accountability = corruption.

All those elements are a recurring theme of PTPs Rice Scheme.

And finally, your last paragraph:

14 tonnes of rice were burned in a warehouse fire, Bluesky made it sound like evidence was being hidden,

14 tonnes is 0.00007% of annual rice production, so their claim is just false.

First fallacy, that the instance you mention "14 tonnes burnt" is the only one reported I presume you are referring to this incident Mystery fire at Lopburi rice warehouse? I don't know because you don't support any of your allegations with citations. If it is that case the n you... ejem, misrepresent the facts with an intention to mislead, because while 14 tonnes was the quantity damaged directly by the fire, a larger quantity was further damaged by the water used to douse the fire.

"He also said that when water was sprayed into the gutted warehouse, all rice kept would be destroyed and could be hardly proved whether they were spoilt or rotten before the fire or not."

Second fallacy on that paragraph, that the amount damaged bears any relation to whether or not it was done to hide evidence, it is the same nonsensical argument as saying that destroying a document proving a fraud worth 1 million Baht was committed is false because it represents only an insignificant percentage of the total GDP of the country.

So... that took some time, and I'm sure you'll pay absolutely no attention to any of it and will continue to spout unsupported and demonstrably false allegations as you have been doing since joining up.

Rice production in Thailand for 2013 was 37.9 million metric tons.

The numbers don't correspond to the amount of rice

Wow. Thanks BNC.. I hadn't realised how much this government have been lying about the rice pledging. You have evidence of 37.9 million tons produced in just one year..

yet the government have said they have about 16-18 million tons in stock from 2 years production.

And USDA say " The government spent 689 billion baht ($21 billion) in the past two crop years buying from farmers at prices that were as much as 76 percent higher than current market rates. The USDA expects that Thai inventories will reach a record 14.7 million tons this year, compared with 6.1 million in 2010."

interesting read here: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-02-11/rice-tumbling-as-thailand-s-unpaid-farmers-demand-stockpile-sale

You don't take a grain of rice from the field and ship it to the consumer.

You can lose up to 40% from the field to the supermarket. Duhhhhhh, unless you like rice delivered in its husk and chock full of moisture.....

Edited February 26, 2014 by Thai at Heart

[casualbiker]

Let's tear this post apart, shall we?

First:

Allegations without substance. If you believe smugglers brought in rice (=high volume low profit) from across the border in any significant amount, then why don't the border farms show unrealistic rice yields?! These farms would have to be showing rice that's impossible to grow, and outside the Thai rice farm yield. They don't.

Claim that the allegations have no substance, when in fact the allegations of rice being smuggled to be sold under the scheme have been numerous and detailed:

Example A: Thon Virak, director of Cambodian state-owned rice exporter Green Trade, estimated up to 300,000 tonnes of paddy rice was smuggled into Thailand in 2012 and a similar amount in 2011.

(Note: BlueNoseCodger pay attention to what I'm doing here, I support what I say with citations.)

Example B: As much as 15 percent of Cam­bodia’s rice crop is illegally ex­ported to Thailand and Viet­nam

Example C: The Army has prosecuted three captains of Burapa Task Force for involvement in smuggling of paddy rice across Thai-Cambodian border, its spokesman Col Sansern Kaewkamnerd said Friday.

The revelation came one day after Rak Prathet Thai MP Chuwit Kamolvisit took the House floor to show four video clips depicting the smuggling of paddy,

(Note: Example C is not just an allegation, but actual prosecution of suspects)

Example D:

Boats loaded with what the smugglers coyly describe as “chicken feed” travel daily across the narrow stretch of the Moei River that separates Myawaddy in Burma from the neighbouring Thai town of Mae Sot.

On the outskirts of Myawaddy, The Telegraph watched as lorries pulled into a compound close to the river bank guarded by Burmese soldiers. Sacks of rice were swiftly unloaded and transferred to waiting boats.

“We started sending ’chicken feed’ to Thailand in big quantities a couple of years ago,” said the officer in charge of the soldiers. “It’s transported mostly at night. Generally, we’ll send 100 sacks at a time.

So that completely disproves the first part of your opening paragraph: "Allegations without substance."

The second part is a non sequitur on the back of a straw man:

If you believe smugglers brought in rice (=high volume low profit) from across the border in any significant amount, then why don't the border farms show unrealistic rice yields?! These farms would have to be showing rice that's impossible to grow, and outside the Thai rice farm yield. They don't.

You construct a straw man, that the smuggled rice HAS to show up as extra farm yields, then you proceed to declare that since farms are not showing unrealistic yields (without actually proving that to be based in actual facts) therefore there is no smuggling (a conclusion that doesn't follow the premise, AKA a non sequitur) and the other person is wrong... in your own head.

Next paragraph: Smugglers are not idiots, they smuggle high value small items, not low value bulk items!

Proven wrong previously with citations to news reports of smugglers smuggling rice into Thailand... in bulk.

Next paragraph:

"I assume the budget for the scheme that was 500 billion baht blew out to 770 billion"

My Google search on "government cost overrun" returns 4.9 million results, a cost overrun is not evidence of corruption.

Another non sequitur (man, you really love those don't you). Cost overruns from other countries say absolutely nothing about the Rice Scheme in Thailand. Besides which, using Google search result numbers as an argument is patently stupid. For example a search for "Blue Nose Codger pathetic debating skills" yields 4190 hits, which proves absolutely nothing at all.

Next!

"Chinese fake rice deals", even the NACC said they were genuine deals, it's claim is that it cannot prove the Chinese companies are authorized to buy by the Chinese government on the G2G scheme. The NACC could simply confirm it with the Chinese government, but chose not to.

Let's compare what you assert without offering any citation to an actual quote from the NACC:

"The NACC also ruled there was no evidence substantiating the government-to-government rice deals claimed by Yingluck's government"

Which directly contradicts what you claim, that the NACC acknowledges this particular deal as genuine.

As for the NACC asking the Chinese government, I don't know if it's within the powers of the NACC to conduct investigations outside Thailand, in any case it is the Thai government who should provide the information.

Next paragraph (if it can be called that):

Supa/IMF/WorldBank etc. an opinion on a policy is nothing to do with corruption.

It does have to do with corruption if the opinion is that there is corruption or the unchecked potential for corruption.

In the case of Supa she exposed the figures of the costs of the Rice Scheme as provided by the government to be false.

A government "cooking the books" is grounds for suspicion of corruption.

In this insightful talk by Afra Raymond Three Myths About Corruption, postulates Expenditure of public money + No Transparency + No accountability = corruption.

All those elements are a recurring theme of PTPs Rice Scheme.

And finally, your last paragraph:

14 tonnes of rice were burned in a warehouse fire, Bluesky made it sound like evidence was being hidden,

14 tonnes is 0.00007% of annual rice production, so their claim is just false.

First fallacy, that the instance you mention "14 tonnes burnt" is the only one reported I presume you are referring to this incident Mystery fire at Lopburi rice warehouse? I don't know because you don't support any of your allegations with citations. If it is that case the n you... ejem, misrepresent the facts with an intention to mislead, because while 14 tonnes was the quantity damaged directly by the fire, a larger quantity was further damaged by the water used to douse the fire.

"He also said that when water was sprayed into the gutted warehouse, all rice kept would be destroyed and could be hardly proved whether they were spoilt or rotten before the fire or not."

Second fallacy on that paragraph, that the amount damaged bears any relation to whether or not it was done to hide evidence, it is the same nonsensical argument as saying that destroying a document proving a fraud worth 1 million Baht was committed is false because it represents only an insignificant percentage of the total GDP of the country.

So... that took some time, and I'm sure you'll pay absolutely no attention to any of it and will continue to spout unsupported and demonstrably false allegations as you have been doing since joining up.

Rice production in Thailand for 2013 was 37.9 million metric tons.

The numbers don't correspond to the amount of rice

Wow. Thanks BNC.. I hadn't realised how much this government have been lying about the rice pledging. You have evidence of 37.9 million tons produced in just one year..

yet the government have said they have about 16-18 million tons in stock from 2 years production.

And USDA say " The government spent 689 billion baht ($21 billion) in the past two crop years buying from farmers at prices that were as much as 76 percent higher than current market rates. The USDA expects that Thai inventories will reach a record 14.7 million tons this year, compared with 6.1 million in 2010."

interesting read here: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-02-11/rice-tumbling-as-thailand-s-unpaid-farmers-demand-stockpile-sale

You don't take a grain of rice from the field and ship it to the consumer.

You can lose up to 40% from the field to the supermarket. Duhhhhhh, unless you like rice delivered in its husk and chock full of moisture.....

Is the government a supermarket now? I know what paddy is and that is what they are talking about: Paddy becomes rice after the removal of husk. Therefore, paddy is the rice with husk.

nitially, Kittiratt kept the budget for the rice-pledging scheme at Bt500 billion. The money is channelled through the Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives, which acts as a go-between with the farmers. Once the farmers pledge their paddy, they receive a pledging document. With the document they can, in theory, claim their money at the Bank for Agriculture. The paddy goes to participating millers under the oversight of the Commerce Ministry. Proceeds from the sale of rice by the Commerce Ministry are supposed to be funnelled back to the Finance Ministry so that it has the liquidity to continue the rice-pledging scheme in the following harvest season.

[TheClog]

The concept of appointed bodies ,with no democratic authority basis, passing judgement upon democratically elected bodies is somewhat puzzling for the democratic world to grasp.

Could it be Yingluck also sees it that way to ?

Edited February 26, 2014 by TheClog

[Bangmod]

Defying the courts??

Is she a Shinawatra????

[TVGerry]

The concept of appointed bodies ,with no democratic authority basis, passing judgement upon democratically elected bodies is somewhat puzzling for the democratic world to grasp.

Could it be Yingluck also sees it that way to ?

Yingluck hasn't had an original thought in years.

[timewilltell]

The concept of appointed bodies ,with no democratic authority basis, passing judgement upon democratically elected bodies is somewhat puzzling for the democratic world to grasp.

Could it be Yingluck also sees it that way to ?

Well every democracy has rules that a government must follow and procedures to handle the circumstances where a democratically elected government ceases to govern 'democratically'. In this increasingly fast world we live in, thought becomes a luxury that most people seem to happily abandon in preference to simplistic and somewhat childish 'snippets'. This is particularly suited to a place where most people are very poorly educated and those that are educated are way behind what would be expected in more advanced countries.

Hence the concept of democracy is reduced to 'the people vote to elect the prime minister so if you challenge her you are against democracy'.

Of course this is wrong but most people will not engage themselves nor educate themselves to understand the concepts more deeply.

Let's just say an elected government and a prime minister appointed by the members of the majority party (not not publicly elected leader for that would be more like a premier or presidential system some countries have), is not necessarily democratic just because the people voted for it. The government then has to perform democratically, following the principles of democracy, for it to remain democratic. And that is why there are rules to govern governments that cease to act democratically in a democracy. Precisely because there will come a time when a government may need censure. In Thailand this is pretty much all the time as the politicians either don't understand the concepts of democratic responsibility or cock a snoop at them just like the PT have behaved.

[Fryslan boppe]

Permit me to offer a non-Opposition reaction to selected quotes in this article:

>"Not only does she have to brave her biggest ever political storm, she will also have to fight court cases to remain as PM."

What "political storm"?...

Coup-mongering Elitists using the judiciary and so-called Independent Agencies do not a "political storm" make for the Prime Minster..

.A "Political Storm" would be loss of support from the electoral majority. When the current election is completed and tabulated, then we will see if there is a "Political Storm"

Trying to deny via whatever means, the choice of the electoral majority will make for a "Political Storm". Let me assure you.

>"The case that has rocked her administration to the core is the rice-pledging scheme"

I thought it was the Amnesty thing, or the terrible Thaksin regime, or self-serving reform-before-election thing.

What is challenging this electorally-solid Administration is coup-intentions by the unelectable political minority.

No one issue these coup-mongers latch onto, are in themselves problematic, or could not be properly Parliamentarized.

One must remain vigilant about actual motivations in order to retain proper context of all this Opposition and Elitist noise. When one does that, misrepresentations by that Opposition are clear.

Edited February 27, 2014 by Fryslan boppe

[Thait Spot]

Permit me to offer a non-Opposition reaction to selected quotes in this article:

>"Not only does she have to brave her biggest ever political storm, she will also have to fight court cases to remain as PM."

What "political storm"?...

Coup-mongering Elitists using the judiciary and so-called Independent Agencies do not a "political storm" make for the Prime Minster..

.A "Political Storm" would be loss of support from the electoral majority. When the current election is completed and tabulated, then we will see if there is a "Political Storm"

Trying to deny via whatever means, the choice of the electoral majority will make for a "Political Storm". Let me assure you.

>"The case that has rocked her administration to the core is the rice-pledging scheme"

I thought it was the Amnesty thing, or the terrible Thaksin regime, or self-serving reform-before-election thing.

What is challenging this electorally-solid Administration is coup-intentions by the unelectable political minority.

No one issue these coup-mongers latch onto, are in themselves problematic, or could not be properly Parliamentarized.

One must remain vigilant about actual motivations in order to retain proper context of all this Opposition and Elitist noise. When one does that, misrepresentations by that Opposition are clear.

"Coup-mongering Elitists using the judiciary and so-called Independent Agencies do not a "political storm" make for the Prime Minster.."

Maybe, for once, you could do us all a favour and stop boring us all with your "coup" (that only you are talking about) and "elitists". There is a finite amount of bytes in the world and it would be a travesty of justice if they were all filled by your cock-eyed lexicon.

"Political Storm"

I would say it is a political storm when there have been millions of people marching against you and now more your own supporters in the form of the rice farmers are turning. Amnesty bill, rice scam, corruption, destroying democracy in parliament with crooked voting and doctored documents and openly defying the courts

"A "Political Storm" would be loss of support from the electoral majority"

Well guess what - PTP polled around half the vote that they did in 2011

"What is challenging this electorally-solid Administration is coup-intentions by the unelectable political minority."

What? Can't use coup enough times in one post when it isn't even happening? Electorally solid? Don't make me laugh. If this carries on much longer the caretaker government will have lost the mandate it got from the 2011 vote!!!

"No one issue these coup-mongers latch onto, are in themselves problematic, or could not be properly Parliamentarized."

You might want to turn that one into English - a meaningless collection of words. But it does feature "coup" once again - must maintain your quota

[aussieinthailand]

Can I ask all Suthep supporters to answer this openly and honestly,

If YL openly called on people to detain Suthep and his members and tell them to make arrangements for their wives and kids in case of trouble,

I wonder if he was tried in an international court would the outcome be the same? and how Suthep's supporters would react and complain?

as it stands at the moment the CC has decided in their wisdom that Suthep has done no wrong and no case to answer, <deleted>???

Ever heard of a Judicial coup?

NOT ONE, big surprise, not bloody one, has answered my Questions, but some have done a great job at deflecting, BIG SUPRISE.....

When the questions you don't like are being asked you don't answer but try to twist and turn or simply play deaf...

Unfortunately for a PM to defy a courts ruling is always going to be controversial regardless of it's so-called (impartiality) HAHAHA

I think YL should take the courts rulings seriously, then appeal them.

I wonder if the judges are now driving a nice new merc, or gifted bricks of gold? etc,

how many here have ever complained about the judicial system in LOS is very much up for sale???

I'll ask another Question for Sutheps supporters, If the courts rule that your hero Suthep in fact dose have a case to answer starting from 1995 with his famous land deals and palm oil controversies'

[Thait Spot]

Can I ask all Suthep supporters to answer this openly and honestly,

If YL openly called on people to detain Suthep and his members and tell them to make arrangements for their wives and kids in case of trouble,

I wonder if he was tried in an international court would the outcome be the same? and how Suthep's supporters would react and complain?

as it stands at the moment the CC has decided in their wisdom that Suthep has done no wrong and no case to answer, <deleted>???

Ever heard of a Judicial coup?

NOT ONE, big surprise, not bloody one, has answered my Questions, but some have done a great job at deflecting, BIG SUPRISE.....

When the questions you don't like are being asked you don't answer but try to twist and turn or simply play deaf...

Unfortunately for a PM to defy a courts ruling is always going to be controversial regardless of it's so-called (impartiality) HAHAHA

I think YL should take the courts rulings seriously, then appeal them.

I wonder if the judges are now driving a nice new merc, or gifted bricks of gold? etc,

how many here have ever complained about the judicial system in LOS is very much up for sale???

I'll ask another Question for Sutheps supporters, If the courts rule that your hero Suthep in fact dose have a case to answer starting from 1995 with his famous land deals and palm oil controversies'

There is one rhetorical question preceded by a pile of waffle.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Thait Spot]

I see YS is too busy looking at fruit and being surrounded by love to attend the NAAC tidau

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[samuidave]

They haven't convicted ANYONE for corruption or graft on the rice scheme yet.

I think even I as a non lawyer could defend her against this accusation. Is there one single proven complaint of corruption in the rice scheme nationwide?

So m'lord, there is no corruption.

Your non-lawyer status is abundantly evident. Take a seat, sir, or be found in contempt.

[samuidave]

Can I ask all Suthep supporters to answer this openly and honestly,

If YL openly called on people to detain Suthep and his members and tell them to make arrangements for their wives and kids in case of trouble,

I wonder if he was tried in an international court would the outcome be the same? and how Suthep's supporters would react and complain?

as it stands at the moment the CC has decided in their wisdom that Suthep has done no wrong and no case to answer, <deleted>???

Ever heard of a Judicial coup?

NOT ONE, big surprise, not bloody one, has answered my Questions, but some have done a great job at deflecting, BIG SUPRISE.....

When the questions you don't like are being asked you don't answer but try to twist and turn or simply play deaf...

Unfortunately for a PM to defy a courts ruling is always going to be controversial regardless of it's so-called (impartiality) HAHAHA

I think YL should take the courts rulings seriously, then appeal them.

I wonder if the judges are now driving a nice new merc, or gifted bricks of gold? etc,

how many here have ever complained about the judicial system in LOS is very much up for sale???

I'll ask another Question for Sutheps supporters, If the courts rule that your hero Suthep in fact dose have a case to answer starting from 1995 with his famous land deals and palm oil controversies'

Famous land deals huh? What was that anyhow? 11 plots of land out of 597 were misdirected to families too wealthy to apply, yet the remaining 586 plots of land went directly to the poor for whom the project was designed. Is that the horrendous corruption to which you refer?

Because, to me, that sounds like a massively successful government project most anywhere, but particularly so by historic Thai standards.

AND it pales in comparison to the crimes committed by the Shin clan these last 12 public years.

How one can behave worse than his enemy in all regards and then claim some sort of moral superiority is beyond me.

[MrSlatersParrot]

Can I ask all Suthep supporters to answer this openly and honestly,

If YL openly called on people to detain Suthep and his members and tell them to make arrangements for their wives and kids in case of trouble,

I wonder if he was tried in an international court would the outcome be the same? and how Suthep's supporters would react and complain?

as it stands at the moment the CC has decided in their wisdom that Suthep has done no wrong and no case to answer, <deleted>???

Ever heard of a Judicial coup?

NOT ONE, big surprise, not bloody one, has answered my Questions, but some have done a great job at deflecting, BIG SUPRISE.....

When the questions you don't like are being asked you don't answer but try to twist and turn or simply play deaf...

Unfortunately for a PM to defy a courts ruling is always going to be controversial regardless of it's so-called (impartiality) HAHAHA

I think YL should take the courts rulings seriously, then appeal them.

I wonder if the judges are now driving a nice new merc, or gifted bricks of gold? etc,

how many here have ever complained about the judicial system in LOS is very much up for sale???

I'll ask another Question for Sutheps supporters, If the courts rule that your hero Suthep in fact dose have a case to answer starting from 1995 with his famous land deals and palm oil controversies'

You move (elf-like) through a herd of trolls.

Move along

[bubblegum]

Ignore the courts ?

Doesn't PTP have a track record of such ?

yes

Sent from my GT-I8552 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[smovi57]

Thaksin has already raped and pillaged Thailand. Theres nothing else for him to take.

[MrSlatersParrot]

Can I ask all Suthep supporters to answer this openly and honestly,

If YL openly called on people to detain Suthep and his members and tell them to make arrangements for their wives and kids in case of trouble,

I wonder if he was tried in an international court would the outcome be the same? and how Suthep's supporters would react and complain?

as it stands at the moment the CC has decided in their wisdom that Suthep has done no wrong and no case to answer, <deleted>???

Ever heard of a Judicial coup?

NOT ONE, big surprise, not bloody one, has answered my Questions, but some have done a great job at deflecting, BIG SUPRISE.....

When the questions you don't like are being asked you don't answer but try to twist and turn or simply play deaf...

Unfortunately for a PM to defy a courts ruling is always going to be controversial regardless of it's so-called (impartiality) HAHAHA

I think YL should take the courts rulings seriously, then appeal them.

I wonder if the judges are now driving a nice new merc, or gifted bricks of gold? etc,

how many here have ever complained about the judicial system in LOS is very much up for sale???

I'll ask another Question for Sutheps supporters, If the courts rule that your hero Suthep in fact dose have a case to answer starting from 1995 with his famous land deals and palm oil controversies'

Famous land deals huh? What was that anyhow? 11 plots of land out of 597 were misdirected to families too wealthy to apply, yet the remaining 586 plots of land went directly to the poor for whom the project was designed. Is that the horrendous corruption to which you refer?

Because, to me, that sounds like a massively successful government project most anywhere, but particularly so by historic Thai standards.

AND it pales in comparison to the crimes committed by the Shin clan these last 12 public years.

How one can behave worse than his enemy in all regards and then claim some sort of moral superiority is beyond me.

Really!

Suthep, the godfather of samui.

Not many people I know there are his fans.the place is infested with mafia.

Quote from wikipedia in full:

As part of the Sor Por Kor 4-01 (สปก.4-01) land reform scheme, Suthep gave title deeds to 592 plots of land in Khao Sam Liam, Kamala and Nakkerd hills of Phuket province to 489 farmers. It was later found that members of 11 wealthy families in Phuket were among the recipients. Suthep addressed a huge crowd in his Surat Thani constituency a month before a no-confidence debate and called on his supporters to march on Bangkok in the hundreds of thousands to defend his reputation.[5] The scandal led Prime Minister Chuan Leekpai of the Democrat Party to dissolve the House of Representatives in July 1995 in order to avoid the no-confidence debate.[6] In subsequent elections, Thai Nation Party won a majority, leading to the downfall of Chuan Leekpai's Democrat Party-led government.

Wikileaks diplomatic cables from the US embassy revealed that many members of his own party have long complained of his corrupt and unethical behavior.[7][8][9]