Thailand's 'red shirts' gear up for a fight

[chainarong]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

I have the feeling that all hell will break loose

Bring it on.

[renaissanc]

Thaksin owns the leaders of the Red Shirts. They have obviously been rewarded well by someone because they live very comfortably. The Red Shirts are stirring up hatred and training people to be violent. The Red Shirts are firing M79s daily, and have caused many injuries and deaths. I wonder where the command for all these activities comes from. I wonder where the funding comes from.

They were always going to be his back-up plan, if things went wrong for him. Now his gloves are off and the fight to get home whitewashed begins in earnest.

[amerasian]

I wish they would just get on with it. This country treats farmers like dirt. When they supply most all of our food. That's not rite...there is a balance that must be maintained. Or food prices will be much higher than they already are...

[kratiam]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

I have the feeling that all hell will break loose

Bring it on.

Unbelievable......

[aussieinthailand]

This will go on until the next election , most likely in May. If PM Yingluck falls on her sword, there are several candidates that stand ready to take her place, with the most likely her sister. However, the big issue is the impeachment. As much as the current government can be criticized over the rice pledging program, in a functioning democracy, punishment would be meted out at the ballot box if merited and not by a judiciary legislating from the bench. If the corruption commission can show the PM was directly implicated in corruption, then fine, impeach the PM, and put her in jail. However, to date, there hasn't been any tangible evidence of her corruption and that's why the NACC had better be able to make a good case. If not, then a popular uprising against the judiciary and its puppet masters would be expected.

As usual, GK spewing out misinformation, and your twisted ideal's of a democracy shows bright.

Your princess isnt being charged with corruption, she is being charged with dereliction of duty. Part of that neglect was allowing corruption to run rampant in this scam.

As usual, DM spewing out misinformation, "Part of that neglect was allowing corruption to run rampant in this scam." the courts have to prove that Y/L DID know about the corruption and by who and did nothing to stop it and allowed it to continue, if that proves true then yes she would be negligent, is it possible that corrupt behavior and information was being withheld from her? or could it be that she was in the process of trying to stop it?

Regardless, of the facts, it seems you have made your guilty verdict, negligence and corruption within a policy happens around the world in some of the most democratic and open governments, If and when a politician has been found to be negligent they are publicly exposed, possibly moved to a lesser portfolio, or moved to a back bench, and worst case is removed from that party,

The rice pledging scheme was implemented to help the farmers get a better price for their product something many governments do, secondly it was to help put an end to the rice millers price fixing scams, and blatantly ripping off the farmers, Unfortunately it was poorly executed by those that were trusted to run the policy and some very cunning business people who have had years of practice in hiding their corrupt ways while making things look ok on paper.

[northernjohn]

This will go on until the next election , most likely in May. If PM Yingluck falls on her sword, there are several candidates that stand ready to take her place, with the most likely her sister. However, the big issue is the impeachment. As much as the current government can be criticized over the rice pledging program, in a functioning democracy, punishment would be meted out at the ballot box if merited and not by a judiciary legislating from the bench. If the corruption commission can show the PM was directly implicated in corruption, then fine, impeach the PM, and put her in jail. However, to date, there hasn't been any tangible evidence of her corruption and that's why the NACC had better be able to make a good case. If not, then a popular uprising against the judiciary and its puppet masters would be expected.

Well If I understand what you are saying in your usual long winded way the corruption committee has no evidence they are just looking into charges out of boredom.

I see you are in favor of her not dismissing the house and carrying on with there rape of the country until her term has run out. Did you ever stop to think that maybe she called an end to it because there was no more money to extort and she wanted to build the treasury up again? Hard to do that with wages going out and greedy pigs standing there to grab every baht that comes in and transfer it to their Off Shore Account.

A functioning democracy has ways to impeach leaders. Are you saying it is wrong for Thailand to have ways to impeach criminals?

[Luk Mhee]

Now this is going to be EXCITING! If carefully manipulated perhaps we can change this into a profitable exercise. The government has been scratching its head for the past few months on just how to pay the farmers. Why don’t they split the groups and turn the various sport complexes’ into arenas, and charge the spectators about 2000B per seat? (After all the stone is slowly rolling back into the primitive age) Not only will this be a world renowned tourist attraction, but it will also keep our kids safe, buildings won’t be touched, petty crime would be reduced, and above all the situation would be controlled, and it would be a great boost to the economy.

[northernjohn]

This will go on until the next election , most likely in May. If PM Yingluck falls on her sword, there are several candidates that stand ready to take her place, with the most likely her sister. However, the big issue is the impeachment. As much as the current government can be criticized over the rice pledging program, in a functioning democracy, punishment would be meted out at the ballot box if merited and not by a judiciary legislating from the bench. If the corruption commission can show the PM was directly implicated in corruption, then fine, impeach the PM, and put her in jail. However, to date, there hasn't been any tangible evidence of her corruption and that's why the NACC had better be able to make a good case. If not, then a popular uprising against the judiciary and its puppet masters would be expected.

As usual, GK spewing out misinformation, and your twisted ideal's of a democracy shows bright.

Your princess isnt being charged with corruption, she is being charged with dereliction of duty. Part of that neglect was allowing corruption to run rampant in this scam.

As usual, DM spewing out misinformation, "Part of that neglect was allowing corruption to run rampant in this scam." the courts have to prove that Y/L DID know about the corruption and by who and did nothing to stop it and allowed it to continue, if that proves true then yes she would be negligent, is it possible that corrupt behavior and information was being withheld from her? or could it be that she was in the process of trying to stop it?

Regardless, of the facts, it seems you have made your guilty verdict, negligence and corruption within a policy happens around the world in some of the most democratic and open governments, If and when a politician has been found to be negligent they are publicly exposed, possibly moved to a lesser portfolio, or moved to a back bench, and worst case is removed from that party,

The rice pledging scheme was implemented to help the farmers get a better price for their product something many governments do, secondly it was to help put an end to the rice millers price fixing scams, and blatantly ripping off the farmers, Unfortunately it was poorly executed by those that were trusted to run the policy and some very cunning business people who have had years of practice in hiding their corrupt ways while making things look ok on paper.

If she knew or not is debatable and maybe papers will show one way or the other.

As for being negligent she is guilty as sin. She chaired a committee for which she was not qualified and in no way could have been responsible. Most of the time she was jetting around the world and shopping. When push came to pull she lied to the farmers about when they would get their money. that happened quite often.

She was negligible in not making arrangements to pay the farmers before she closed the house down. To not find her negligible would to be negligible.

[Mr Yim]

So the red shirts will come out fighting irrespective of any evidence that implicates yinglick. Even if the evidence is irrefutable and the NACC have absolutely no choice, but to find her guilty the red shirts won't respect that verdict and come out fighting. They say that yingluck is their democratically elected PM which is 100% correct, but does that mean she can act with impunity. Impunity is a word aptly used to describe the red shirts, not the PM. So the red shirts are really saying we don't care if she is guilty or not we will come out fighting. They are fighting not for, but against the democratic framework that is used throughout the world that hold people accountable…Don't forget that this is in the context that there is irrefutable evidence against yingluck.

They are fighting for democracy yet after the NACC ruling the case goes through the senate. Again we have the democratic pathway being exercised and due process being shown. This is all done democratically, but the red shirts don't like this democratic framework, they don't like this form of democracy so they will amass a street gang of 200 000 people with access to 10 million weapons to disrupt this democratic system to ensure they can have there elected, no matter if guilty or not, PM running the country.

Do the red shirts suggest Thailand turn their back on crime? How about giving the PM carte blanche to commit any crimes while Thailand and the rule of law turn a blind eye. Maybe the rule of lw should only be applied to DEM's and the PDRC and not the red shirts or the PTP. That is red democracy. They were falling all over themselves and salivating like rabid dogs (pun intended) when they thought the amnesty was going to absolve them, but stopped dead in their tracks when they knew the opposition would be absolved. They don't mind unaccountability if it involves them. Anyone else though is just not an option.

So show your true colors red shirts and bring our your street gang to fight against the principles of democracy and remember that even if the evidence is absolutely irrefutable the world will be watching you disrespect the rule of law and revolting in a bloody brutal armed terrorist uprising that I am sure the US ambassador will see as violent as opposed to the peaceful PDRC protests she described last week.

When you have 2 accused terrorists running the brutal terrorist organization then the outcome is already predetermined. They thrive on violence.

The below is an indication of the respect they have for principles.

"United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), say they are mustering recruits to be sent for military-style training"

UDD principle #3. To promote non-violence as our modus operandi for all activities.

Who would have thought a terrorist organization would have had principles and if they did is it any surprise that they break them…NO

Democracy is about letting a government voted by the majority govern. Now if you are so confident the majority of the people are anti the current government, then support an election. If not stop posting your inane drivel about red this and red that. I myself am confident that the PTP will win any election whether now or in 1 years time. That is of course provided they are allowed to vote.

[phantomfiddler]

Ever since the appearance of designated redshirt villages, I have been of the impression that they are preparing to take on even the military in their mistaken cause to keep the very family that is using them in power. Some people never learn, and are totally subject to manipulation.

[SICHONSTEVE]

I would suggest the reds don't need to gear up, they are in a permanent state of readiness and from the way some of their leaders speak just raring to go.

If they do attack and hundreds/thousands of them are killed by the army then we all know where the blame for the death will lie - and it won't be at the army's feet but somewhere far away!!!

[Bocking]

To compare Democracy & Driving, the Election is like the Driving Test. If you 'Pass', then you're allowed to drive. The other elements of Democracy

are the 'Rules of the Road' or the 'Highway Code'. If you break those rules then you'll be Sanctioned, Banned or Imprisoned depending on the severity of the breach. I fear that no matter what evidence is presented by the NACC, if Yingluck is found 'Guilty' then the verdict will not be accepted by her supporters and they'll surely cry 'Foul'.

As a side note ... In terms of Driving, Thailand now ranks second to last in the world's 'Fatalities per Capita' listing behind only Namibia.

Edited March 31, 2014 by Bocking

[AleG]

The Red Shirts threat of violence if things don't go their way is a constant, part of the PTP victory in 2011 even, when I think it was Nattawut answering the question if there would be any violence if PTP didn't win with a "we will see about that" or words to that effect.

You can't have a Democracy where a large group is willing and eager to visit violence on those who oppose them and do almost with impunity under the complicit inaction of the police. That is not Democracy, its rule by fear.

[SICHONSTEVE]

So the red shirts will come out fighting irrespective of any evidence that implicates yinglick. Even if the evidence is irrefutable and the NACC have absolutely no choice, but to find her guilty the red shirts won't respect that verdict and come out fighting. They say that yingluck is their democratically elected PM which is 100% correct, but does that mean she can act with impunity. Impunity is a word aptly used to describe the red shirts, not the PM. So the red shirts are really saying we don't care if she is guilty or not we will come out fighting. They are fighting not for, but against the democratic framework that is used throughout the world that hold people accountable…Don't forget that this is in the context that there is irrefutable evidence against yingluck.

They are fighting for democracy yet after the NACC ruling the case goes through the senate. Again we have the democratic pathway being exercised and due process being shown. This is all done democratically, but the red shirts don't like this democratic framework, they don't like this form of democracy so they will amass a street gang of 200 000 people with access to 10 million weapons to disrupt this democratic system to ensure they can have there elected, no matter if guilty or not, PM running the country.

Do the red shirts suggest Thailand turn their back on crime? How about giving the PM carte blanche to commit any crimes while Thailand and the rule of law turn a blind eye. Maybe the rule of lw should only be applied to DEM's and the PDRC and not the red shirts or the PTP. That is red democracy. They were falling all over themselves and salivating like rabid dogs (pun intended) when they thought the amnesty was going to absolve them, but stopped dead in their tracks when they knew the opposition would be absolved. They don't mind unaccountability if it involves them. Anyone else though is just not an option.

So show your true colors red shirts and bring our your street gang to fight against the principles of democracy and remember that even if the evidence is absolutely irrefutable the world will be watching you disrespect the rule of law and revolting in a bloody brutal armed terrorist uprising that I am sure the US ambassador will see as violent as opposed to the peaceful PDRC protests she described last week.

When you have 2 accused terrorists running the brutal terrorist organization then the outcome is already predetermined. They thrive on violence.

The below is an indication of the respect they have for principles.

"United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), say they are mustering recruits to be sent for military-style training"

UDD principle #3. To promote non-violence as our modus operandi for all activities.

Who would have thought a terrorist organization would have had principles and if they did is it any surprise that they break them…NO

Democracy is about letting a government voted by the majority govern. Now if you are so confident the majority of the people are anti the current government, then support an election. If not stop posting your inane drivel about red this and red that. I myself am confident that the PTP will win any election whether now or in 1 years time. That is of course provided they are allowed to vote.

That is NOT democracy!!

Democracy is abiding by the rules laid down in government and in governing in a responsible manner that benefits all of the citizens (not just those who vote for you).

This lot have failed in every aspect laid out!!!!

[rabas]

Thaksin owns the leaders of the Red Shirts. They have obviously been rewarded well by someone because they live very comfortably. The Red Shirts are stirring up hatred and training people to be violent. The Red Shirts are firing M79s daily, and have caused many injuries and deaths. I wonder where the command for all these activities comes from. I wonder where the funding comes from.

They were always going to be his back-up plan, if things went wrong for him. Now his gloves are off and the fight to get home whitewashed begins in earnest.

Legitimate point. Burn down Bangkok was his backup plan last time.

[dcutman]

This will go on until the next election , most likely in May. If PM Yingluck falls on her sword, there are several candidates that stand ready to take her place, with the most likely her sister. However, the big issue is the impeachment. As much as the current government can be criticized over the rice pledging program, in a functioning democracy, punishment would be meted out at the ballot box if merited and not by a judiciary legislating from the bench. If the corruption commission can show the PM was directly implicated in corruption, then fine, impeach the PM, and put her in jail. However, to date, there hasn't been any tangible evidence of her corruption and that's why the NACC had better be able to make a good case. If not, then a popular uprising against the judiciary and its puppet masters would be expected.

As usual, GK spewing out misinformation, and your twisted ideal's of a democracy shows bright.

Your princess isnt being charged with corruption, she is being charged with dereliction of duty. Part of that neglect was allowing corruption to run rampant in this scam.

As usual, DM spewing out misinformation, "Part of that neglect was allowing corruption to run rampant in this scam." the courts have to prove that Y/L DID know about the corruption and by who and did nothing to stop it and allowed it to continue, if that proves true then yes she would be negligent, is it possible that corrupt behavior and information was being withheld from her? or could it be that she was in the process of trying to stop it?

Regardless, of the facts, it seems you have made your guilty verdict, negligence and corruption within a policy happens around the world in some of the most democratic and open governments, If and when a politician has been found to be negligent they are publicly exposed, possibly moved to a lesser portfolio, or moved to a back bench, and worst case is removed from that party,

The rice pledging scheme was implemented to help the farmers get a better price for their product something many governments do, secondly it was to help put an end to the rice millers price fixing scams, and blatantly ripping off the farmers, Unfortunately it was poorly executed by those that were trusted to run the policy and some very cunning business people who have had years of practice in hiding their corrupt ways while making things look ok on paper.

Unfortunately it was poorly executed by those that were trusted to run the policy and some very cunning business people who have had years of practice in hiding their corrupt ways while making things look ok on paper.

I hope Yinglucks legal team does a better job in her defense than what you just laid out.

[tetleythedog]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

"We'll act when our democratically elected prime minister is kicked out by the elite," Suporn Attawong, a red shirt leader known by followers as "Rambo Isarn", told Reuters in Bangkok


Why didn't Rambo act when their democratically elected prime minister Samak was kicked out by the Chiang Mai elite in favor of the Chiang Mai elite's Somchai? Double Standards?

Leaders of the red shirt movement, formally called the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), say they are mustering recruits to be sent for military-style training in order to protect their own protesters if they go to the barricades.


Calling all men in black. Time to report for terroristic duty.

Most definitely so! Isn't sending people on military training courses paramount to instigating an act of planned insurgency ? Can"t they rightfully be arrested and jailed for this?

[rogeratkins]

This will go on until the next election , most likely in May. If PM Yingluck falls on her sword, there are several candidates that stand ready to take her place, with the most likely her sister. However, the big issue is the impeachment. As much as the current government can be criticized over the rice pledging program, in a functioning democracy, punishment would be meted out at the ballot box if merited and not by a judiciary legislating from the bench. If the corruption commission can show the PM was directly implicated in corruption, then fine, impeach the PM, and put her in jail. However, to date, there hasn't been any tangible evidence of her corruption and that's why the NACC had better be able to make a good case. If not, then a popular uprising against the judiciary and its puppet masters would be expected.

Even if there is no corruption even a 15 year old schoolboy knows that it had to collapse.

Paying rice farmers 40 procent above market price ?? To who the government would sell this and also include the costs of stocking .Who would pay 40 procent above the market place.?

[geriatrickid]

This will go on until the next election , most likely in May. If PM Yingluck falls on her sword, there are several candidates that stand ready to take her place, with the most likely her sister. However, the big issue is the impeachment. As much as the current government can be criticized over the rice pledging program, in a functioning democracy, punishment would be meted out at the ballot box if merited and not by a judiciary legislating from the bench. If the corruption commission can show the PM was directly implicated in corruption, then fine, impeach the PM, and put her in jail. However, to date, there hasn't been any tangible evidence of her corruption and that's why the NACC had better be able to make a good case. If not, then a popular uprising against the judiciary and its puppet masters would be expected.

As usual, GK spewing out misinformation, and your twisted ideal's of a democracy shows bright.

Your princess isnt being charged with corruption, she is being charged with dereliction of duty. Part of that neglect was allowing corruption to run rampant in this scam.

I read the two charges; I) abuse of power causing corruption, which is the charge that can result in her impeachment and ii) malfeasance.

The NACC at the prodding of its political masters have sought to tarnish and destroy the prime minister by accusing her of being responsible for corruption, which I understand in Thai law is one and the same. It is no different than a person who facilitates a capital crime, being charged with that capital crime. The NACC haven't got a pot to piss in when it comes to actually proving that the PM profited from the rice pledging program. instead, they will attempt to kill her with a thousand pinpricks. The PM is a lot tougher than the NACC understands or any foreign hater assumes. She is squeaky clean on this and has never ever taken any monies in an unlawful manner nor has she aided or abetted any corruption. This is a politically motivated frame up, pure and simple.

Edited March 31, 2014 by geriatrickid

[geriatrickid]

This will go on until the next election , most likely in May. If PM Yingluck falls on her sword, there are several candidates that stand ready to take her place, with the most likely her sister. However, the big issue is the impeachment. As much as the current government can be criticized over the rice pledging program, in a functioning democracy, punishment would be meted out at the ballot box if merited and not by a judiciary legislating from the bench. If the corruption commission can show the PM was directly implicated in corruption, then fine, impeach the PM, and put her in jail. However, to date, there hasn't been any tangible evidence of her corruption and that's why the NACC had better be able to make a good case. If not, then a popular uprising against the judiciary and its puppet masters would be expected.

Even if there is no corruption even a 15 year old schoolboy knows that it had to collapse.

Paying rice farmers 40 procent above market price ?? To who the government would sell this and also include the costs of stocking .Who would pay 40 procent above the market place.?

Governments. It's called agricultural subsidies in the west. In 2012 in the EU, public funding accounted for 19% of farmers receipts. In the USA I believe corn growers obtain approximately 35% of their revenue by way of subsidies from the US government. Unlike the EU, and the USA Thailand is still heavily weighted to the agrarian sector.

[nong38]

I assume that the red shirts dont have any work to occupy their time. Is the PM relaxed about all these unemployed (unemployable?) supporters who seem to have so much time on their hands and naturally no money, why would these red shirt folk want to support a government which has not made their lives better?

[Krataiboy]

The peasants are revolting (verb or adjective - take your pick).

[Baerboxer]

The NACC will be held responsible if they make a hasty, biased decision. The rice scheme is ill-conceived and wasteful but it was clearly stated as an election promise. It must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that there is clear evidence of corruption and that Yingluck could have been reasonably expected to be aware of it. The US farm subsidy, EU CAP policy, Japanese gentan policy and many others around the world are based on flawed economic reasoning, riddled with bureacracy, and waste billions of taxpayers money, but they are not reason to topple the governments or leaders. Another politically influenced decision by the NACC will incense the govt supporters who have understandably had enough of being disenfranchised.

Probably the most sensible post I've read for a long time - and I don't always agree with you.

The NACC must clearly show evidence, beyond reasonable doubt that there is corruption in this scheme. Where they have evidence, charges should be brought.

Could YL be expected to be aware of it - she was PM, and chair of the committee, and their was lots of very public issues and warnings. That looks a "no brainer" - but they must prove the corruption first.

The threatening and intimidation of the NACC and other courts doesn't help. It just makes people think there is something to hide.

Let's wait and see all the evidence, if and when it become public, and how the decision is reached.

[chuang]

[Why didn't Rambo act when their democratically elected prime minister Samak was kicked out by the Chiang Mai elite in favor of the Chiang Mai elite's Somchai? Double Standards?

Correct me if I am wrong, wasn't Samak kicked out as PM by the Demorcats over a cooking TV show...Chiangmai elite ?????

[djjamie]

So the red shirts will come out fighting irrespective of any evidence that implicates yinglick. Even if the evidence is irrefutable and the NACC have absolutely no choice, but to find her guilty the red shirts won't respect that verdict and come out fighting. They say that yingluck is their democratically elected PM which is 100% correct, but does that mean she can act with impunity. Impunity is a word aptly used to describe the red shirts, not the PM. So the red shirts are really saying we don't care if she is guilty or not we will come out fighting. They are fighting not for, but against the democratic framework that is used throughout the world that hold people accountable…Don't forget that this is in the context that there is irrefutable evidence against yingluck.

They are fighting for democracy yet after the NACC ruling the case goes through the senate. Again we have the democratic pathway being exercised and due process being shown. This is all done democratically, but the red shirts don't like this democratic framework, they don't like this form of democracy so they will amass a street gang of 200 000 people with access to 10 million weapons to disrupt this democratic system to ensure they can have there elected, no matter if guilty or not, PM running the country.

Do the red shirts suggest Thailand turn their back on crime? How about giving the PM carte blanche to commit any crimes while Thailand and the rule of law turn a blind eye. Maybe the rule of lw should only be applied to DEM's and the PDRC and not the red shirts or the PTP. That is red democracy. They were falling all over themselves and salivating like rabid dogs (pun intended) when they thought the amnesty was going to absolve them, but stopped dead in their tracks when they knew the opposition would be absolved. They don't mind unaccountability if it involves them. Anyone else though is just not an option.

So show your true colors red shirts and bring our your street gang to fight against the principles of democracy and remember that even if the evidence is absolutely irrefutable the world will be watching you disrespect the rule of law and revolting in a bloody brutal armed terrorist uprising that I am sure the US ambassador will see as violent as opposed to the peaceful PDRC protests she described last week.

When you have 2 accused terrorists running the brutal terrorist organization then the outcome is already predetermined. They thrive on violence.

The below is an indication of the respect they have for principles.

"United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD), say they are mustering recruits to be sent for military-style training"

UDD principle #3. To promote non-violence as our modus operandi for all activities.

Who would have thought a terrorist organization would have had principles and if they did is it any surprise that they break them…NO

Democracy is about letting a government voted by the majority govern. Now if you are so confident the majority of the people are anti the current government, then support an election. If not stop posting your inane drivel about red this and red that. I myself am confident that the PTP will win any election whether now or in 1 years time. That is of course provided they are allowed to vote.

I'm not talking about elections..I never mentioned elections. This post of mine is as far from elections as the truth is from the accused terrorist Jatuporn's lips. It is wonderful you think the PTP will win the election though. We are not talking about your beliefs or what you think in any upcoming election. That was never mentioned and elections where not even allured too in my post.

If I am confident the majority of the people are anti - government? I didn't say that either. The majority might well support yingluck, but that does not make her immune from prosecution. Ned Kelley was a very popular criminal in Australian history…Your argument dictates that he should be allowed to act with impunity thus without accountability and commit his crimes. Why? Because he was popular…History is littered with popular criminals. Popularity is not proportional to impunity.

I am talking about the PM's impunity and the terrorist organizations tactics, who irrespective of her innocence or guilt, will come out guns ablazing. I am talking about post elections and questioning whether a PM can act with immunity from prosecution should she do something wrong.

If my drivel is inane then that is your opinion which I respect. Well done and thanks for the constructive criticism. I will not belittle you, demonize you or be condescending towards you. That is not what people do in democracies. People that do that don't respect the democratic framework we live in. If yingluck followed this lead she would not be in this predicament. If she respected others opinions and took criticism on board instead of demonizing them she would be smiling and strutting her stuff and swinging her democratic hips to the "beat of the drum" that beat of which would not include the word "war". She would be proudly standing next to Supa giving interviews being heralded as defenders of the truth and "the female fighters of corruption". Abhisit would be in denial, The 15 principle supporters would be embarrassed to even post on TFV anymore and bitting their upper lip thinking that this PTP are in fact more honest than we gave them credit for. If only heay…If only.

But no…We are still here as strong as ever..Still denouncing the PTP for not being transparent. Not being truthful. Not defending democracy. If only heay. If only.

So as an example to your adherence to democracy try to not be condescending in your replies and respect others opinion…..Unless of course you mirror the UDD and PTP anti democratic ways.

Edited March 31, 2014 by djjamie

[Thait Spot]

https://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/2010/12/25/teflon-mark-and-the-nacc/

Teflon Mark and the NACC

Splendid.

You should offer your services to Yingluck

[oldsailor35]

They should call in Chuck Norris to settle it.

I wonder where all this will end.

Heaven forbid ! Please no, not another interfering American hero . The world has seen too many of them already.

[wolfmanjack]

This will go on until the next election , most likely in May. If PM Yingluck falls on her sword, there are several candidates that stand ready to take her place, with the most likely her sister. However, the big issue is the impeachment. As much as the current government can be criticized over the rice pledging program, in a functioning democracy, punishment would be meted out at the ballot box if merited and not by a judiciary legislating from the bench. If the corruption commission can show the PM was directly implicated in corruption, then fine, impeach the PM, and put her in jail. However, to date, there hasn't been any tangible evidence of her corruption and that's why the NACC had better be able to make a good case. If not, then a popular uprising against the judiciary and its puppet masters would be expected.

As usual, GK spewing out misinformation, and your twisted ideal's of a democracy shows bright.

Your princess isnt being charged with corruption, she is being charged with dereliction of duty. Part of that neglect was allowing corruption to run rampant in this scam.

I read the two charges; I) abuse of power causing corruption, which is the charge that can result in her impeachment and ii) malfeasance.

The NACC at the prodding of its political masters have sought to tarnish and destroy the prime minister by accusing her of being responsible for corruption, which I understand in Thai law is one and the same. It is no different than a person who facilitates a capital crime, being charged with that capital crime. The NACC haven't got a pot to piss in when it comes to actually proving that the PM profited from the rice pledging program. instead, they will attempt to kill her with a thousand pinpricks. The PM is a lot tougher than the NACC understands or any foreign hater assumes. She is squeaky clean on this and has never ever taken any monies in an unlawful manner nor has she aided or abetted any corruption. This is a politically motivated frame up, pure and simple.

I wonder which part of the budget the $1 billion USD that was sent to thaksin came from? You don't think she knew about that ? Even if she did not know about the corruption all they have to prove is that she should have known and that any reasonable person that was the chairperson of the committee and did their job would have known. Especially after there were reports of corruption and she did not investigate so all they would have to prove is if she would have investigated she would have found out. Any of these would prove negligence and malfeasance.

To make it easy for you. She is guilty if there was any way a reasonable person in her job would have, should have or could have known or found out.

[oldsailor35]

If it is the only way to silence the trouble making Suthep, bring it on.

[oldsailor35]

This will go on until the next election , most likely in May. If PM Yingluck falls on her sword, there are several candidates that stand ready to take her place, with the most likely her sister. However, the big issue is the impeachment. As much as the current government can be criticized over the rice pledging program, in a functioning democracy, punishment would be meted out at the ballot box if merited and not by a judiciary legislating from the bench. If the corruption commission can show the PM was directly implicated in corruption, then fine, impeach the PM, and put her in jail. However, to date, there hasn't been any tangible evidence of her corruption and that's why the NACC had better be able to make a good case. If not, then a popular uprising against the judiciary and its puppet masters would be expected.

Even if there is no corruption even a 15 year old schoolboy knows that it had to collapse.

Paying rice farmers 40 procent above market price ?? To who the government would sell this and also include the costs of stocking .Who would pay 40 procent above the market place.?

Governments. It's called agricultural subsidies in the west. In 2012 in the EU, public funding accounted for 19% of farmers receipts. In the USA I believe corn growers obtain approximately 35% of their revenue by way of subsidies from the US government. Unlike the EU, and the USA Thailand is still heavily weighted to the agrarian sector.

USA farmers are heavily subsidised by their government because they have strong lobbiests. This is wrong, if the farmers are not efficient enough to run their businesses then they should get out. The Australian govt refuse to subsidise farmers, that is why Australia has got some of the most efficient farmers in the world. The 'duds' quickly fall by the wayside.

Edited March 31, 2014 by oldsailor35