i bet they will sell it to the market anyway

profits before health, right ?

i bet they will sell it to the market anyway

profits before health, right ?

Of course they are going to try to sell it they want to return as much money to the Thai people as possible.

If they can sell it they would sell it as it is and the buyers would be well aware of what they were buying.

It is then up to the buyer who has knowingly bought a deteriorated (rotten if you like) product as to what they do with it.

The seller has no responsibility for what the buyer does with the rice after it is sold.

And anyway from here on in there is no profit, it is all about minimizing loss.

Edited July 11, 201412 yr by Robby nz

And they want to sell how much rice? 555 good luck with that plan

Sent from my GT-N5100 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

You are focusing on quantitative proof. In my humble opinion they will find that, but you might also want to go back to media reports, pre- coup, where non-quantitative charges were being discussed.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

A qualitative charge that the rice deteriorated ? Hmmmm. Hello? Its 40c and 90% humidity. I don't think that stands up in a court of law.

Really, don't think so?

So if I charge you for X amount of money to keep your commodity in good conditions you'd be just fine with me pocketing the money and letting it rot instead?

How charitable of you.

That's diametrically the other way round. If you rent my warehouse knowing it isn't moisture tight I won't provide you any guarantee that it won't go mouldy.

You are focusing on quantitative proof. In my humble opinion they will find that, but you might also want to go back to media reports, pre- coup, where non-quantitative charges were being discussed.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

A qualitative charge that the rice deteriorated ? Hmmmm. Hello? Its 40c and 90% humidity. I don't think that stands up in a court of law.

Really, don't think so?

So if I charge you for X amount of money to keep your commodity in good conditions you'd be just fine with me pocketing the money and letting it rot instead?

How charitable of you.

That's diametrically the other way round. If you rent my warehouse knowing it isn't moisture tight I won't provide you any guarantee that it won't go mouldy.

So your converse argument is that Yingluck acted in accordance with her moral code and mandated role as chairperson of the rice scam committee, when she knowingly sub contracted the storing of tax payers rice in totally inadequate warehouses where she knew the rice would become quickly spoilt. Then you expect us to accept that this scenario is an effective defence against malfeasant and corruption charges against her?

That argument would confuse even her!

???

Edited July 11, 201412 yr by waza

You are focusing on quantitative proof. In my humble opinion they will find that, but you might also want to go back to media reports, pre- coup, where non-quantitative charges were being discussed.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

A qualitative charge that the rice deteriorated ? Hmmmm. Hello? Its 40c and 90% humidity. I don't think that stands up in a court of law.

Really, don't think so?

So if I charge you for X amount of money to keep your commodity in good conditions you'd be just fine with me pocketing the money and letting it rot instead?

How charitable of you.

That's diametrically the other way round. If you rent my warehouse knowing it isn't moisture tight

I won't provide you any guarantee that it won't go mouldy.

So your converse argument is that Yingluck acted in accordance with her moral code and mandated role as chairperson of the rice scam committee, when she knowingly sub contracted the storing of tax payers rice in totally inadequate warehouses where she knew the rice would become quickly spoilt. Then you expect us to accept that this scenario is an effective defence against malfeasant and corruption charges against her?

That argument would confuse even her!

t1main-yingluck1-afp-gi.jpg ???

Corruption aside, as it relates to negligence, it is possible that potential charges against her will having nothing to do with the actual sale/ non-sale/storage of rice, but rather on a much more macro scale, continuing a program that has allegedly been detrimental to the country, despite alleged credible warnings.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Panadda visits Udon Thani for rice inspection

UDON THANI, 13 July 2014 (NNT) – M.L. Panadda Diskul, Permanent Secretary to the Office of the Prime Minister has monitored rice inspection in Udon Thani Province with the relevant authorities today.

The overall check found rice to be of normal quality except the 3rd warehouse which was mostly destroyed by snout beetles.

Other companies will continue to inspect until 20 July and will summarize the results of the rice quality to the 2nd Regional Army later.

Snout beetles in the rice. A new PC name for politicians, Nope.

Rice weevils are 1/8- to 1/4-inch long, reddish brown to black snout beetles.

Adults can live for 6 to 8 months and may be found some distance from infested articles.

The larval stage is a legless grub that develops inside kernels of rice, wheat or corn, or other whole grains or caked materials. Development from egg to adult takes as little as 1 month.

You are focusing on quantitative proof. In my humble opinion they will find that, but you might also want to go back to media reports, pre- coup, where non-quantitative charges were being discussed.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

A qualitative charge that the rice deteriorated ? Hmmmm. Hello? Its 40c and 90% humidity. I don't think that stands up in a court of law.

Really, don't think so?

So if I charge you for X amount of money to keep your commodity in good conditions you'd be just fine with me pocketing the money and letting it rot instead?

How charitable of you.

That's diametrically the other way round. If you rent my warehouse knowing it isn't moisture tight I won't provide you any guarantee that it won't go mouldy.

So your converse argument is that Yingluck acted in accordance with her moral code and mandated role as chairperson of the rice scam committee, when she knowingly sub contracted the storing of tax payers rice in totally inadequate warehouses where she knew the rice would become quickly spoilt. Then you expect us to accept that this scenario is an effective defence against malfeasant and corruption charges against her?

That argument would confuse even her!

t1main-yingluck1-afp-gi.jpg ???

I will send you a link to a map of a designated rice warehouse. It is about 50 years old, wooden walls and a tin roof. The flow is cracked to hell. It belongs to the local mayor. It gets rice, cassava, and cows stored in it from time to time. It is an old style godown.

There is no reason to build enough storage for 20mn tonnes normally.