cornishcarlos Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 "If the members of the NLA would like to perform their role in putting the country back on the right track, the impeachment of a wrongdoer would show the supremacy of the law", Warong stated. as this particular NLA has been hand-picked by the 'NCPO' which overturned the last government through, let's say, errr, ... less than legal methods, then it begs the question, "who's law?" Last caretaker government Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post rubl Posted January 10, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2015 On the TV broadcast, they used the word 'suspect'. They don't even have evidences that she's corrupted. There is nothing for her to address. At that point in time, her administration believed it was the right decision to buy the rice from the farmers. End of story. The right decision as they told us was a 'revolving funds' outside the National Budget as the RPPS would be 'self-financing' scheme. No need for reservations in the National Budget, no problems, all under control, opposition only political of course, etc., etc. That's why we have a 700 billion debt at BAAC guaranteed by the Yingluck government, payable by 'us, the people'. Furthermore in the last censure debate PM Yingluck clearly stated that she and only she was in charge. A charge of 'negligence' seems mild. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post timewilltell Posted January 10, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2015 "failed to address the issues" yea so did Obama, Bush, Cameron, Blair et al Public office is, and should be, such that you cannot get 'sued', 'impeached' or 'witch-hunted' AFTER you leave office. When you are IN office you should come under CLOSE scrutiny of the public, press and watchdogs and ejected IF the voters votes you out OR you have committed an illegal act. To hound someone AFTER they leave office is vindictive and absurd UNLESS it was an illegal act. No one has suggested the ex-PM acted illegally they just want to grind her into the ground for revenge and to set themselves up at the feeding trough for years to come. Most Thais I know find this distasteful and are not in the least fooled by this as they all know the real reason (which we cannot discuss). It seems in Thailand they seek to fool all of the people ALL of the time So you are saying a politician can do whatever they like, be completely derelict of duty, be corrupt to the core and introduce policies with the intent of providing a vehicle for corruption and then try to pass laws without due process in order to provide themselves an amnesty. Then when it fails just say I am not in office so you cannot touch me? Twaddle. She us guilty as hell and must be impeached. Why all this talk of amnesty except that politicians are all trying to hide from their traitorous actions. There are others that should be brought to task as well on both sides of the political divide. It is about time politicians took some personal responsibility for their actions - all of them. And that applies to the people in the current administration if they do something that is for personal gain rather than for the good of the country. No one should be above punishment for treason and make no mistake that is what cheating the country is. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JOC Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Stop screwing around and just throw her ass in jail. Everyone knows she is as guilty as hell. Thank you Sir for your in depth analysis!! After reading your excellent contribution, I suddenly understand the case much better!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Briggsy Posted January 10, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) Perhaps a nice long stay in prison might bring back her failing memory. Make the cell big enough for her brother and other family members. Statements like this show you have no understanding of Thai politics. The very last thing the current military / elite-backed administration wants to do is to jail Yingluck. Not only would it bring massive opposition from both the grassroots and the very well-funded political opposition, it would smash the convention that in Thailand, the rich and powerful don't go to prison. It would lead to a very, very nasty unrestrained battle with unpredictable outcomes. The Prayuth govt does not want that. It is on fairly weak ground anyway. It wants to continually pressure the political opposition, keep the squeeze on them so that they have more to gain by silently complying rather than launching an all-out rebellion. Edited January 10, 2015 by Briggsy 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Trouble Posted January 10, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2015 If I understood the OP correctly I would like to know why a former Democrat MP is doing the grilling in this censure debate. Seems to me the investigation should have been done by an impartial body and all proceedings done by impartial members. Of course it is also curious that this whole process seems to be just a way of pushing her and her party out of politics so the Democrats can run the government under the domination of the generals when they see fit to return to "civilian" rule. It is all a sham proceeding orchestrated by an illegal government. The Thai government is a joke from top to bottom. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post rubl Posted January 10, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) If I understood the OP correctly I would like to know why a former Democrat MP is doing the grilling in this censure debate. Seems to me the investigation should have been done by an impartial body and all proceedings done by impartial members. Of course it is also curious that this whole process seems to be just a way of pushing her and her party out of politics so the Democrats can run the government under the domination of the generals when they see fit to return to "civilian" rule. It is all a sham proceeding orchestrated by an illegal government. The Thai government is a joke from top to bottom. The former Democrat party MP only commented after the NLA 'hearing', he didn't participate as he's not an NLA member, nor in Ms. Yingluck's defense team. Some following of your post seems based on that misunderstanding and is therefore not valid. The whole process here is just part of the regular 'checks and balances'. Ms. Yingluck managed to lose the State 700 billion Baht on a 'self-financing' scheme. If that was a mere accident Ms. Yingluck was negligent, if is wasn't an accident the charge might well be more criminating. None of this has any relation to 'political motivated'. The tax payer was defrauded, that's not a political crime. Edited January 10, 2015 by rubl 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post binjalin Posted January 10, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2015 "failed to address the issues" yea so did Obama, Bush, Cameron, Blair et al Public office is, and should be, such that you cannot get 'sued', 'impeached' or 'witch-hunted' AFTER you leave office. When you are IN office you should come under CLOSE scrutiny of the public, press and watchdogs and ejected IF the voters votes you out OR you have committed an illegal act. To hound someone AFTER they leave office is vindictive and absurd UNLESS it was an illegal act. No one has suggested the ex-PM acted illegally they just want to grind her into the ground for revenge and to set themselves up at the feeding trough for years to come. Most Thais I know find this distasteful and are not in the least fooled by this as they all know the real reason (which we cannot discuss). It seems in Thailand they seek to fool all of the people ALL of the time So you are saying a politician can do whatever they like, be completely derelict of duty, be corrupt to the core and introduce policies with the intent of providing a vehicle for corruption and then try to pass laws without due process in order to provide themselves an amnesty. Then when it fails just say I am not in office so you cannot touch me? Twaddle. She us guilty as hell and must be impeached. Why all this talk of amnesty except that politicians are all trying to hide from their traitorous actions. There are others that should be brought to task as well on both sides of the political divide. It is about time politicians took some personal responsibility for their actions - all of them. And that applies to the people in the current administration if they do something that is for personal gain rather than for the good of the country. No one should be above punishment for treason and make no mistake that is what cheating the country is. You think it ok that Blair and Bush got 1000s killed with their WMD BS? did they get 'impeached' for a lie? Yingluck killed no one and you want her head? no one would serve in public office if they knew there was NO Parliamentary Privilege. This is not about corruption it's about ******************** (censored) If you READ my post more carefully I said "When you are IN office you should come under CLOSE scrutiny of the public, press and watchdogs and ejected IF the voters votes you out OR you have committed an illegal act." Currently NO comment, NO criticism and NO freedom of assembly is allowed and YOU support THAT??? you don't 'get it' that a lot of this is to deflect away from the d*******ship (censored)? wow... just wow 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Bakseeda Posted January 10, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2015 Supremacy of the law? More like supremacy of the junta! She hasn't fled there's been no tears just grace and dignity and this farce is only going to make her more popular than ever before no matter which way it goes. The self proclaimed peoples champion hides behind a monks robe ignoring court summonses and currying favour for his divisive efforts in bringing down Thailands elected government while this lady stands face to face with her accusers. If the general thought he would wipe the Shinawatras off the political map then sadly for the junta and yellow dems the complete reverse is happening. Hate to tell you this S/P... the Shinewatras are finished, and lets all hope they strip her of her assets publicly to re-pay the hard working Thai taxpayer of all the moneys she swindled them out of. “Living is Easy with Eyes Closed.” John Lennon. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker69 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 "failed to address the issues" yea so did Obama, Bush, Cameron, Blair et al Public office is, and should be, such that you cannot get 'sued', 'impeached' or 'witch-hunted' AFTER you leave office. When you are IN office you should come under CLOSE scrutiny of the public, press and watchdogs and ejected IF the voters votes you out OR you have committed an illegal act. To hound someone AFTER they leave office is vindictive and absurd UNLESS it was an illegal act. No one has suggested the ex-PM acted illegally they just want to grind her into the ground for revenge and to set themselves up at the feeding trough for years to come. Most Thais I know find this distasteful and are not in the least fooled by this as they all know the real reason (which we cannot discuss). It seems in Thailand they seek to fool all of the people ALL of the time So you are saying a politician can do whatever they like, be completely derelict of duty, be corrupt to the core and introduce policies with the intent of providing a vehicle for corruption and then try to pass laws without due process in order to provide themselves an amnesty. Then when it fails just say I am not in office so you cannot touch me?Twaddle. She us guilty as hell and must be impeached. Why all this talk of amnesty except that politicians are all trying to hide from their traitorous actions. There are others that should be brought to task as well on both sides of the political divide. It is about time politicians took some personal responsibility for their actions - all of them. And that applies to the people in the current administration if they do something that is for personal gain rather than for the good of the country. No one should be above punishment for treason and make no mistake that is what cheating the country is. You think it ok that Blair and Bush got 1000s killed with their WMD BS? did they get 'impeached' for a lie? Yingluck killed no one and you want her head? no one would serve in public office if they knew there was NO Parliamentary Privilege. This is not about corruption it's about ******************** (censored) If you READ my post more carefully I said "When you are IN office you should come under CLOSE scrutiny of the public, press and watchdogs and ejected IF the voters votes you out OR you have committed an illegal act." Currently NO comment, NO criticism and NO freedom of assembly is allowed and YOU support THAT??? you don't 'get it' that a lot of this is to deflect away from the d*******ship (censored)? wow... just wow 16 rice farmers killed them selfes when they didn't get paid for their rice. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakseeda Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 " Yingluck killed no one and you want her head? " Sorry , but what of all the "killed" Farmers... Wake up apoligists..! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubonjoe Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Posts that were personal attacks of a member have been removed. Pleas keep it civil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post WhizBang Posted January 10, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2015 Yingluck 'failed to address issues' Well of course she failed to address the issues. She doen't understand them. He defense consists of... I did as I was told, how can that be wrong. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robby nz Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I doubt that she actually said anything instead just reading what was put in front of her (after several coaching sessions), which would have been put together by the spin doctors, who very likely work for that lawyer company that says it is no longer employed by Thaksin. He did not say whether the former premier would attend the NLA hearing next Friday. If I understood correctly next Fridays hearing is to question Yingluck and the NACC rep on points in their submissions. But she may not attend....to answer questions ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Baerboxer Posted January 10, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2015 Supremacy of the law? More like supremacy of the junta! She hasn't fled there's been no tears just grace and dignity and this farce is only going to make her more popular than ever before no matter which way it goes. The self proclaimed peoples champion hides behind a monks robe ignoring court summonses and currying favour for his divisive efforts in bringing down Thailands elected government while this lady stands face to face with her accusers. If the general thought he would wipe the Shinawatras off the political map then sadly for the junta and yellow dems the complete reverse is happening. Grace and dignity - from a liar who betrayed the oaths she gave? How loyal you are. You remind me of those nice Chinese waving their little red books. Tell us all, how do you think she managed the rice scheme when she never attended a single meeting? 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post mikemac Posted January 10, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2015 Supremacy of the law? More like supremacy of the junta! She hasn't fled there's been no tears just grace and dignity and this farce is only going to make her more popular than ever before no matter which way it goes. The self proclaimed peoples champion hides behind a monks robe ignoring court summonses and currying favour for his divisive efforts in bringing down Thailands elected government while this lady stands face to face with her accusers. If the general thought he would wipe the Shinawatras off the political map then sadly for the junta and yellow dems the complete reverse is happening. Grace and dignity - from a liar who betrayed the oaths she gave? How loyal you are. You remind me of those nice Chinese waving their little red books. Tell us all, how do you think she managed the rice scheme when she never attended a single meeting? ..................."Tell us all, how do you think she managed the rice scheme when she never attended a single meeting?"........................... He would not be able to answer your question BB as the little red book he gets his material from does not cover that area of neglect. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LatPhrao Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I'm sure I read this thread earlier in the day and it included a number of supportive posts of Yingluck and factual information. Now it's just filled with the usual hate Thaksin and the ardent but light weight and misinformed claims about Yingluck as PM. Hmmmm.... Her public address yesterday was the first factual and cogent accounting of the rice scheme I've read in the many months this purge and persecution has been underway. Bravo for the breathe of fresh air in her laying it all out from a leadership point of view and informing the public, in contrast to the cock ups of her detractors and who cares what a Democrat might have to say on this subject anyway. And no surprise either. The Shinawatras and YIngluck remain the best Thailand has had to offer in terms of representing the entire country, considering the poor and knowledgeably participating in the experiment of democracy. Like those who burned Joan of Arc at the stake, those voices withered over time. But Joan of Arc remains a revered symbol over hundreds of years, and so will Yingluck Shinawatra when her detractors are whistling under Milkwood. Enjoy a manao boys and girls, plenty to go around. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A1Str8 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I feel for this yingluck girl. She's so messed up as an individual that it's a miracle she found her way to the parking lot after the hearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I'm sure I read this thread earlier in the day and it included a number of supportive posts of Yingluck and factual information. Now it's just filled with the usual hate Thaksin and the ardent but light weight and misinformed claims about Yingluck as PM. Hmmmm.... Her public address yesterday was the first factual and cogent accounting of the rice scheme I've read in the many months this purge and persecution has been underway. Bravo for the breathe of fresh air in her laying it all out from a leadership point of view and informing the public, in contrast to the cock ups of her detractors and who cares what a Democrat might have to say on this subject anyway. And no surprise either. The Shinawatras and YIngluck remain the best Thailand has had to offer in terms of representing the entire country, considering the poor and knowledgeably participating in the experiment of democracy. Like those who burned Joan of Arc at the stake, those voices withered over time. But Joan of Arc remains a revered symbol over hundreds of years, and so will Yingluck Shinawatra when her detractors are whistling under Milkwood. Enjoy a manao boys and girls, plenty to go around. Joan of Arc? What's it with Yingluck supporters? Even our stuttering parrot was talking about burning at the stake a few days ago 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post samsensam Posted January 10, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2015 how can you impeach someone who is not in power under a constitution that no longer exists? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post rubl Posted January 10, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2015 how can you impeach someone who is not in power under a constitution that no longer exists? just watch this space to find out 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Loh Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Talk about a waste of press space. Asking a former Dem and someone who being criticizing the rice scheme and wrote a book on it for a comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post rubl Posted January 10, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2015 Talk about a waste of press space. Asking a former Dem and someone who being criticizing the rice scheme and wrote a book on it for a comment. True, true. They should have asked common people. "Given that Ms. Yingluck said her RPPS was 'self-financing' and lost 700 billion Baht, given that this has to be repaid by the government from your taxes, and given that with less financial margin the government will increase VAT, do you think Ms. Yingluck is - a: innocent - b: negligent - c: criminal - d: other (please specify) Thank you." 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ldiablo Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 My question would be why these people were not questioning the scheme while they were all in office. I am sure this Mr. Warong was involved in the government in some form so why was he not asking these questions when he was an MP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Yingluck 'failed to address issues' Well of course she failed to address the issues. She doen't understand them. He defense consists of... I did as I was told, how can that be wrong. Like the line in one of the Batman films when she may have asked questions about the scheme. I didn't want to bore you with details. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunna Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 how can you impeach someone who is not in power under a constitution that no longer exists? Because her actions when in power and under that Constitution are impeachable. If you rob a bank which then goes bankrupt and is closed down it doesn't mean you can't be convicted for the crime. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post AleG Posted January 10, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2015 I'm sure I read this thread earlier in the day and it included a number of supportive posts of Yingluck and factual information. Now it's just filled with the usual hate Thaksin and the ardent but light weight and misinformed claims about Yingluck as PM. Hmmmm.... Her public address yesterday was the first factual and cogent accounting of the rice scheme I've read in the many months this purge and persecution has been underway. Bravo for the breathe of fresh air in her laying it all out from a leadership point of view and informing the public, in contrast to the cock ups of her detractors and who cares what a Democrat might have to say on this subject anyway. And no surprise either. The Shinawatras and YIngluck remain the best Thailand has had to offer in terms of representing the entire country, considering the poor and knowledgeably participating in the experiment of democracy. Like those who burned Joan of Arc at the stake, those voices withered over time. But Joan of Arc remains a revered symbol over hundreds of years, and so will Yingluck Shinawatra when her detractors are whistling under Milkwood. Enjoy a manao boys and girls, plenty to go around. The difference between Joan d'Arc and Yingluck is that one was hoisted up by a powerful man to rally the peasantry to help him achieve absolute power regardless of her lack of qualifications, while the other was a 15th century nut case. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Loh Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Talk about a waste of press space. Asking a former Dem and someone who being criticizing the rice scheme and wrote a book on it for a comment. True, true. They should have asked common people. "Given that Ms. Yingluck said her RPPS was 'self-financing' and lost 700 billion Baht, given that this has to be repaid by the government from your taxes, and given that with less financial margin the government will increase VAT, do you think Ms. Yingluck is - a: innocent - b: negligent - c: criminal - d: other (please specify) Thank you." The common people were asked and they voted her back to office. What next was a travesty of justice with the court invalidating the result and now this attempt to ban her for 5 years. The case before the NLA is politically motivated and the NACC is on a self serving personal agenda. Let's see them open up the case of the 2010 killings. Doubt that will see the light of day for a long time. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 My question would be why these people were not questioning the scheme while they were all in office. I am sure this Mr. Warong was involved in the government in some form so why was he not asking these questions when he was an MP They did, it wasn't well received. For example, PTP's response to Waron taking a bag of rotting rice to Parliament to illustrate the sate of the stock in government warehouses was to threaten to fill a police report against him for theft. Search for "Democrats slam pledged rice quality" 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucec64 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 "failed to address the issues" yea so did Obama, Bush, Cameron, Blair et al Public office is, and should be, such that you cannot get 'sued', 'impeached' or 'witch-hunted' AFTER you leave office. When you are IN office you should come under CLOSE scrutiny of the public, press and watchdogs and ejected IF the voters votes you out OR you have committed an illegal act. To hound someone AFTER they leave office is vindictive and absurd UNLESS it was an illegal act. No one has suggested the ex-PM acted illegally they just want to grind her into the ground for revenge and to set themselves up at the feeding trough for years to come. Most Thais I know find this distasteful and are not in the least fooled by this as they all know the real reason (which we cannot discuss). It seems in Thailand they seek to fool all of the people ALL of the time So you are saying a politician can do whatever they like, be completely derelict of duty, be corrupt to the core and introduce policies with the intent of providing a vehicle for corruption and then try to pass laws without due process in order to provide themselves an amnesty. Then when it fails just say I am not in office so you cannot touch me?Twaddle. She us guilty as hell and must be impeached. Why all this talk of amnesty except that politicians are all trying to hide from their traitorous actions. There are others that should be brought to task as well on both sides of the political divide. It is about time politicians took some personal responsibility for their actions - all of them. And that applies to the people in the current administration if they do something that is for personal gain rather than for the good of the country. No one should be above punishment for treason and make no mistake that is what cheating the country is. Do you know what is also treason? Treason itself. And the current junta government has already given themselves an amnesty for that. So I guess some are above the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now