Yingluck's minister incensed by NLA 'hired guns' remark

[casualbiker]

All this uproar about a few bags of rice and none at all about gunning down innocent civilians and press corps in live fire zones on Bangkok streets...a telling set of priorities indeed.

Shameful isn't. Bags of rice are valued more than lives according to the NACC priorities. The 2010 killings will probably not see the light of day with the current NACC commitee.

But why would the NACC investigate the 2010 riots and deaths, what did those have to do with corruption, surely it was the DSI under Khun Tarit, who brought charges against the then-PM/DPM ?

It might indeed be interesting, to find out who absolved the RTA of any wrong-doing, at that time. But that is another topic, and belongs in another thread. This one is about Yingluck's apparent inability, to show-up in-person and answer questions, about things she was directly in-charge-of and responsible for.

Think you have very shallow understanding of the cases under NACC purview. Try checking malfeasance charge brought against CRES in the 2010 killings. By the way, the killings have nothing todo with the RTA.

I'm going to bite!

Care to explain the statement below?

" By the way, the killings have nothing todo with the RTA"

[bangrak]

To think that thing was a country's Prime Minister!!

Dear God!!

Think not. She indeed was the elected Prime Minister compare to current unelected thing.

Who was she elected by?

Less you forget, Thailand was a democratic country and leaders are elected by the electoral system not that long ago. You still remember that period where freedom of expression was tolerated and the 3 fingers salute was allowed?

Mr Loh in his usual refined twisting and turning act... Thailand a democratic country, leaders elected by the electoral system, never in the past my dear, and not any soon when it would depend of the persons you write for!

As for the 3 fingers, the freedom of expression allows me to tell you that with the adequate rubber glove, quite some people would give you a salute you would not easily forget!

I always wondered what attorneys and propagandists take in to be able to sleep at night...

[bangrak]

To think that thing was a country's Prime Minister!!

Dear God!!

Think not. She indeed was the elected Prime Minister compare to current unelected thing.

And Kittirat publicly admitted to have been telling lies, that makes him... a liar, try to twist and turn that one around! In fact, as you seem to be working for the same people, shouldn't you publicly admit that's what you do in most of 'your' 'opinions'?

[rubl]

All this uproar about a few bags of rice and none at all about gunning down innocent civilians and press corps in live fire zones on Bangkok streets...a telling set of priorities indeed.

billions in graft on rice, suicides, further poverty by oppressing the poor played off as pawns.... Nothing to do with a city on fire under siege by armed, payed rogues and bums. Her bro still needs the guillotine for that one.

"billions if graft" you have evidence...? you know that awkward little thing that pops up in Courts?

suicides? wasn't that to do with the banks refusing to lend back then, and Hey Presto!, they lend when the bad guys take over? with their guns and such - funny that

you do live in a naive world join us in the real one? the Military have taken over, there are no elections, people are not allowed to discuss, gather or demonstrate and we are about to celebrate closer ties with North Korea - get it now?

Edit: PS oh i forgot to mention we are under Martial Law and so any impeachment is invalid as there are no elected representatives of the people (you know those pesky voter folk who normally select their government)

Well, some were talking about 130 billion Baht lost due to graft as part of the possibly 700++ billion loss in total on that wonderful 'self-financing' scheme. Even Kittirat of the OP stated the government would get it's money back through rice sales, stated the day before the scheme started.

The suicides, well wasn't that because the Yingluck government was somewhat economical with the truth when in mid-2013 they stated to have made all necessary provisions, the money was there, no need to borrow and at the same time starting to 'forget' to pay bills?

Edit: PS the NLA is representing both parliament and Senate as described in the Interim Constitution. Of course some say it's not valid, but some also said that about the 2007 version some like to go back to now.

PPS the absurdity of claims here seems to indicate some people get really worried. As if they do not believe in in Ms. Yingluck's innocence and have little faith in her legal team.

[casualbiker]

To think that thing was a country's Prime Minister!!

Dear God!!

Think not. She indeed was the elected Prime Minister compare to current unelected thing.

She was elected in exactly the same way as Abhisit, from a vote of MP's not the electorate!

As all Thai PM's have been voted into office. Including Samak and Thaksin's brother in law. But it was only Abhisit who was undemocratic. Strange that!!!

[rubl]

All this uproar about a few bags of rice and none at all about gunning down innocent civilians and press corps in live fire zones on Bangkok streets...a telling set of priorities indeed.

Shameful isn't. Bags of rice are valued more than lives according to the NACC priorities. The 2010 killings will probably not see the light of day with the current NACC commitee.

Shameful, really. Almost makes you forget that the Yingluck Administration was trying to push through to law a 'blanket amnesty bill" instead of paying attention to paying bills and mounting losses.

[bangrak]

IMO, the current Thai laws didn't allow Mr Pornpetch to tell the truth without being sued, by calling Kittirat: 'a hired liar', although Kittirat publicly admitted it before himself...

[AleG]

All this uproar about a few bags of rice and none at all about gunning down innocent civilians and press corps in live fire zones on Bangkok streets...a telling set of priorities indeed.

Shameful isn't. Bags of rice are valued more than lives according to the NACC priorities. The 2010 killings will probably not see the light of day with the current NACC commitee.

Well, then add murder charges for the protesters killed by the police during her term; no double standards, remember?

[Baerboxer]

To think that thing was a country's Prime Minister!!

Dear God!!

Think not. She indeed was the elected Prime Minister compare to current unelected thing.

Who was she elected by?

Less you forget, Thailand was a democratic country and leaders are elected by the electoral system not that long ago. You still remember that period where freedom of expression was tolerated and the 3 fingers salute was allowed?

Yes sure, if you say so Eric. A democracy in which a crook can own and run a government whilst a fugitive, facing even more charges. A democracy where the puppet PM and her ministers can openly lie and state they will defy the rule of law when they don't like it. A democracy where the incumbent government can refuse parliamentary debate and refuse to divulge information.

Had the previous regime manipulated the amnesty their owner desired, and changed things to suit themselves, do you really think they would be interested in democracy?

JOC, just one more and I will leave this people to have their hard drink.

BB, key words were puppet, lies, rule of law, Parlimentary debate and amnesty. Are you talking about the current junta?

You missed one key word out Eric - criminal. There is only one convicted criminal who owns and manages a political party AFAIK.

[Baerboxer]

All this uproar about a few bags of rice and none at all about gunning down innocent civilians and press corps in live fire zones on Bangkok streets...a telling set of priorities indeed.

Shameful isn't. Bags of rice are valued more than lives according to the NACC priorities. The 2010 killings will probably not see the light of day with the current NACC commitee.

But why would the NACC investigate the 2010 riots and deaths, what did those have to do with corruption, surely it was the DSI under Khun Tarit, who brought charges against the then-PM/DPM ?

It might indeed be interesting, to find out who absolved the RTA of any wrong-doing, at that time. But that is another topic, and belongs in another thread. This one is about Yingluck's apparent inability, to show-up in-person and answer questions, about things she was directly in-charge-of and responsible for.

Think you have very shallow understanding of the cases under NACC purview. Try checking malfeasance charge brought against CRES in the 2010 killings. By the way, the killings have nothing todo with the RTA.

Would that be the same Khun Tarit who was a member of CRES himself? The one who failed to charge Yingluck with perjury and said so the day after she took office? The same one who is currently under investigation for encroachment?

Bet he gets on well with Mr White Lies formerly of Finance.

[Baerboxer]

To think that thing was a country's Prime Minister!!

Dear God!!

Prepare to defend yourself sir, the Red Brigade will be along in a moment to refute that statement.

Right enough. Where are the Fabricator, Robespiere (sic) and the Stammering mange-bird these days?

Collecting tinder wood and gunpowder, methinks.

Good question. Boiler room pressure sure gets through the workers quickly. They simply burn out.

[NeverSure]

Hold it.

Requiring someone to testify against herself is inhumane. The questions can be just as twisted as answers can be.

Does no one else live in a Western country where you're not required to testify against yourself but can instead refuse to answer questions? Does no one else live in a Western country where if the prosecution has a case they have to present it all by themselves, with the accused's attorney able to object to any and all testimony and evidence if it's irrelevant, immaterial but prejudicial against the defendant?

I've read this thread and I'm shocked that no one has pointed out that no one should be required to be a witness against himself. It's a violation of basic human rights, and is law in at least one country.

[Robby nz]

Hold it.

Requiring someone to testify against herself is inhumane. The questions can be just as twisted as answers can be.

Does no one else live in a Western country where you're not required to testify against yourself but can instead refuse to answer questions? Does no one else live in a Western country where if the prosecution has a case they have to present it all by themselves, with the accused's attorney able to object to any and all testimony and evidence if it's irrelevant, immaterial but prejudicial against the defendant?

I've read this thread and I'm shocked that no one has pointed out that no one should be required to be a witness against himself. It's a violation of basic human rights, and is law in at least one country.

That would be the twist of the year so far.

She has made a statement in her defense, some of the members of the body she made that statement to, want clarification on points in her defense statement.

They will be asking her what she meant by points in her statement, or what they believe she may have failed to explain fully.

That means she is being given an opportunity to add to her defense.

All very fair and reasonable.

Unless of course, as your post seems to imply, any answers she may give can only incriminate her.

You must also remember that her accusers are also going to be asked questions which puts them in the same position as her.....right ?

[Siripon]

Yingluck has consistently said there was nothing wrong with the rice policy.

Well she has a wonderful chance to go into details tomorrow .

But she won't be there because in truth she knows almost nothing and can only answer questions from a prepared speech.

She won't want to embarrass herself.

[casualbiker]

Hold it.

Requiring someone to testify against herself is inhumane. The questions can be just as twisted as answers can be.

Does no one else live in a Western country where you're not required to testify against yourself but can instead refuse to answer questions? Does no one else live in a Western country where if the prosecution has a case they have to present it all by themselves, with the accused's attorney able to object to any and all testimony and evidence if it's irrelevant, immaterial but prejudicial against the defendant?

I've read this thread and I'm shocked that no one has pointed out that no one should be required to be a witness against himself. It's a violation of basic human rights, and is law in at least one country.

It's not a criminal trial. I think that's the difference!

[yasothon]

Yingluck has consistently said there was nothing wrong with the rice policy.

Well she has a wonderful chance to go into details tomorrow .

But she won't be there because in truth she knows almost nothing and can only answer questions from a prepared speech.

She won't want to embarrass herself.

crux

noun: crux

the decisive or most important point at issue.

[rickirs]

"If [Yingluck] sends hired guns to answer for her, how will that be credible?"

From another perspective that has nothing to do with Yingluck, this is a ludicrous and hypocrital statement.

The NLA only exists because of the military coup. It owes its existence to the end of a gun aimed at the collective head of the Thai people. A majority of NLA membership is composed of military officers and 100% of the NLA was selected and appointed by the Junta leadership. The NLA has NO judicial, ethical, or moral credibility.

[rubl]

"If [Yingluck] sends hired guns to answer for her, how will that be credible?"

From another perspective that has nothing to do with Yingluck, this is a ludicrous and hypocrital statement.

The NLA only exists because of the military coup. It owes its existence to the end of a gun aimed at the collective head of the Thai people. A majority of NLA membership is composed of military officers and 100% of the NLA was selected and appointed by the Junta leadership. The NLA has NO judicial, ethical, or moral credibility.

From a more realistic perspective that has all to do with the NLA trying to ask Ms. Yingluck a few more questions regarding her defence statement as it would seem she didn't address the issue of how her self-financing RPPS could lose hundreds of billion Baht.

Of course Ms. Yingluck may bring some hired help to pass questions but even then she'll be asked to confirm the answer provided is correct and she agrees with it.

As for legality, well although some seem to think Thailand is a lawless country we do have an Interim Constitution and lots of laws. It would seem Ms. Yingluck has flaunted laws and legality and her 'incensed' former Minister of Finance is a self-confessed teller of 'little' white lies.

[binjalin]

All this uproar about a few bags of rice and none at all about gunning down innocent civilians and press corps in live fire zones on Bangkok streets...a telling set of priorities indeed.

billions in graft on rice, suicides, further poverty by oppressing the poor played off as pawns.... Nothing to do with a city on fire under siege by armed, payed rogues and bums. Her bro still needs the guillotine for that one.

"billions if graft" you have evidence...? you know that awkward little thing that pops up in Courts?

suicides? wasn't that to do with the banks refusing to lend back then, and Hey Presto!, they lend when the bad guys take over? with their guns and such - funny that

you do live in a naive world join us in the real one? the Military have taken over, there are no elections, people are not allowed to discuss, gather or demonstrate and we are about to celebrate closer ties with North Korea - get it now?

Edit: PS oh i forgot to mention we are under Martial Law and so any impeachment is invalid as there are no elected representatives of the people (you know those pesky voter folk who normally select their government)

Why did the caretaker government HAVE to try and borrow money to pay the farmers, it was a revolving scheme. Money came from sales to pay the farmers BUT we all know that's not what happened!

Also the payment structure SHOULD have been in place BEFORE Yingluck stepped down .. no?

the scheme was set up to assist poor farmers... just like the Common Agricultural Policy of the EU which costs many more BILLIONS than this scheme and I don't see Merkle, Cameron and Hollande (or predecessors) in Court

this has nothing to do with RICE and everything to do with POWER and things we cannot talk about - many people 'get' this and hopefully you will soon

Edited January 15, 2015 by binjalin

[binjalin]

"If [Yingluck] sends hired guns to answer for her, how will that be credible?"

From another perspective that has nothing to do with Yingluck, this is a ludicrous and hypocrital statement.

The NLA only exists because of the military coup. It owes its existence to the end of a gun aimed at the collective head of the Thai people. A majority of NLA membership is composed of military officers and 100% of the NLA was selected and appointed by the Junta leadership. The NLA has NO judicial, ethical, or moral credibility.

From a more realistic perspective that has all to do with the NLA trying to ask Ms. Yingluck a few more questions regarding her defence statement as it would seem she didn't address the issue of how her self-financing RPPS could lose hundreds of billion Baht.

Of course Ms. Yingluck may bring some hired help to pass questions but even then she'll be asked to confirm the answer provided is correct and she agrees with it.

As for legality, well although some seem to think Thailand is a lawless country we do have an Interim Constitution and lots of laws. It would seem Ms. Yingluck has flaunted laws and legality and her 'incensed' former Minister of Finance is a self-confessed teller of 'little' white lies.

dear rubl the 'Interim Constitution' was written by the unelected Junta Ms Yingluck was ELECTED or you propose the D can 'make up' laws and it's perfectly legal? bit like Mugabe and Kim Jong-un?

Yingluck will be found guilty, of course, but do you REALLY support this witch-hunt of political opponents? you think it's ethical? moral?

[scorecard]

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

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

To think that thing was a country's Prime Minister!!

Dear God!!

Think not. She indeed was the elected Prime Minister compare to current unelected thing.

Who was she elected by?

Less you forget, Thailand was a democratic country and leaders are elected by the electoral system not that long ago. You still remember that period where freedom of expression was tolerated and the 3 fingers salute was allowed?"

"Less you forget, Thailand was a democratic country and leaders are elected by the electoral system not that long ago"

The winner - Joke of the day award!!

Democracy is a joke to you. I see you compromised your own moral standard. Live with that for your rest of your life.

Ahhh.... another twister. Doesn't take much thinking and/or intelligence to realize I was referring to the 'not that long ago' gang who claimed they were building and protecting democracy but were in fact working towards setting up a dictatorship and totalitarianism.

I sleep fine thanks in terms of my own morals.

[Freed1948]

All this uproar about a few bags of rice and none at all about gunning down innocent civilians and press corps in live fire zones on Bangkok streets...a telling set of priorities indeed.

Only 19 replies for that to surface!

[rubl]

"If [Yingluck] sends hired guns to answer for her, how will that be credible?"

From another perspective that has nothing to do with Yingluck, this is a ludicrous and hypocrital statement.

The NLA only exists because of the military coup. It owes its existence to the end of a gun aimed at the collective head of the Thai people. A majority of NLA membership is composed of military officers and 100% of the NLA was selected and appointed by the Junta leadership. The NLA has NO judicial, ethical, or moral credibility.

From a more realistic perspective that has all to do with the NLA trying to ask Ms. Yingluck a few more questions regarding her defence statement as it would seem she didn't address the issue of how her self-financing RPPS could lose hundreds of billion Baht.

Of course Ms. Yingluck may bring some hired help to pass questions but even then she'll be asked to confirm the answer provided is correct and she agrees with it.

As for legality, well although some seem to think Thailand is a lawless country we do have an Interim Constitution and lots of laws. It would seem Ms. Yingluck has flaunted laws and legality and her 'incensed' former Minister of Finance is a self-confessed teller of 'little' white lies.

dear rubl the 'Interim Constitution' was written by the unelected Junta Ms Yingluck was ELECTED or you propose the D can 'make up' laws and it's perfectly legal? bit like Mugabe and Kim Jong-un?

Yingluck will be found guilty, of course, but do you REALLY support this witch-hunt of political opponents? you think it's ethical? moral?

So, you also think Ms. Yingluck will be found guilty of 'negligence' ? Personally I'm more for 'criminal intend to deceive and defraud'. Still tomorrow Ms. Yingluck gets a chance to answer questions, or pass them to her hired helpers to answer. Of course she'll have to tell the NLA if she agrees with the explanation put forward by her helpers.

As for the incensed gentleman, well he did admit to telling little white lies.

As a tax payer here in Thailand I think to ask former PMs to justify a staggering 700++ billion Baht debt leftover from a 'self-financing' scheme is not more than ethically just, morally so.

[casualbiker]

All this uproar about a few bags of rice and none at all about gunning down innocent civilians and press corps in live fire zones on Bangkok streets...a telling set of priorities indeed.

billions in graft on rice, suicides, further poverty by oppressing the poor played off as pawns.... Nothing to do with a city on fire under siege by armed, payed rogues and bums. Her bro still needs the guillotine for that one.

"billions if graft" you have evidence...? you know that awkward little thing that pops up in Courts?

suicides? wasn't that to do with the banks refusing to lend back then, and Hey Presto!, they lend when the bad guys take over? with their guns and such - funny that

you do live in a naive world join us in the real one? the Military have taken over, there are no elections, people are not allowed to discuss, gather or demonstrate and we are about to celebrate closer ties with North Korea - get it now?

Edit: PS oh i forgot to mention we are under Martial Law and so any impeachment is invalid as there are no elected representatives of the people (you know those pesky voter folk who normally select their government)

Why did the caretaker government HAVE to try and borrow money to pay the farmers, it was a revolving scheme. Money came from sales to pay the farmers BUT we all know that's not what happened!

Also the payment structure SHOULD have been in place BEFORE Yingluck stepped down .. no?

the scheme was set up to assist poor farmers... just like the Common Agricultural Policy of the EU which costs many more BILLIONS than this scheme and I don't see Merkle, Cameron and Hollande (or predecessors) in Court

this has nothing to do with RICE and everything to do with POWER and things we cannot talk about - many people 'get' this and hopefully you will soon

Your absolutely right for a change .. it has nothing to do with rice or the poor. It was an attempt to keep a Shinawatra in power for as long as possible.

the European subsidies are generally where they are needed due to under or over supply and to ensure that Europe keeps an agricultural sector.

The rice subsidies were not really needed as such, certainly not storing the rice. You do remember that Thailand WAS the top rice EXPORTING country in the world prior to this disastrous scheme?

[gemini81]

All this uproar about a few bags of rice and none at all about gunning down innocent civilians and press corps in live fire zones on Bangkok streets...a telling set of priorities indeed.

billions in graft on rice, suicides, further poverty by oppressing the poor played off as pawns.... Nothing to do with a city on fire under siege by armed, payed rogues and bums. Her bro still needs the guillotine for that one.

"billions if graft" you have evidence...? you know that awkward little thing that pops up in Courts?

suicides? wasn't that to do with the banks refusing to lend back then, and Hey Presto!, they lend when the bad guys take over? with their guns and such - funny that

you do live in a naive world join us in the real one? the Military have taken over, there are no elections, people are not allowed to discuss, gather or demonstrate and we are about to celebrate closer ties with North Korea - get it now?

Edit: PS oh i forgot to mention we are under Martial Law and so any impeachment is invalid as there are no elected representatives of the people (you know those pesky voter folk who normally select their government)

Who is naive, trolling away praising and denying her and her family's graft. Things will be restored, and you know the system now is in place to stop the return of shinawatras from further devastating the place. better than a city under siege, riots, killings, graft corruption.

Are you denying she oversaw the rice scheme (but never showed up to meeting) as a PM and must take responsibility. read all the old news articles on the loss of rice, theft, graft, rotten rice. you know it, can only fool yourself PTP were accountable for unprecedented corruption.

[Robby nz]

"billions if graft" you have evidence...? you know that awkward little thing that pops up in Courts?

suicides? wasn't that to do with the banks refusing to lend back then, and Hey Presto!, they lend when the bad guys take over? with their guns and such - funny that

you do live in a naive world join us in the real one? the Military have taken over, there are no elections, people are not allowed to discuss, gather or demonstrate and we are about to celebrate closer ties with North Korea - get it now?

Edit: PS oh i forgot to mention we are under Martial Law and so any impeachment is invalid as there are no elected representatives of the people (you know those pesky voter folk who normally select their government)

Why did the caretaker government HAVE to try and borrow money to pay the farmers, it was a revolving scheme. Money came from sales to pay the farmers BUT we all know that's not what happened!

Also the payment structure SHOULD have been in place BEFORE Yingluck stepped down .. no?

the scheme was set up to assist poor farmers... just like the Common Agricultural Policy of the EU which costs many more BILLIONS than this scheme and I don't see Merkle, Cameron and Hollande (or predecessors) in Court

this has nothing to do with RICE and everything to do with POWER and things we cannot talk about - many people 'get' this and hopefully you will soon

Unfortunately the scheme did not assist poor farmers :

http://freedombarometer.org/assets/pdfs/Freedom-Barometer-Special-Report-Thailands-Agrarian-Policy.pdf

. According to a study by the World Bank, only 18% of poor farmers profited from the

subsidised prices as small producers are unable to produce large surpluses on their relatively

small planting areas. In accordance with another study by the TDRI, only 5% of the

programme's revenues reach poor farmers.

If you can post links to show that the scheme helped poor farmers please do so.

The pledging scheme had nothing in common with EC AG policy as it was touted as a self funding scheme which would eventually run at a profit and never was said to be a subsidy.

I am indebted to you for pointing out that the warehouses are not indeed filled with rice but power and you. hiding behind something you say you cant talk about are full of bull.

Get over it, this is about accountability of politicians to send a message to future politicians that they can and will be held responsible for not doing the job they swore to do.

[billd766]

Khun Kittirat is correct. It does not serve any interest for this guy to be abusive and hectoring. He would be better advised to try with the facts rather than his obvious prejudgement

This is coming from an ex Minister of Finance who publically admitted to lying to the parliament, the Thai people and the world at large, at least the few in the world who were interested.

Methinks he doth protest to much.

Yingluck is a big girl now, an ex PM of Thailand. ALL politicians are born with a thick skin and should take the rough with the smooth.

[billd766]

To think that thing was a country's Prime Minister!!

Dear God!!

Think not. She indeed was the elected Prime Minister compare to current unelected thing.

NO she was NOT elected as PM of Thailand or even as an MP as she has never stood for an election for anything in her life.

She was actually SELECTED from a short list of party list MPs, all of whom had a vote and the ONLY vote that counted came from a criminal fugitive who was her brother.

Edited January 15, 2015 by billd766

[billd766]

"If [Yingluck] sends hired guns to answer for her, how will that be credible?"

From another perspective that has nothing to do with Yingluck, this is a ludicrous and hypocrital statement.

The NLA only exists because of the military coup. It owes its existence to the end of a gun aimed at the collective head of the Thai people. A majority of NLA membership is composed of military officers and 100% of the NLA was selected and appointed by the Junta leadership. The NLA has NO judicial, ethical, or moral credibility.

From a more realistic perspective that has all to do with the NLA trying to ask Ms. Yingluck a few more questions regarding her defence statement as it would seem she didn't address the issue of how her self-financing RPPS could lose hundreds of billion Baht.

Of course Ms. Yingluck may bring some hired help to pass questions but even then she'll be asked to confirm the answer provided is correct and she agrees with it.

As for legality, well although some seem to think Thailand is a lawless country we do have an Interim Constitution and lots of laws. It would seem Ms. Yingluck has flaunted laws and legality and her 'incensed' former Minister of Finance is a self-confessed teller of 'little' white lies.

dear rubl the 'Interim Constitution' was written by the unelected Junta Ms Yingluck was ELECTED or you propose the D can 'make up' laws and it's perfectly legal? bit like Mugabe and Kim Jong-un?

Yingluck will be found guilty, of course, but do you REALLY support this witch-hunt of political opponents? you think it's ethical? moral?

Do you think the charges of murder against Abhisit and Suthep were also a witch hunt against political opponents and those charges carry the death penalty?

Yet both Abhisit and Suthep WANTED their time in court and would have been there and answered the questions themselves.

[binjalin]

"If [Yingluck] sends hired guns to answer for her, how will that be credible?"

From another perspective that has nothing to do with Yingluck, this is a ludicrous and hypocrital statement.

The NLA only exists because of the military coup. It owes its existence to the end of a gun aimed at the collective head of the Thai people. A majority of NLA membership is composed of military officers and 100% of the NLA was selected and appointed by the Junta leadership. The NLA has NO judicial, ethical, or moral credibility.

From a more realistic perspective that has all to do with the NLA trying to ask Ms. Yingluck a few more questions regarding her defence statement as it would seem she didn't address the issue of how her self-financing RPPS could lose hundreds of billion Baht.

Of course Ms. Yingluck may bring some hired help to pass questions but even then she'll be asked to confirm the answer provided is correct and she agrees with it.

As for legality, well although some seem to think Thailand is a lawless country we do have an Interim Constitution and lots of laws. It would seem Ms. Yingluck has flaunted laws and legality and her 'incensed' former Minister of Finance is a self-confessed teller of 'little' white lies.

dear rubl the 'Interim Constitution' was written by the unelected Junta Ms Yingluck was ELECTED or you propose the D can 'make up' laws and it's perfectly legal? bit like Mugabe and Kim Jong-un?

Yingluck will be found guilty, of course, but do you REALLY support this witch-hunt of political opponents? you think it's ethical? moral?

Do you think the charges of murder against Abhisit and Suthep were also a witch hunt against political opponents and those charges carry the death penalty?

Yet both Abhisit and Suthep WANTED their time in court and would have been there and answered the questions themselves.

I believe that public office HAS to include 'Parliamentary Privilege' or no one would serve and so I believe both Abhisit and Suthep were wrong but are covered by that, as is Bush, as is Blair, as are all Ministers and MP's and as Yingluck should be - right or wrong that's what elections are for UNLESS it's illegal (Nixon et al)