It's interesting to see that public opinion is very much with Yingluck in this NACC relentless pursuit. Most articles in the mass media related to this case that invite public opinion seem to take side with Yingluck. As Professor Somchai deputy rector of the Chiangmai University opined that if the NLA was to act on their conscience, they will ruled against the charge to impeach her. I agree.

I won't ask for a poll on this as you wouldn't accept the results anyway.

If the NLA is acting on it's conscience they would impeach Ms. Yingluck. She is still avoiding questions, gives answers unrelated to questions asked and is intend on dodging responsibility.

I would prefer they stick to provable facts versus their conscience.

Correct, although as far as I'm concerned both go together. So 'negligence' will do for impeachment. In court they can fight about 'negligence', 'criminal negligence' or 'intent to deceive and defraud'

Nope, I was serious. They misled the country. In fact, lied to the country. Suthep wanted the government to step fown so fresh elections could be held. Government stepped down and Suthep violently stopped the elections so there could be a coup. Prayuth told everybody he has ne desire to be PM. Then elected himself PM. Elections promised 2015. Now 2016. It'll never happen. In the meantime the tourist industry is down the toilet. Prayuth is putting his cronies in the top government positions and forbade freedom of speech. All of this has cost the country billions of baht. I could go on but you get my drift. They should be impeached too. But that will never happen as he will write laws into the consitution absolving himself and all of his mates from being charged should a democratic process every happen again in Thailand.

Suthep wanted the government to resign. They didn't resign.

Yes they did resign, They stepped down but stayed on as caretaker government until an election could be held - which is what they're obligated to do by law. Then Suthep prevented the election (probably because he knew they would win as they will in the next election but that's not the point). A government cannot just say bye-bye and walk away leaving the country with no government and empty offices, lol!!

I smell dirty politics.

It's interesting to see that public opinion is very much with Yingluck in this NACC relentless pursuit. Most articles in the mass media related to this case that invite public opinion seem to take side with Yingluck. As Professor Somchai deputy rector of the Chiangmai University opined that if the NLA was to act on their conscience, they will ruled against the charge to impeach her. I agree.

I won't ask for a poll on this as you wouldn't accept the results anyway.

If the NLA is acting on it's conscience they would impeach Ms. Yingluck. She is still avoiding questions, gives answers unrelated to questions asked and is intend on dodging responsibility.

I would prefer they stick to provable facts versus their conscience.

In a normal circumstance and a fair trial, I would prefer the ruling is based on provable facts than conscience. But this ain't normal circumstance and anywhere in the world would look at any post coup trials with lots of suspicion and not worthy of any credibility. I hope that the NLA will vote wisely and not made this trial a mockery for the free world.

Possibly, if she hadn't followed the constitutional way by remaining as caretaker government, they would have charged her for not respecting constitution. :-)

Nope, I was serious. They misled the country. In fact, lied to the country. Suthep wanted the government to step fown so fresh elections could be held. Government stepped down and Suthep violently stopped the elections so there could be a coup. Prayuth told everybody he has ne desire to be PM. Then elected himself PM. Elections promised 2015. Now 2016. It'll never happen. In the meantime the tourist industry is down the toilet. Prayuth is putting his cronies in the top government positions and forbade freedom of speech. All of this has cost the country billions of baht. I could go on but you get my drift. They should be impeached too. But that will never happen as he will write laws into the consitution absolving himself and all of his mates from being charged should a democratic process every happen again in Thailand.

Suthep wanted the government to resign. They didn't resign.

didn't resign?

what do you call dissolving parliament and calling elections?

I'd call it not the same. Ms. Yingluck even insisted for a moment she wouldn't dissolve the House or resign before stating she was willing to dissolve the House or resign. In January 2014 as caretaker PM she stated not to resign following with stating she was willing to resign.

So, not the same.

It doesn't matter what you Yingluck said "for a moment" does it as she did dissolve the government. She might have been willing to resign but the fact is she could not resign. Check the constitution, if I recall it's article 87?

This has one purpose only, to convict Yingluck of some offence or other so that under the new constitution she cannot be eligible to stand as an election candidate. She will be the first of many.

It is pointless. They can remove leader after leader after leader.

Given the chance to vote someone from her party would still win. The Shinawatra family have offered to stay out of politics many times. They have their own money and businesses.

The Thai people will not allow them to be out of the public eye.

It's interesting to see that public opinion is very much with Yingluck in this NACC relentless pursuit. Most articles in the mass media related to this case that invite public opinion seem to take side with Yingluck. As Professor Somchai deputy rector of the Chiangmai University opined that if the NLA was to act on their conscience, they will ruled against the charge to impeach her. I agree.

Eric, we all know you think the sun shines out her arse and that she's totally innocent of doing any wrong ever.

All the public opinion I've heard from Thai friends, colleagues including many who voted for PTP is that she's been as negligent as possible, Simply didn't do anything other than what her criminal brother instructed from his fugitive havens,

Chaingmai University - isn't she an alumni of that place? A former class president, student leader of some sort? Still he's playing safe as her family's private militia are centered there and not known for the tolerance of free speech and speaking against their masters.

Do you really think she is so dumb that she had no ideas of what was really going on? Or did she simply chose to ignore it, along with all the oaths she swore when taking office - and ignored too?

Eric (and others) are of the opinion that public opinion is with Yingluck. You (and others) believe that public opinion is against her. The irony is of course that the true test of public opinion, the general election which she called in accordance with the constitution was ultimately prevented by the coup which installed the Junta !

The only publicly available guide we seem to have are various Junta initiated surveys, whose claims of support in the 90% area only the most devoted fans of military government would come close to believing. Let us not even bother with the surveys of "community leaders" to ascertain their level of happiness. I doubt even the Junta believe them!

Public opinion remains effectively suppressed, along with freedom of expression and assembly, so there is little point debating it until it can be tested in a free and fair election. Therefore it is unlikely to be an acknowledged feature of Thai politics for quite a long time!

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

She did nothing illegal…where is the corruption?

The red shirt mantra "We dun nuffink rong." In a similar vein, the PTP mantra "We wuz elected."

When evidence of wrongdoing presented, repeat louder.

You forgot ;

But Suthep............

But the Junta.....................

Great points. Eloquent...

There is a difference between illegal and self serving interests…required trait for all politicians.

It's interesting to see that public opinion is very much with Yingluck in this NACC relentless pursuit. Most articles in the mass media related to this case that invite public opinion seem to take side with Yingluck. As Professor Somchai deputy rector of the Chiangmai University opined that if the NLA was to act on their conscience, they will ruled against the charge to impeach her. I agree.

Eric, we all know you think the sun shines out her arse and that she's totally innocent of doing any wrong ever.

All the public opinion I've heard from Thai friends, colleagues including many who voted for PTP is that she's been as negligent as possible, Simply didn't do anything other than what her criminal brother instructed from his fugitive havens,

Chaingmai University - isn't she an alumni of that place? A former class president, student leader of some sort? Still he's playing safe as her family's private militia are centered there and not known for the tolerance of free speech and speaking against their masters.

Do you really think she is so dumb that she had no ideas of what was really going on? Or did she simply chose to ignore it, along with all the oaths she swore when taking office - and ignored too?

Eric (and others) are of the opinion that public opinion is with Yingluck. You (and others) believe that public opinion is against her. The irony is of course that the true test of public opinion, the general election which she called in accordance with the constitution was ultimately prevented by the coup which installed the Junta !

The only publicly available guide we seem to have are various Junta initiated surveys, whose claims of support in the 90% area only the most devoted fans of military government would come close to believing. Let us not even bother with the surveys of "community leaders" to ascertain their level of happiness. I doubt even the Junta believe them!

Public opinion remains effectively suppressed, along with freedom of expression and assembly, so there is little point debating it until it can be tested in a free and fair election. Therefore it is unlikely to be an acknowledged feature of Thai politics for quite a long time!

Yes election will be the penultimate way to gauge public opinion. With an election still without a firm date and poll by highly suspicious military initiated survey, the like and dislike vote from the general public albeit simple does seem to be a reliable barometer to gauge public sentiment. Take for instance the news about the u-tube defence in a major English newspaper has 33% more agreeing. I seen many related articles and most have the same statistic. Let's not even bother about world opinion. Win or lose, this case reflect very poorly on Thailand.

The funny thing about this whole situation is, if the price of rice went up and Thailand made allot of money from this political tactic, this would be a mute point.

That is your true barometer. Mismanagement is not a crime.

The scheme would have been 'self-financing' if the market price had increased to a point.

Similar to the massive investments into energy by the US which are not financially viable as soon as the oil price rises above a certain point.

no one besides rubl believes that she is being impeached because the program was touted as self-financing.

As usual you guys still try to divert from the issue.

Ms. Yingluck is in this impeachment process because she and her cabinet positioned and defended the RPPS as 'self-financing', continued to defend it and managed to lose the country 700 billion Baht.

Had she positioned the RPPS as 'subsidy' requiring some, limited reservations in the National Budget, she would not be in the position she's in now.

But if the price had stayed as it was when she was elected it would have been self-funded.

The funny thing about this whole situation is, if the price of rice went up and Thailand made allot of money from this political tactic, this would be a mute point.

That is your true barometer. Mismanagement is not a crime.

It becomes a crime if the mismanagement is continued and ongoing in spite of countless warnings and red flags.

What is the funny thing about this whole situation, is that had Yingluck and PTP simply recognized that the policy was failing, as was plain for all to see, and either ditched it or seriously amended it, all of this business would have been avoided. But they couldn't do that could they.

Why? Well for one it would have meant losing face, and for two, they feared that they would lose votes.

Billions of baht of taxpayers money being recklessly gambled all in the desperate hope of securing themselves more time at the piggy's trough.

The funny thing about this whole situation is, if the price of rice went up and Thailand made allot of money from this political tactic, this would be a mute point.

That is your true barometer. Mismanagement is not a crime.

It becomes a crime if the mismanagement is continued and ongoing in spite of countless warnings and red flags.

What is the funny thing about this whole situation, is that had Yingluck and PTP simply recognized that the policy was failing, as was plain for all to see, and either ditched it or seriously amended it, all of this business would have been avoided. But they couldn't do that could they.

Why? Well for one it would have meant losing face, and for two, they feared that they would lose votes.

Billions of baht of taxpayers money being recklessly gambled all in the desperate hope of securing themselves more time at the piggy's trough.

What was this then?

"The Cabinet on June 19 approved a 20 percent reduction in rice-purchase prices to help stem losses from the program.."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-24/yingluck-risks-farmer-ire-to-curb-fiscal-burden-southeast-asia.html

The funny thing about this whole situation is, if the price of rice went up and Thailand made allot of money from this political tactic, this would be a mute point.

That is your true barometer. Mismanagement is not a crime.

It becomes a crime if the mismanagement is continued and ongoing in spite of countless warnings and red flags.

What is the funny thing about this whole situation, is that had Yingluck and PTP simply recognized that the policy was failing, as was plain for all to see, and either ditched it or seriously amended it, all of this business would have been avoided. But they couldn't do that could they.

Why? Well for one it would have meant losing face, and for two, they feared that they would lose votes.

Billions of baht of taxpayers money being recklessly gambled all in the desperate hope of securing themselves more time at the piggy's trough.

What was this then?

"The Cabinet on June 19 approved a 20 percent reduction in rice-purchase prices to help stem losses from the program.."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-24/yingluck-risks-farmer-ire-to-curb-fiscal-burden-southeast-asia.html

What that was, was far far too little, far far too late.

The funny thing about this whole situation is, if the price of rice went up and Thailand made allot of money from this political tactic, this would be a mute point.

That is your true barometer. Mismanagement is not a crime.

It becomes a crime if the mismanagement is continued and ongoing in spite of countless warnings and red flags.

What is the funny thing about this whole situation, is that had Yingluck and PTP simply recognized that the policy was failing, as was plain for all to see, and either ditched it or seriously amended it, all of this business would have been avoided. But they couldn't do that could they.

Why? Well for one it would have meant losing face, and for two, they feared that they would lose votes.

Billions of baht of taxpayers money being recklessly gambled all in the desperate hope of securing themselves more time at the piggy's trough.

What was this then?

"The Cabinet on June 19 approved a 20 percent reduction in rice-purchase prices to help stem losses from the program.."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-24/yingluck-risks-farmer-ire-to-curb-fiscal-burden-southeast-asia.html

What that was, was far far too little, far far too late.

Your ignorant and incendiary comment was cut to shreds by the truth and that's your response? Lame! It's OK to admit you are wrong, because you are!

Nope, I was serious. They misled the country. In fact, lied to the country. Suthep wanted the government to step fown so fresh elections could be held. Government stepped down and Suthep violently stopped the elections so there could be a coup. Prayuth told everybody he has ne desire to be PM. Then elected himself PM. Elections promised 2015. Now 2016. It'll never happen. In the meantime the tourist industry is down the toilet. Prayuth is putting his cronies in the top government positions and forbade freedom of speech. All of this has cost the country billions of baht. I could go on but you get my drift. They should be impeached too. But that will never happen as he will write laws into the consitution absolving himself and all of his mates from being charged should a democratic process every happen again in Thailand.

Suthep wanted the government to resign. They didn't resign.

Yes they did resign, They stepped down but stayed on as caretaker government until an election could be held - which is what they're obligated to do by law. Then Suthep prevented the election (probably because he knew they would win as they will in the next election but that's not the point). A government cannot just say bye-bye and walk away leaving the country with no government and empty offices, lol!!

If Yingluck had resigned, she would have no longer been PM. They didn't resign. They dissolved parliament for elections. That made Yingluck care-taker PM. If she had resigned, she wouldn't have been any sort of PM.

The funny thing about this whole situation is, if the price of rice went up and Thailand made allot of money from this political tactic, this would be a mute point.

That is your true barometer. Mismanagement is not a crime.

It becomes a crime if the mismanagement is continued and ongoing in spite of countless warnings and red flags.

What is the funny thing about this whole situation, is that had Yingluck and PTP simply recognized that the policy was failing, as was plain for all to see, and either ditched it or seriously amended it, all of this business would have been avoided. But they couldn't do that could they.

Why? Well for one it would have meant losing face, and for two, they feared that they would lose votes.

Billions of baht of taxpayers money being recklessly gambled all in the desperate hope of securing themselves more time at the piggy's trough.

What was this then?

"The Cabinet on June 19 approved a 20 percent reduction in rice-purchase prices to help stem losses from the program.."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-24/yingluck-risks-farmer-ire-to-curb-fiscal-burden-southeast-asia.html

But they didn't actually implement the reduction. The backed down and kept the original prices.

The funny thing about this whole situation is, if the price of rice went up and Thailand made allot of money from this political tactic, this would be a mute point.

That is your true barometer. Mismanagement is not a crime.

It becomes a crime if the mismanagement is continued and ongoing in spite of countless warnings and red flags.

What is the funny thing about this whole situation, is that had Yingluck and PTP simply recognized that the policy was failing, as was plain for all to see, and either ditched it or seriously amended it, all of this business would have been avoided. But they couldn't do that could they.

Why? Well for one it would have meant losing face, and for two, they feared that they would lose votes.

Billions of baht of taxpayers money being recklessly gambled all in the desperate hope of securing themselves more time at the piggy's trough.

What was this then?

"The Cabinet on June 19 approved a 20 percent reduction in rice-purchase prices to help stem losses from the program.."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-24/yingluck-risks-farmer-ire-to-curb-fiscal-burden-southeast-asia.html

What that was, was far far too little, far far too late.

Your ignorant and incendiary comment was cut to shreds by the truth and that's your response? Lame! It's OK to admit you are wrong, because you are!

What's lame is the furious googling you just did trying desperately to come up with proof that the scheme was ditched or seriously amended, which it clearly wasn't.

Thailand had the best looking PM in the world and they blew it. Big set back into the 3rd world.

Oh look a corrupt politician... next...

The only difference between these Thai corrupt pollies and the ones back home are they were too stupid to get caught and couldn't afford to buy themselves out

Capture.PNG

which is a clear statement supporting government programs which provide price stability for producers.

This is why the Democrats had a rice program which, I hear, also lost billions. This is why the US and Europe have agricultural price support systems.

In this case, based on the people doing the investigating and the prosecuting such as Wicha (we all know that elections are evil), it is a logical conclusion to say that the former PM is being crucified for political reasons and not due to any search for justice.

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

People should be able to see "right from wrong" and once facts are clarified to the public.

So after endless years of depriving the vast majority of normal Thai people adequate education and a full history of lies and corruption from all sides, military and governmental they now believe that all these people are going to understand the in's and out's of the country's constitutional procedures, then all walk away in agreement she is at fault completely. WRONG

As far as the people are concerned they will see it as they have always known it and this will be collective bullying in destroying the woman and all her supporters in an attempt to remove this element from being involved in any democratic process the near future may hold.

It is quite clear that these people can not win over the vast majority of this country through democracy. Only dictatorial measures such as these will have any chance of success. She is out of the picture and the country is at ease. Why stir up trouble? Maybe they think a war on the people will be the best road to take.

Rubbish.

A conundrum, very smart.

It's interesting to see that public opinion is very much with Yingluck in this NACC relentless pursuit. Most articles in the mass media related to this case that invite public opinion seem to take side with Yingluck. As Professor Somchai deputy rector of the Chiangmai University opined that if the NLA was to act on their conscience, they will ruled against the charge to impeach her. I agree.

I won't ask for a poll on this as you wouldn't accept the results anyway.

If the NLA is acting on it's conscience they would impeach Ms. Yingluck. She is still avoiding questions, gives answers unrelated to questions asked and is intend on dodging responsibility.

I would prefer they stick to provable facts versus their conscience.

In a normal circumstance and a fair trial, I would prefer the ruling is based on provable facts than conscience. But this ain't normal circumstance and anywhere in the world would look at any post coup trials with lots of suspicion and not worthy of any credibility. I hope that the NLA will vote wisely and not made this trial a mockery for the free world.

If Ms. Yingluck is impeached she'll get her trial in court.

BTW 'vote wisely'? You start to sound like that former CAPO head who also urged courts the make the 'right' decision. As if that's not normal for a court.

Suthep wanted the government to resign. They didn't resign.

didn't resign?

what do you call dissolving parliament and calling elections?

I'd call it not the same. Ms. Yingluck even insisted for a moment she wouldn't dissolve the House or resign before stating she was willing to dissolve the House or resign. In January 2014 as caretaker PM she stated not to resign following with stating she was willing to resign.

So, not the same.

It doesn't matter what you Yingluck said "for a moment" does it as she did dissolve the government. She might have been willing to resign but the fact is she could not resign. Check the constitution, if I recall it's article 87?

We're getting somewhat off topic here, but Ms. Yingluck as PM and as caretaker PM has gone on record saying to be willing to resign. If the law prohibited her from resigning there it would be misleading to state to be willing to resign (or not resign).

BTW 2007 Constitution

Section 106 Membership of the House of Representatives terminates upon:

(3) resignation;

Section 182, The ministership of an individual Minister terminates upon:

(2) resignation;

As the PM seems to have to be MP and as MPs can resign, it would seem a PM can resign by disqualifying him/herself by resigning as PM.

The scheme would have been 'self-financing' if the market price had increased to a point.

Similar to the massive investments into energy by the US which are not financially viable as soon as the oil price rises above a certain point.

no one besides rubl believes that she is being impeached because the program was touted as self-financing.

As usual you guys still try to divert from the issue.

Ms. Yingluck is in this impeachment process because she and her cabinet positioned and defended the RPPS as 'self-financing', continued to defend it and managed to lose the country 700 billion Baht.

Had she positioned the RPPS as 'subsidy' requiring some, limited reservations in the National Budget, she would not be in the position she's in now.

But if the price had stayed as it was when she was elected it would have been self-funded.Capture.PNG

As the Thai government has no control over the Worldwide Rice prices, as the price had varied much over the last year before the RPPS started it may well be criminally neglect to position a scheme as 'self-financing'. There was no guarantee prices would remain high, not even guarantee prices would be low. Without control over the situation the Yingluck Administration was simply gambling with tax payer's money.

BTW your graph seems to come from

http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=rice&months=60

This is really very simple.

her wealth and assets alegedly tripled, during her time in government, involving BILLION'S of baht.

Ask her where this new found wealth came from and let her proove it.

And I read that big brother,s assets quadrupled in one year while she was in power. Sorta makes one wonder, dunnit ?

This is really very simple.

her wealth and assets alegedly tripled, during her time in government, involving BILLION'S of baht.

Ask her where this new found wealth came from and let her proove it.

And I read that big brother,s assets quadrupled in one year while she was in power. Sorta makes one wonder, dunnit ?

I guess that you don't have more proof of what you wrote than did stopthegreed:

" Caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra had Bt603 million in assets and Bt28 million in liabilities. Her assets increased since taking office by more than Bt50 million"

http://www.nationmul...C-30226088.html

(that's 8.3%/year, less than the stock exchange growth in Thailand)

Thailand had the best looking PM in the world and they blew it. Big set back into the 3rd world.

I hear Sarah Palin is looking for a job. Wrong religion, how about Paris Hilton?

I guess that you don't have more proof of what you wrote than did stopthegreed:

" Caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra had Bt603 million in assets and Bt28 million in liabilities. Her assets increased since taking office by more than Bt50 million"

http://www.nationmul...C-30226088.html

(that's 8.3%/year, less than the stock exchange growth in Thailand)

You continue to refer to her declared assets gain, without any disclaimer that she may have undeclared assets/income, something she has perjured herself about in the past. You also ignore asset increases of her family.

Her brother has declared a huge wealth increase after being allowed access to cabinet meetings. If any knowledge gained, let alone allowing him to dictate policy, was used to his advantage, and how could it not, they are both guilty of insider trading and she of corruptly abusing her office.