Yingluck 'involved in corruption'

[wolfmanjack]

These Junta clowns are repeating their 2006 failure. They have silenced all opposition voices with their guns and oppression and now idiotically believe that the dearth of criticism of their ridiculously biased actions is proof of their correctness and vast public support - idiots one and all. This right wing extremist joke is hurtling inevitably towards its deserved demise

"Examples need to be set that those who commit wrong will be punished, so no future leaders dare repeat these actions. This will create sustainable reconciliation," the NACC member said.

- Does this line of thinking apply to the Army leaders and the coups they continually inflict upon the nation? Selective justice is no justice at all!

Reconciliation cannot be forced by one side onto the other at the barrel of a gun.

so you like that this corruption from shinawatres continou !!

was ever an political leader imposed by fake and vote buying system kicked out by democratic rules ??

Did change any Dictatorship by democratic votes ?

Will Kim Jung Un step down if in election he would get less than 50% ??

So this is what you say !!

lets Korean people deside in a vote if Kim is the elected president !

From which country you are ? ( ISAAN ? ) ;

mango66, English is a bit a bit a problem for you huh?

Issan is not a country, it's a province, and it's attitudes like yours that think that your superior in some way, NEWS flash, YOUR NOT......

Take a look at her bank accounts there will be a paper trial and if she stole money and is corrupt then put her in gaol, if no paper trial of corruption then to bad have another crack.

Why on earth do you people think there is going to be a paper trail for corruption money? I had a business here for 12 years and only once was a government official stupid enough to let me pay them by check or bank. transfer. The funny thing is the one official that was stupid enough to let me pay by bank transfer did not pass the money on to his boss so when they came to me asking why I did not pay I had proof that i did.

No one with half a brain allows a money trail these days if they can help it. CASH is king in crime of all types.

[GeckosDiving]

Well it is good if they pursue legal actions as well as impeaching her. She needs to be held accountable for such huge losses to the country and from what I understand in this article they have enough proof that she contributed and benefitted from those losses as well.

They should immediately revoke her passport or she is going to follow her brother and do a runner.

You are deluded - she will never reach a court, never be punished after she has fled overseas. That's what the ****** wants to happen - they want her out of the country and then they can use her as a feared fugitive whipping girl ad infinitum. She's no use to them in prison because it makes it look like she is a martyr or worse still actually willing to pay the price for her sins.

It must really annoy them, that she hasn't fled! Just imagine all those phone calls from the back of the mercs en route to the club, "how do we get rid of this woman?"

Its such a shame that the old " Benign Aquino" option is not really on the table any more.

The reason she doesn't run is because she's to stupid to run !! She'll wait til it's to late to run !!

Well that's what happens to dumb ass puppets.

[GeckosDiving]

These Junta clowns are repeating their 2006 failure. They have silenced all opposition voices with their guns and oppression and now idiotically believe that the dearth of criticism of their ridiculously biased actions is proof of their correctness and vast public support - idiots one and all. This right wing extremist joke is hurtling inevitably towards its deserved demise

"Examples need to be set that those who commit wrong will be punished, so no future leaders dare repeat these actions. This will create sustainable reconciliation," the NACC member said.

- Does this line of thinking apply to the Army leaders and the coups they continually inflict upon the nation? Selective justice is no justice at all!

Reconciliation cannot be forced by one side onto the other at the barrel of a gun.

What nonsense! Where have guns been used to silence people? Where is the Army on the streets? Barricades? Armed vehicles?

It was Prayut who commenced paying the rice farmers within 3 days of taking over; not the Yingluck Gov't...they allowed graft & corruption to occur to the tune of Billions of baht.

Wicha's comment that you quoted is correct;Thai people are entitled to have those who have wronged them, to be punished....that's natural justice!!

Agree: your only correct statement is in the last line...."Reconciliation cannot be forced by one side onto the other at the barrel of a gun."

Rubbish,Prayuth never paid anything the bank bailed them out under Prayuths orders. Yingluck tried to get help from the bank as well but the bank which is owned and controlled by the elites refused to help until a time when it could be done in a way that benefitted the elites. It matters not that Thaksin was corrupt because all politicians in Thailand are corrupt and matters not that Yingluck made mistakes even though her heart was in the right place the bottom line is that they are fighting a 1000 year old dictatorship and trying to bring Thailand into the modern age. Prayuth is dragging everything backwards.. The coup was brought about after a long conspiracy between Suthep annd Prayuth. The protest were created in order make an atmosphere of violence which would give the army ann excuse to take over. This is admitted by Suthep. I guess allot of farangs don't like the idea of Thailand coming into the modern age because then girls will be able to get good paying jobs and won't have to sell their bodies and work as slaves To yellow shirt brothel owners anymore.

I've read a lot of Dumb Ass Posts before but yours is the best by miles Lmao

[candide]

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.

You may or may not be right. Any sources?

[chotthee]

She is guilty.

She is very guilty.

Now, someone fetch my whip; thank you 3 times.

[seedy]

The 'law' in this country is nothing more than a politicised attack dog for a small group of powerbrokers.

In which country in the world is it not exactly the same ?

Answer - none

[halloween]

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.

You may or may not be right. Any sources?

What exactly would you like sources to substantiate that haven't had links provided before? Thaksin's increase in wealth, his access to cabinet meetings, or her perjury at his assets case?

[candide]

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.

You may or may not be right. Any sources?

What exactly would you like sources to substantiate that haven't had links provided before? Thaksin's increase in wealth, his access to cabinet meetings, or her perjury at his assets case?

I was refering to your critic of refering only to her declared assets, i.e. "that she may have undeclared assets/income" and "You also ignore asset increases of her family."

I answered that you may or may not be right (as I don't know how to check it) and asked about any sources you may know, in particular in relation to stopthegreed's post claiming that "her wealth and assets alegedly tripled, during her time in government, involving BILLION'S of baht."

[waitforusalso]

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

Then the US federal government are also playing with taxpayers money when investing in expensive oil extraction techniques that are reliant on high oil prices. Buffer stock schemes are a common form of ensuring farmer incomes against volatile commodity prices. It's not gambling.

[rubl]

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

Then the US federal government are also playing with taxpayers money when investing in expensive oil extraction techniques that are reliant on high oil prices. Buffer stock schemes are a common form of ensuring farmer incomes against volatile commodity prices. It's not gambling.

No comment on what the US Government does, not relevant for this topic.

BTW 'hedging', of 'buffer stock schemes' may help, but the Yingluck Government had this wonderful 'self-financing' scheme which obviously didn't need any safeguarding. With no control over international prices that was a wee bit over-confident, or as you might call stupid bordering on criminal.

PS Ponzi still being lodged at tax payer's expenses ?

[whybother]

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

If that's the case, why did they even need the scheme?

[rubl]

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.

Correct the Democrat led coalition government had a Minimum Rice Price Guarantee SUBSIDY for which 30 or 40 billion Baht was allocated in the yearly National Budget.

The Yingluck Government had a Rice Price Pledging Scheme which they positioned and defended as 'self-financing' which they used as reason to not need some reservations in the National Budget.

So, 700 billion Baht loss on a 'self-financing' gamble and some still talk about 'political crucification'. Imagine!

Edited January 19, 2015 by rubl

[tbthailand]

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.

Correct the Democrat led coalition government had a Minimum Rice Price Guarantee SUBSIDY for which 30 or 40 billion Baht was allocated in the yearly National Budget.

The Yingluck Government had a Rice Price Pledging Scheme which they positioned and defended as 'self-financing' which they used as reason to not need some reservations in the National Budget.

So, 700 billion Baht loss on a 'self-financing' gamble and some still talk about 'political crucification'. Imagine!

yes, the Dems had price supports too. Bloomberg puts the cost (aka 'loss') of their program for the 2010-2011 year at 67 billion. Whereby it should be noted that they obviously provided less money to rice farmers with that subsidy. They also had a program, it also lost billions, it provided less income to farmers. OK, so that's a different policy.

none of that makes the current charade less of a political vendetta. It just makes it more obvious that it is a political vendetta. Which is what I stated the first time.

Edited January 19, 2015 by tbthailand

[halloween]

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.

You may or may not be right. Any sources?

What exactly would you like sources to substantiate that haven't had links provided before? Thaksin's increase in wealth, his access to cabinet meetings, or her perjury at his assets case?

I was refering to your critic of refering only to her declared assets, i.e. "that she may have undeclared assets/income" and "You also ignore asset increases of her family."

I answered that you may or may not be right (as I don't know how to check it) and asked about any sources you may know, in particular in relation to stopthegreed's post claiming that "her wealth and assets alegedly tripled, during her time in government, involving BILLION'S of baht."

Why would I have links to support someone else's claim, to which I have not referred? Thaksin is family, his wealth increase was self-declared and well documented, and that is sufficient to support the charges without hidden increases which MAY have occurred.

[candide]

You may or may not be right. Any sources?

What exactly would you like sources to substantiate that haven't had links provided before? Thaksin's increase in wealth, his access to cabinet meetings, or her perjury at his assets case?

I was refering to your critic of refering only to her declared assets, i.e. "that she may have undeclared assets/income" and "You also ignore asset increases of her family."

I answered that you may or may not be right (as I don't know how to check it) and asked about any sources you may know, in particular in relation to stopthegreed's post claiming that "her wealth and assets alegedly tripled, during her time in government, involving BILLION'S of baht."

Why would I have links to support someone else's claim, to which I have not referred? Thaksin is family, his wealth increase was self-declared and well documented, and that is sufficient to support the charges without hidden increases which MAY have occurred.

Why did you answer my post which was precisely an answer to this someone else's claim? And which was clearly refering to the period during which Yingluck was PM.

[halloween]

Why did you answer my post which was precisely an answer to this someone else's claim? And which was clearly refering to the period during which Yingluck was PM.

Because you claim as fact something which is only the declaration of a known perjurer, while ignoring equally relevant asset increases.

[candide]

Why did you answer my post which was precisely an answer to this someone else's claim? And which was clearly refering to the period during which Yingluck was PM.

Because you claim as fact something which is only the declaration of a known perjurer, while ignoring equally relevant asset increases.

OK, do you have a better answer to ""her wealth and assets alegedly tripled, during her time in government, involving BILLION'S of baht."?

[halloween]

Why did you answer my post which was precisely an answer to this someone else's claim? And which was clearly refering to the period during which Yingluck was PM.

Because you claim as fact something which is only the declaration of a known perjurer, while ignoring equally relevant asset increases.

OK, do you have a better answer to ""her wealth and assets alegedly tripled, during her time in government, involving BILLION'S of baht."?

"Do you have proof of that?" is better than answering one likely spurious allegation with another allegation equally or more likely to be spurious.

[rubl]

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.

Correct the Democrat led coalition government had a Minimum Rice Price Guarantee SUBSIDY for which 30 or 40 billion Baht was allocated in the yearly National Budget.

The Yingluck Government had a Rice Price Pledging Scheme which they positioned and defended as 'self-financing' which they used as reason to not need some reservations in the National Budget.

So, 700 billion Baht loss on a 'self-financing' gamble and some still talk about 'political crucification'. Imagine!

yes, the Dems had price supports too. Bloomberg puts the cost (aka 'loss') of their program for the 2010-2011 year at 67 billion. Whereby it should be noted that they obviously provided less money to rice farmers with that subsidy. They also had a program, it also lost billions, it provided less income to farmers. OK, so that's a different policy.

none of that makes the current charade less of a political vendetta. It just makes it more obvious that it is a political vendetta. Which is what I stated the first time.

Absolutely. A subsidy which is budgeted in the National Budget as a reservation, furthermore a subsidy which reaches 4,000,000 farmers. is really much worse than a 'self-financing' scheme that reaches 1,800,000 farmers and loses 700,000,000,000 Baht.

Clearly Ms. Yingluck is an angel and deserves the Nobel Price for Economy.

PS August 2012 Bloomberg already had the figures on 2010/2011 Rice subsidy. Nice when things are documented, isn't it ?

Edited January 20, 2015 by rubl

[chotthee]

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

If that's the case, why did they even need the scheme?

Like the Thai oil fund, if you wait long enough, eventually the account will turn positive.

The oil fund loss billions just as recent as last year. Now, due to a sudden drop in oil price, it is billions positive.

The rice fund could be 700 billion negative, but a sudden increase in rice price could turn the situation, and Yingluck could gain billion instead of loss,

[rubl]

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

If that's the case, why did they even need the scheme?

Like the Thai oil fund, if you wait long enough, eventually the account will turn positive.

The oil fund loss billions just as recent as last year. Now, due to a sudden drop in oil price, it is billions positive.

The rice fund could be 700 billion negative, but a sudden increase in rice price could turn the situation, and Yingluck could gain billion instead of loss,

The RPPS with 700 billion Baht loss couldn't turn positive again as we only have 17.8 million tonnes of rice left, it's quality not inspiring.

Anyway the issue is not about what could, but about what was and the lack of an explanation for those 700 billion Baht lost on a 'self-financing' scheme and all obfuscation around the 'real' figures. Why did the caretaker Yingluck Government suddenly wanted to borrow 130 billion extra after a few months before having stated to have everything under control and financially reserved? Negligent or deceiving, or defrauding ? Take your pick.

[whybother]

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

If that's the case, why did they even need the scheme?

Like the Thai oil fund, if you wait long enough, eventually the account will turn positive.

The oil fund loss billions just as recent as last year. Now, due to a sudden drop in oil price, it is billions positive.

The rice fund could be 700 billion negative, but a sudden increase in rice price could turn the situation, and Yingluck could gain billion instead of loss,

But "waitforusalso" is suggesting that price was already high enough for the scheme to be self funding. If it was already self funding, then they didn't actually need the scheme in the first place.

[waitforusalso]

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

If that's the case, why did they even need the scheme?

Like the Thai oil fund, if you wait long enough, eventually the account will turn positive.

The oil fund loss billions just as recent as last year. Now, due to a sudden drop in oil price, it is billions positive.

The rice fund could be 700 billion negative, but a sudden increase in rice price could turn the situation, and Yingluck could gain billion instead of loss,

But "waitforusalso" is suggesting that price was already high enough for the scheme to be self funding. If it was already self funding, then they didn't actually need the scheme in the first place.

The need for the scheme is to ensure stable prices in a volatile market to protect a segment of society with low incomes. Do the maths if you want to find out @ which price the scheme became self funding.

[halloween]

The need for the scheme is to ensure stable prices in a volatile market to protect a segment of society with low incomes. Do the maths if you want to find out @ which price the scheme became self funding.

Come on, even you know that is crap. To start with, the lowest income earning rice farmers never got close to a start. The price set was so high that it encouraged extra plantings on semi-viable land during a world glut, and countless scams from smuggling, to simple miscounting, and theft and resale back into the scam.

There was no rent control, so much of the money "intended" for farmers went to wealthy land owners, and huge amounts in storage costs went to developers willing to build storage required only because of the scheme (IMHO the real story behind the 4 Seasons fiasco).

[SaintLouisBlues]

Thai politicians are corrupt

Yingluck is a Thai politician

Therefore Yingluck is corrupt

QED

[seedy]

Thai politicians are corrupt

Yingluck is a Thai politician

Therefore Yingluck is corrupt

QED

Blanket statements are BS

People who post them are Id***s

no QED - Fact

[h90]

These Junta clowns are repeating their 2006 failure. They have silenced all opposition voices with their guns and oppression and now idiotically believe that the dearth of criticism of their ridiculously biased actions is proof of their correctness and vast public support - idiots one and all. This right wing extremist joke is hurtling inevitably towards its deserved demise

"Examples need to be set that those who commit wrong will be punished, so no future leaders dare repeat these actions. This will create sustainable reconciliation," the NACC member said.

- Does this line of thinking apply to the Army leaders and the coups they continually inflict upon the nation? Selective justice is no justice at all!

Reconciliation cannot be forced by one side onto the other at the barrel of a gun.

yes they repeat the the 2006 failure, they should have jailed all the corrupt one immediately and seized their money. Best would have been to distribute the trillion (surely hundreds of billions, only this single policeman had 11 billions).

I can't see Prayut right wing extremist. I recall Thaksin concentrated all the power in his hands (police, army, justice, mass media) and made things like the war on drugs killing 3000 people. If there is a right wing extremist than it would be your hero.

[TheClog]

Yingluck involved in corruption, accused of negligence?

So why has the current unelected PM not slashed the Military budget , to offset the rice scheme "losses", and divert more cash to other ministries like schools?

Corruption and Negligence anyone?

[Keesters]

If nothing else Yingluck embodies all that is wrong with Thailand and represents corruption, malfeasance and ineptitude in all aspects.

And she learned it all from her brother.

What amazes me though is that a lot of the Thai people seem happy with being tossed a bone while the Shinawatra's et al. have all the meat.

[dukebowling]

If nothing else Yingluck embodies all that is wrong with Thailand and represents corruption, malfeasance and ineptitude in all aspects.

And she learned it all from her brother.

What amazes me though is that a lot of the Thai people seem happy with being tossed a bone while the Shinawatra's et al. have all the meat.

What did the Shins do that was illegal? Can't find any hard evidence on this. Only conjecture.

Edited January 22, 2015 by dukebowling