rubl Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 "She is accused of criminal negligence over a populist but economically disastrous rice subsidy scheme..." Does the junta really want to establish this precedent? After all, there are military commanders in the south that allowed dozens of illegal migrant prisons to operate in the areas they were supposed to be guarding. That seems pretty negligent to me. Justice doesn't matter to you? Anyway, not too many in the past positioned a scheme as 'self-financing' and promptly lost 700 billion Baht. If only Ms. Yingluck had positioned her scheme as subsidy with an 100 billion Baht reservation in the National Budget then she wouldn't be up the creek without a peddle like now. The frequent televised statement of being in charge, having no problems, having listened, etc., etc. doesn't make it much easier either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a99az Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 rich people don't go in jail Possibly but I don't think the General needs any one out there getting in the way of his grab for power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plutojames88 Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 (edited) Yingluck is not accused of corruption but of failing to prevent alleged graft within the programme, which cost billions of dollars and galvanised the protests that eventually felled her elected government leading to last May's coup. So now for the first time in history, they are actually going to hold "someone" accountable.... Such a terrible thing that is done, it must be a foreigner done it...... No Thai would do such a terrible thing........ Im no fan of the shopping crazed woman that acted as a PM on her brothers behalf.... BUT this is too stupid even for Thailand... Criminal Negligence this in a country where you cant trust anybody (even family) as far as you can throw them.... Amazing TIT The truth is she is going to take the fall for her brother, she had no business getting herself into the position in the first place, she should have remained a happy shopper salon tripper shoe collector. Maybe her brother will do the right thing and return and face the music It's all so simple for the Thaksin haters.............Bit like EU immigration policy, the rules of VAT and who got Diana. Why do a vociferous few on here, have such vehement hatred for Thaksin and the Thai electorate ?? Sincere question. It could be something to do with the way he governed. The killing of 2400 without trial in his so called drugs war plus the 80 or so who suffocated in southern police trucks.He stuffed his government with friends and family. The man and his kin thought Thailand was their piggy bank. It is a mystery why foreigners have yielded to the Thaksin hating cult.I understand why privileged Thais loathe him and I partly understand why the mainly Sino Thai middle class take the same view.Be clear this is not the same as strong disapproval which is the stance of many sensible people towards Thaksin.I am talking of the foaming at mouth type of hatred. The examples you give are fatuous and it is slightly surprising that even now the drugs war and and atrocities on the South are given as reasons for the Establishment turning against Thaksin.Still against stupidity the gods themselves struggle in vain. The hatred of Thaksin is because he shifted the levers of power away from the old elite of feudalists, army and old style Chinese tycoons.What we are seeing now is a rearguard action but the long term outcome is beyond doubt. None of this means Thaksin was an admirable man.If he hadn't explored the situation, another clever politician would have done so.The biggest stupidity of the cultists is that they confuse the symptom (Thaksin) with the cause - the selfishness, greed and authoritarianism of the dying establishment class. You make a very valid case , when you say their opposition is not balanced but overstated like a hatred and out pouring. I have seen on other forums people ( westerners) ask if the anti - military camp quote wanted "" death"? Not so much as a threat or sanction against the military ( though in context that's possible ) but rather to not support the military is to be pro revolution and death. And then the vilification of Thaksin is vile and mad dog like , it rehashed one speech where his sisters sexual organs were referred to in a hate speech in Bangkok by a doctor in one of those so called Rally sites. Go google if you doubt it happened. The greatest stupidity as put above is the inability to discern in themselves a mechanism used in Nazi Germany ...hatreds. Recently the General said the wanted to eradicate human trash . Given a dying situation of both democratic process and transitional forces at play. This language could be a precursor to some serious internal conflict . Edited May 17, 2015 by Plutojames88 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heybruce Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 (edited) "She is accused of criminal negligence over a populist but economically disastrous rice subsidy scheme..." Does the junta really want to establish this precedent? After all, there are military commanders in the south that allowed dozens of illegal migrant prisons to operate in the areas they were supposed to be guarding. That seems pretty negligent to me. Justice doesn't matter to you? Anyway, not too many in the past positioned a scheme as 'self-financing' and promptly lost 700 billion Baht. If only Ms. Yingluck had positioned her scheme as subsidy with an 100 billion Baht reservation in the National Budget then she wouldn't be up the creek without a peddle like now. The frequent televised statement of being in charge, having no problems, having listened, etc., etc. doesn't make it much easier either. Justice definitely matters to me. I don't see how thousands of refugees could have been held for ransom and sold into slavery in dozens of camps in the heavily patrolled south without the military being aware and complicit in the activities. I would like to see appropriate charges brought against the appropriate people. The voters should deal with politicians who are too incompetent to prevent corruption, the courts should deal with those who actually commit the corruption. To the best of my knowledge that's how it works in the rest of the world. If every politician, civil servant, judge and military officer who failed to prevent corruption in their area of responsibility were convicted of negligence there wouldn't be a government in Thailand. The proper way to prevent corruption isn't by selective prosecution of politicians when power changes hands, but by making it difficult to commit corrupt acts in the first place. This requires rules mandating transparency in government operations, regular financial disclosures by everyone in government (military included) in a position to influence government spending, open competition for government contracts, etc. Are any meaningful measures to fight corruption and general government incompetence through transparency included in this draft constitution? Do you think the victors justice of investigating and prosecuting people after a coup, but never investigating and prosecuting the people involved in the coup, will lead to a more just Thailand? Edited May 17, 2015 by heybruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjablonsky Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Political ruin to some a Heroine to others Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 "She is accused of criminal negligence over a populist but economically disastrous rice subsidy scheme..." Does the junta really want to establish this precedent? After all, there are military commanders in the south that allowed dozens of illegal migrant prisons to operate in the areas they were supposed to be guarding. That seems pretty negligent to me. Justice doesn't matter to you? Anyway, not too many in the past positioned a scheme as 'self-financing' and promptly lost 700 billion Baht. If only Ms. Yingluck had positioned her scheme as subsidy with an 100 billion Baht reservation in the National Budget then she wouldn't be up the creek without a peddle like now. The frequent televised statement of being in charge, having no problems, having listened, etc., etc. doesn't make it much easier either. Justice definitely matters to me. I don't see how thousands of refugees could have been held for ransom and sold into slavery in dozens of camps in the heavily patrolled south without the military being aware and complicit in the activities. I would like to see appropriate charges brought against the appropriate people. The voters should deal with politicians who are too incompetent to prevent corruption, the courts should deal with those who actually commit the corruption. To the best of my knowledge that's how it works in the rest of the world. If every politician, civil servant, judge and military officer who failed to prevent corruption in their area of responsibility were convicted of negligence there wouldn't be a government in Thailand. The proper way to prevent corruption isn't by selective prosecution of politicians when power changes hands, but by making it difficult to commit corrupt acts in the first place. This requires rules mandating transparency in government operations, regular financial disclosures by everyone in government (military included) in a position to influence government spending, open competition for government contracts, etc. Are any meaningful measures to fight corruption and general government incompetence through transparency included in this draft constitution? Do you think the victors justice of investigating and prosecuting people after a coup, but never investigating and prosecuting the people involved in the coup, will lead to a more just Thailand? That was a rhetorical question, my dear chap. Tomorrow the start of the trial for "negligence". May Ms. Yingluck come with better answers than she's come up till now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 You make a very valid case , when you say their opposition is not balanced but overstated like a hatred and out pouring. I have seen on other forums people ( westerners) ask if the anti - military camp quote wanted "" death"? Not so much as a threat or sanction against the military ( though in context that's possible ) but rather to not support the military is to be pro revolution and death. And then the vilification of Thaksin is vile and mad dog like , it rehashed one speech where his sisters sexual organs were referred to in a hate speech in Bangkok by a doctor in one of those so called Rally sites. Go google if you doubt it happened. The greatest stupidity as put above is the inability to discern in themselves a mechanism used in Nazi Germany ...hatreds. Recently the General said the wanted to eradicate human trash . Given a dying situation of both democratic process and transitional forces at play. This language could be a precursor to some serious internal conflict . A few year ago then Pheu Thai party list MP and UDD co-leader Dr. weng spoke about eradicating the Democrat party. His wife Ms. Thida later said it was time to wipe out reactionaries. Of course that language came out of the Communist Manifest, not out of Nazi Germany. I'm sure Ms. Yingluck will show more dignity tomorrow.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew65 Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Throwing her in the can will really unify the country, and give a sense of closure! Justice can be tough, can't it ....even tougher when applied by an independent/credible judiciary! I strongly suspect that we will not be seeing K Abhisit & the monk go anywhere near a prison over the 2010 affair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookee68 Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 There is more chance to her giving birth to a Farang child than going to prison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerrysum Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 AFP ....Ahahaha What a load of biased craps... Agreed, why would they label the rice pledging scheme as "populist" and quote Yingluck as saying the program "lifted the quality of life for rice farmers". It was never intended to transfer wealth to poor rice farmers. instead, it was intended to pad the bank accounts of rice millers, warehouse operators, smugglers and other political cronies who could bilk the program and raid government coffers. Unfortunately, the scheme defrauded the very people who elected her to office, robbing them of their harvest and the true power of their votes. I agree with you 100%, What a bunch of crap! Been there done that, never again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bander Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Yingluck said on her facebook page "i have not done anything wrong at all". So all the lying, false promises, inflammatory foreign speeches and zero attendance records for rice meetings were completely kosher then. Alright. She deserves to be locked up. Any normal person would be. 1 law should be applicable to all after all Actually she needs to be locked up in a mental hospital for criminal insane together with her brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bander Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 "She is accused of criminal negligence over a populist but economically disastrous rice subsidy scheme..." Does the junta really want to establish this precedent? After all, there are military commanders in the south that allowed dozens of illegal migrant prisons to operate in the areas they were supposed to be guarding. That seems pretty negligent to me. Justice doesn't matter to you? Anyway, not too many in the past positioned a scheme as 'self-financing' and promptly lost 700 billion Baht. If only Ms. Yingluck had positioned her scheme as subsidy with an 100 billion Baht reservation in the National Budget then she wouldn't be up the creek without a peddle like now. The frequent televised statement of being in charge, having no problems, having listened, etc., etc. doesn't make it much easier either. Justice definitely matters to me. I don't see how thousands of refugees could have been held for ransom and sold into slavery in dozens of camps in the heavily patrolled south without the military being aware and complicit in the activities. I would like to see appropriate charges brought against the appropriate people. The voters should deal with politicians who are too incompetent to prevent corruption, the courts should deal with those who actually commit the corruption. To the best of my knowledge that's how it works in the rest of the world. If every politician, civil servant, judge and military officer who failed to prevent corruption in their area of responsibility were convicted of negligence there wouldn't be a government in Thailand. The proper way to prevent corruption isn't by selective prosecution of politicians when power changes hands, but by making it difficult to commit corrupt acts in the first place. This requires rules mandating transparency in government operations, regular financial disclosures by everyone in government (military included) in a position to influence government spending, open competition for government contracts, etc. Are any meaningful measures to fight corruption and general government incompetence through transparency included in this draft constitution? Do you think the victors justice of investigating and prosecuting people after a coup, but never investigating and prosecuting the people involved in the coup, will lead to a more just Thailand? That was a rhetorical question, my dear chap. Tomorrow the start of the trial for "negligence". May Ms. Yingluck come with better answers than she's come up till now. That's not happening unless she have a live Skype line with her brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbthailand Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 "She is accused of criminal negligence over a populist but economically disastrous rice subsidy scheme..." Does the junta really want to establish this precedent? After all, there are military commanders in the south that allowed dozens of illegal migrant prisons to operate in the areas they were supposed to be guarding. That seems pretty negligent to me. Justice doesn't matter to you? Anyway, not too many in the past positioned a scheme as 'self-financing' and promptly lost 700 billion Baht. If only Ms. Yingluck had positioned her scheme as subsidy with an 100 billion Baht reservation in the National Budget then she wouldn't be up the creek without a peddle like now. The frequent televised statement of being in charge, having no problems, having listened, etc., etc. doesn't make it much easier either. If only Ms. Yingluck had positioned her scheme as subsidy with an 100 billion Baht reservation in the National Budget then she wouldn't be up the creek without a peddle like now. I disagree. No matter what she had done, under the current conditions she would be "up a creek without a paddle" - if not for the rice program, then for something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daboyz1 Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 How many farmers killed themselves waiting to get paid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daboyz1 Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 (edited) "She is accused of criminal negligence over a populist but economically disastrous rice subsidy scheme..." Does the junta really want to establish this precedent? After all, there are military commanders in the south that allowed dozens of illegal migrant prisons to operate in the areas they were supposed to be guarding. That seems pretty negligent to me. Justice doesn't matter to you? Anyway, not too many in the past positioned a scheme as 'self-financing' and promptly lost 700 billion Baht. If only Ms. Yingluck had positioned her scheme as subsidy with an 100 billion Baht reservation in the National Budget then she wouldn't be up the creek without a peddle like now. The frequent televised statement of being in charge, having no problems, having listened, etc., etc. doesn't make it much easier either. If only Ms. Yingluck had positioned her scheme as subsidy with an 100 billion Baht reservation in the National Budget then she wouldn't be up the creek without a peddle like now. I disagree. No matter what she had done, under the current conditions she would be "up a creek without a paddle" - if not for the rice program, then for something else. True. Maybe she would be "up a creek without a paddle" over the 4 a.m. amnesty for her brother. What's really sad is that a brother would do that to his own sister. Just shows what scum the guy really is. ETA: At least she's sticking around to face the music unlike her coward brother. Edited May 18, 2015 by daboyz1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si Thea01 Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 rich people don't go in jail They do actually, check and see what is happening here and around the world. You'd be surprised. I would give you some links but I'm very lazy today, so I hope you'll understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PilotEd Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 What a farce. I do not doubt that Yingluck did some things wrong, But this is just a sham by the yellow shirt elites to disenfranchise the voters who legally elected her. (I know that there was vote buying but convince me that the yellow shirts didn't do the same.) This government will not stand because the majority of Thais do not really approve. And all of Prayuth's TV speeches will not convince them. They want "populist" programs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northernjohn Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 rich people don't go in jail Possibly but I don't think the General needs any one out there getting in the way of his grab for power. Nor sure what you mean in the way in his grab for power. He is not grabbing for power he has it. That is why it was so easy to throw the criminals out of office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigman Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 Only political ruin?? ....she probably doesn't care except jail... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heybruce Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 "She is accused of criminal negligence over a populist but economically disastrous rice subsidy scheme..." Does the junta really want to establish this precedent? After all, there are military commanders in the south that allowed dozens of illegal migrant prisons to operate in the areas they were supposed to be guarding. That seems pretty negligent to me. Justice doesn't matter to you? Anyway, not too many in the past positioned a scheme as 'self-financing' and promptly lost 700 billion Baht. If only Ms. Yingluck had positioned her scheme as subsidy with an 100 billion Baht reservation in the National Budget then she wouldn't be up the creek without a peddle like now. The frequent televised statement of being in charge, having no problems, having listened, etc., etc. doesn't make it much easier either. Justice definitely matters to me. I don't see how thousands of refugees could have been held for ransom and sold into slavery in dozens of camps in the heavily patrolled south without the military being aware and complicit in the activities. I would like to see appropriate charges brought against the appropriate people. The voters should deal with politicians who are too incompetent to prevent corruption, the courts should deal with those who actually commit the corruption. To the best of my knowledge that's how it works in the rest of the world. If every politician, civil servant, judge and military officer who failed to prevent corruption in their area of responsibility were convicted of negligence there wouldn't be a government in Thailand. The proper way to prevent corruption isn't by selective prosecution of politicians when power changes hands, but by making it difficult to commit corrupt acts in the first place. This requires rules mandating transparency in government operations, regular financial disclosures by everyone in government (military included) in a position to influence government spending, open competition for government contracts, etc. Are any meaningful measures to fight corruption and general government incompetence through transparency included in this draft constitution? Do you think the victors justice of investigating and prosecuting people after a coup, but never investigating and prosecuting the people involved in the coup, will lead to a more just Thailand? That was a rhetorical question, my dear chap. Tomorrow the start of the trial for "negligence". May Ms. Yingluck come with better answers than she's come up till now. Yes, trials for elected officials, amnesty for coup leaders, and no investigations of military commanders who allowed appalling crimes to take place in the areas they were "guarding". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovetotravel Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 Yes, trials for elected officials, amnesty for coup leaders, and no investigations of military commanders who allowed appalling crimes to take place in the areas they were "guarding". Trials for corrupt elected officials is a good thing. Not much you can do about the coup leaders. Again, the coup was caused due to the actions of the corrupt elected officials. One army colonel has been moved from their position and is being investigated for problems in the South. But yes, more need to be investigated, on all fronts, unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackanapes Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 incorrect procedure to impeach someone who has been removed from office I don't believe the lady is guilty and I hope she gets exonerated . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaidam Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 incorrect procedure to impeach someone who has been removed from office I don't believe the lady is guilty and I hope she gets exonerated . You don't believe she was guilty of negligence when as the PM and chairwoman of the rice committee she didn't attend a single meeting? She ignored all warnings from both domestic and international bodies. Your positions smacks of an emotional stance rather than dealing with the facts(however painful they may be). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunna Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 incorrect procedure to impeach someone who has been removed from office I don't believe the lady is guilty and I hope she gets exonerated . You don't believe she was guilty of negligence when as the PM and chairwoman of the rice committee she didn't attend a single meeting? She ignored all warnings from both domestic and international bodies. Your positions smacks of an emotional stance rather than dealing with the facts(however painful they may be). Or maybe he hasn't read anything about the rice scam yet, just looked at Yingluck's photo with lust. Thailand's Impeachment laws are different to those in many other countries, eg can Impeach Government official after they leave office so they cannot stand again for 5 years - I would prefer option of life time bad for corruption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muirton Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 Yingluck said on her facebook page "i have not done anything wrong at all". So all the lying, false promises, inflammatory foreign speeches and zero attendance records for rice meetings were completely kosher then. Alright. She deserves to be locked up. Any normal person would be. 1 law should be applicable to all after all Pure fascism your opinion is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scorecard Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 Yingluck said on her facebook page "i have not done anything wrong at all". So all the lying, false promises, inflammatory foreign speeches and zero attendance records for rice meetings were completely kosher then. Alright. She deserves to be locked up. Any normal person would be. 1 law should be applicable to all after all Pure fascism your opinion is. Z42's post mentions a number of facts then an opinion. IMHO many people, across many countries would agree, her track record as PM is inexcusable and criminally derelict and very strongly ignores and disrespects the expectations of a nation of people and therefore a case for strong punishment. As stated, nobody can be above the law, and the law should be applicable to all. So why is the comment "pure fascism"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 What a farce. I do not doubt that Yingluck did some things wrong, But this is just a sham by the yellow shirt elites to disenfranchise the voters who legally elected her. (I know that there was vote buying but convince me that the yellow shirts didn't do the same.) This government will not stand because the majority of Thais do not really approve. And all of Prayuth's TV speeches will not convince them. They want "populist" programs. Actually it seems this is just trying to get answers from Ms. Yingluck on how her self-financing RPPS could lose 700 billion Baht while she kept being positive and even stated in parliament to be in charge. Now if only Ms. Yingluck would provide some good answers. I fear that "I'm elected, I've got a mandate" isn't going to cut it and that has nothing to do with 'yellow', 'shirts', or 'elite', not even with 'red', or "Amply Rich", only with responsibility and accountability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobb Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 No way she will be found guilty. All the politician fear her brother or will get paid off by him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 Justice doesn't matter to you? Anyway, not too many in the past positioned a scheme as 'self-financing' and promptly lost 700 billion Baht. If only Ms. Yingluck had positioned her scheme as subsidy with an 100 billion Baht reservation in the National Budget then she wouldn't be up the creek without a peddle like now. The frequent televised statement of being in charge, having no problems, having listened, etc., etc. doesn't make it much easier either. Justice definitely matters to me. I don't see how thousands of refugees could have been held for ransom and sold into slavery in dozens of camps in the heavily patrolled south without the military being aware and complicit in the activities. I would like to see appropriate charges brought against the appropriate people. The voters should deal with politicians who are too incompetent to prevent corruption, the courts should deal with those who actually commit the corruption. To the best of my knowledge that's how it works in the rest of the world. If every politician, civil servant, judge and military officer who failed to prevent corruption in their area of responsibility were convicted of negligence there wouldn't be a government in Thailand. The proper way to prevent corruption isn't by selective prosecution of politicians when power changes hands, but by making it difficult to commit corrupt acts in the first place. This requires rules mandating transparency in government operations, regular financial disclosures by everyone in government (military included) in a position to influence government spending, open competition for government contracts, etc. Are any meaningful measures to fight corruption and general government incompetence through transparency included in this draft constitution? Do you think the victors justice of investigating and prosecuting people after a coup, but never investigating and prosecuting the people involved in the coup, will lead to a more just Thailand? That was a rhetorical question, my dear chap. Tomorrow the start of the trial for "negligence". May Ms. Yingluck come with better answers than she's come up till now. Yes, trials for elected officials, amnesty for coup leaders, and no investigations of military commanders who allowed appalling crimes to take place in the areas they were "guarding". Well, this may surprise you, but indeed here we talk about Ms. Yingluck, an elected party list MP and PM. Somehow you seem to suggest those should be above the law, apart from the suggestion to look at other people first of course. Anyway, tomorrow Ms. Yingluck will be formally charged in the Supreme Court for Political Office Holders and acknowledge the charge (as in 'I heard and understand, nothing to do with guilty/not guilty). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxLee Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 Thailand's Yingluck faces trial and political ruin when, when, I haven't seen anything for years now,.... 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