Pheu Thai issues statement in defence of Ms Yingluck over rice pledging scheme

[mikemac]

Good statement as nothing illegal has occurred and it's perfectly normal to subsidize farmers. It's NOT about rice!

Yes and where is the money for farmers ?

YL was negligent, she is not investigated on corruption in the scheme, and non payment of farmers.... in 2013 during her regime no poor farmers receive payment from her corrupt government

In western country a PM is responsible for the actions of his cabinet, some member of her cabinet make false declaration or made false deal with some obscure contractor to sell rice, to hide the rice scheme scandal

If i remember rightly didn't the current gang put a block on the bank that was organizing payment of funds to be paid to the farmers before the coup. In a western country leaders are not held personally responsible for failed policy. This is a witch hunt to destroy the opposition, always has been always will be.

Exactly what happened and "mysteriously" the banks lent to the guys with the guns when they took over

and boring !

[rubl]

So, just for peace sake and reconciliation and so we should just drop it? Maybe also just drop the violence of 2013/2014, the 'fun' in 2010, 2009, 2008 ? Politicians can't help themselves, but are compelled to 'help' themselves and we should understand?

Democracy died when Ms. Yingluck was asked to show her responsibility and be accountable?

Passing personal damages against a PM isn't a correct use of the legal system.

It is a very unusual prosecution and she may even prove that she has immunity from this type of prosecution. So it isn't even 100% sure that she can even be prosecuted.

She is already banned for 5 years, chasing for damages caused by a policy is a very bad precedent to set. It will cause problems for every further political party to implement anything.

Carrying the prosecution out under a junta also devalues any judgement that will be made. It is the specific chasing for damages that I think is misplaced as a strategy.

It is going to be open to accusation of political bias from the first step. It will not put the issue of the Shinawatra, PTP being popular with the voting population. I believe it will make it worse. The odds they get one baht out of her are very low.

If the PM shouldn't be liable, who should? The chair of the Rice Policy Committee perhaps?

"It is going to be open to accusation of political bias from the first step"

Can you think of one prosecution of Thaksin or the Shinawatras that was NOT claimed to be political bias? Even when the facts prove they are guilty, the claim is "politically motivated prosecution" as if that has any reduction to guilt.

Personally for the loss? No one. It's a market loss. It was written last week that they will have to prove that she took this post as a private individual not a cabinet member, which would mean she should normally have immunity. Ministers and governments in just about every other grown up country have immunity for policy losses.

Then get her for lying to parliament. Presumably that is a criminal offence.

Srely the day a politician was held to her word about responsibility and accountability democracy died. Also such action of holding her responsible sets a bad precedent.

As taxpayer I think you're getting somewhat ridiculous in your defense of a person who repeatedly stated to be in charge, repeatedly stated to listen and take into account reports from government commissions and the opposition.

As for lying in parliament, that falls under parliamentary immunity some have it. Probably the reason why Ms. Yingluck and her bunch of handpicked ministers didn't write down too much about how 800 billion Baht was paid directly to (poor) rice farmers.

[Thai at Heart]

So, just for peace sake and reconciliation and so we should just drop it? Maybe also just drop the violence of 2013/2014, the 'fun' in 2010, 2009, 2008 ? Politicians can't help themselves, but are compelled to 'help' themselves and we should understand?

Democracy died when Ms. Yingluck was asked to show her responsibility and be accountable?

Passing personal damages against a PM isn't a correct use of the legal system.

It is a very unusual prosecution and she may even prove that she has immunity from this type of prosecution. So it isn't even 100% sure that she can even be prosecuted.

She is already banned for 5 years, chasing for damages caused by a policy is a very bad precedent to set. It will cause problems for every further political party to implement anything.

Carrying the prosecution out under a junta also devalues any judgement that will be made. It is the specific chasing for damages that I think is misplaced as a strategy.

It is going to be open to accusation of political bias from the first step. It will not put the issue of the Shinawatra, PTP being popular with the voting population. I believe it will make it worse. The odds they get one baht out of her are very low.

If the PM shouldn't be liable, who should? The chair of the Rice Policy Committee perhaps?

"It is going to be open to accusation of political bias from the first step"
Can you think of one prosecution of Thaksin or the Shinawatras that was NOT claimed to be political bias? Even when the facts prove they are guilty, the claim is "politically motivated prosecution" as if that has any reduction to guilt.

Personally for the loss? No one. It's a market loss. It was written last week that they will have to prove that she took this post as a private individual not a cabinet member, which would mean she should normally have immunity. Ministers and governments in just about every other grown up country have immunity for policy losses.

Then get her for lying to parliament. Presumably that is a criminal offence.

Srely the day a politician was held to her word about responsibility and accountability democracy died. Also such action of holding her responsible sets a bad precedent.

As taxpayer I think you're getting somewhat ridiculous in your defense of a person who repeatedly stated to be in charge, repeatedly stated to listen and take into account reports from government commissions and the opposition.

As for lying in parliament, that falls under parliamentary immunity some have it. Probably the reason why Ms. Yingluck and her bunch of handpicked ministers didn't write down too much about how 800 billion Baht was paid directly to (poor) rice farmers.

I was a taxpayer at the time too, so, I don't see that as some badge of honour.

I look at it from the perspective of trying to settle all of these issues in a way that will pass domestic, political and foreign scrutiny. Politicians are not prosecuted for these type of policy issues because it leaves former and future politicians open to criminal accusations for policy failure.

Yes the policy failed. Not as disastrously as some people say it did on here, but still it failed.

This doesn't mean that it should be prosecuted for damages against the pm.

There are hundreds of failed policies in every govt everyday. This is the nature of govt. What Thailand has to do, if it wants to prosecute these types of things is to do so under the setting of an apolitical judiciary with an elected govt. Until then, there is always the accusation of bias.

They won't be able to get 500bm from her, and symbolically they will simply chuck another 10000 litres of fuel on the fire. There is practically nothing of benefit here and it is virtually impossible to make this convection stick and have anyone believe it was an apolitical judgement.

If they really want to start prosecuting every failed policy in Thailand that causes an extraordinary loss, they will end up locking up ad many good people as as many dishonest.

[rubl]

Srely the day a politician was held to her word about responsibility and accountability democracy died. Also such action of holding her responsible sets a bad precedent.

As taxpayer I think you're getting somewhat ridiculous in your defense of a person who repeatedly stated to be in charge, repeatedly stated to listen and take into account reports from government commissions and the opposition.

As for lying in parliament, that falls under parliamentary immunity some have it. Probably the reason why Ms. Yingluck and her bunch of handpicked ministers didn't write down too much about how 800 billion Baht was paid directly to (poor) rice farmers.

I was a taxpayer at the time too, so, I don't see that as some badge of honour.

I look at it from the perspective of trying to settle all of these issues in a way that will pass domestic, political and foreign scrutiny. Politicians are not prosecuted for these type of policy issues because it leaves former and future politicians open to criminal accusations for policy failure.

Yes the policy failed. Not as disastrously as some people say it did on here, but still it failed.

This doesn't mean that it should be prosecuted for damages against the pm.

There are hundreds of failed policies in every govt everyday. This is the nature of govt. What Thailand has to do, if it wants to prosecute these types of things is to do so under the setting of an apolitical judiciary with an elected govt. Until then, there is always the accusation of bias.

They won't be able to get 500bm from her, and symbolically they will simply chuck another 10000 litres of fuel on the fire. There is practically nothing of benefit here and it is virtually impossible to make this convection stick and have anyone believe it was an apolitical judgement.

If they really want to start prosecuting every failed policy in Thailand that causes an extraordinary loss, they will end up locking up ad many good people as as many dishonest.

You're getting as desperate and imaginative as Ms. Yingluck's representatives, her legal team and her brother's Pheu Thai party.

Almost as if you're saying "we didn't mean that bit about responsibility and accountability; we didn't mean it applied to our Amply rich Thai pretty; democracy died when people started to talk about real responsibility and accountability". "hundreds of failed policies in every government every day" seems a wee bit overdone though.

Anyway, whether Ms. Yingluck should, can, or must pay back 500 billilon Baht depends on the outcome of her trial. A former Bank of Thailand governor was judged personally responsible for the loss of Thailands foreign reserves in 1997, but luckily jurisprudence is not part of the Thai legal system (as far as I know). So we start again. Ms. Yingluck has a fair chance, but doesn't seem to trust her own innocence. In that sense she doesn't seem to be so ignorant.

[Thai at Heart]

Srely the day a politician was held to her word about responsibility and accountability democracy died. Also such action of holding her responsible sets a bad precedent.

As taxpayer I think you're getting somewhat ridiculous in your defense of a person who repeatedly stated to be in charge, repeatedly stated to listen and take into account reports from government commissions and the opposition.

As for lying in parliament, that falls under parliamentary immunity some have it. Probably the reason why Ms. Yingluck and her bunch of handpicked ministers didn't write down too much about how 800 billion Baht was paid directly to (poor) rice farmers.

I was a taxpayer at the time too, so, I don't see that as some badge of honour.

I look at it from the perspective of trying to settle all of these issues in a way that will pass domestic, political and foreign scrutiny. Politicians are not prosecuted for these type of policy issues because it leaves former and future politicians open to criminal accusations for policy failure.

Yes the policy failed. Not as disastrously as some people say it did on here, but still it failed.

This doesn't mean that it should be prosecuted for damages against the pm.

There are hundreds of failed policies in every govt everyday. This is the nature of govt. What Thailand has to do, if it wants to prosecute these types of things is to do so under the setting of an apolitical judiciary with an elected govt. Until then, there is always the accusation of bias.

They won't be able to get 500bm from her, and symbolically they will simply chuck another 10000 litres of fuel on the fire. There is practically nothing of benefit here and it is virtually impossible to make this convection stick and have anyone believe it was an apolitical judgement.

If they really want to start prosecuting every failed policy in Thailand that causes an extraordinary loss, they will end up locking up ad many good people as as many dishonest.

You're getting as desperate and imaginative as Ms. Yingluck's representatives, her legal team and her brother's Pheu Thai party.

Almost as if you're saying "we didn't mean that bit about responsibility and accountability; we didn't mean it applied to our Amply rich Thai pretty; democracy died when people started to talk about real responsibility and accountability". "hundreds of failed policies in every government every day" seems a wee bit overdone though.

Anyway, whether Ms. Yingluck should, can, or must pay back 500 billilon Baht depends on the outcome of her trial. A former Bank of Thailand governor was judged personally responsible for the loss of Thailands foreign reserves in 1997, but luckily jurisprudence is not part of the Thai legal system (as far as I know). So we start again. Ms. Yingluck has a fair chance, but doesn't seem to trust her own innocence. In that sense she doesn't seem to be so ignorant.

The suing of the bloke for however many billion over the baht was farcical also.

He went with what he believed to be an acceptable policy it failed.

If you really think Yingluck has a snowballs chance of getting an independent trial at the moment you are a very large optimist.

I would love for govt to try to find a way to prosecute failures all over the world, not just Thailand. Just read the international boards on here with people's love or hatred of America PMs. Some would sue the current bunch for implementing polices that in other parts of the world are deemed part of the national character.

Reason I don't want it to happen is because it causes more problems than it solves and can't be done without being accused of political witch hunt. I don't think chasing politicians for this type of issue is constructive in the long run unless done in an absolutely scrupulous and independent manner.

Hardly something that can be said about a junta that ousted her.

[rubl]

Srely the day a politician was held to her word about responsibility and accountability democracy died. Also such action of holding her responsible sets a bad precedent.

As taxpayer I think you're getting somewhat ridiculous in your defense of a person who repeatedly stated to be in charge, repeatedly stated to listen and take into account reports from government commissions and the opposition.

As for lying in parliament, that falls under parliamentary immunity some have it. Probably the reason why Ms. Yingluck and her bunch of handpicked ministers didn't write down too much about how 800 billion Baht was paid directly to (poor) rice farmers.

I was a taxpayer at the time too, so, I don't see that as some badge of honour.

I look at it from the perspective of trying to settle all of these issues in a way that will pass domestic, political and foreign scrutiny. Politicians are not prosecuted for these type of policy issues because it leaves former and future politicians open to criminal accusations for policy failure.

Yes the policy failed. Not as disastrously as some people say it did on here, but still it failed.

This doesn't mean that it should be prosecuted for damages against the pm.

There are hundreds of failed policies in every govt everyday. This is the nature of govt. What Thailand has to do, if it wants to prosecute these types of things is to do so under the setting of an apolitical judiciary with an elected govt. Until then, there is always the accusation of bias.

They won't be able to get 500bm from her, and symbolically they will simply chuck another 10000 litres of fuel on the fire. There is practically nothing of benefit here and it is virtually impossible to make this convection stick and have anyone believe it was an apolitical judgement.

If they really want to start prosecuting every failed policy in Thailand that causes an extraordinary loss, they will end up locking up ad many good people as as many dishonest.

You're getting as desperate and imaginative as Ms. Yingluck's representatives, her legal team and her brother's Pheu Thai party.

Almost as if you're saying "we didn't mean that bit about responsibility and accountability; we didn't mean it applied to our Amply rich Thai pretty; democracy died when people started to talk about real responsibility and accountability". "hundreds of failed policies in every government every day" seems a wee bit overdone though.

Anyway, whether Ms. Yingluck should, can, or must pay back 500 billilon Baht depends on the outcome of her trial. A former Bank of Thailand governor was judged personally responsible for the loss of Thailands foreign reserves in 1997, but luckily jurisprudence is not part of the Thai legal system (as far as I know). So we start again. Ms. Yingluck has a fair chance, but doesn't seem to trust her own innocence. In that sense she doesn't seem to be so ignorant.

The suing of the bloke for however many billion over the baht was farcical also.

He went with what he believed to be an acceptable policy it failed.

If you really think Yingluck has a snowballs chance of getting an independent trial at the moment you are a very large optimist.

I would love for govt to try to find a way to prosecute failures all over the world, not just Thailand. Just read the international boards on here with people's love or hatred of America PMs. Some would sue the current bunch for implementing polices that in other parts of the world are deemed part of the national character.

Reason I don't want it to happen is because it causes more problems than it solves and can't be done without being accused of political witch hunt. I don't think chasing politicians for this type of issue is constructive in the long run unless done in an absolutely scrupulous and independent manner.

Hardly something that can be said about a junta that ousted her.

Optimist as I am I think your "causes more problems than it solves" is just as optimistic in trying to make Ms. Yingluck avoid her responsibility.

So a last time, democracy died when a poor little Amply rich girl was asked to show that responsibility and accountability she was so full of while being PM and smiling nicely in front of the camera talking about her government's dedication.

Al of the arguments you've giving only seem to try to distract from what in a democracy would be normal: hold a politician to his/her word and demand responsibility combined with accountability.

[Thai at Heart]

Srely the day a politician was held to her word about responsibility and accountability democracy died. Also such action of holding her responsible sets a bad precedent.

As taxpayer I think you're getting somewhat ridiculous in your defense of a person who repeatedly stated to be in charge, repeatedly stated to listen and take into account reports from government commissions and the opposition.

As for lying in parliament, that falls under parliamentary immunity some have it. Probably the reason why Ms. Yingluck and her bunch of handpicked ministers didn't write down too much about how 800 billion Baht was paid directly to (poor) rice farmers.

I was a taxpayer at the time too, so, I don't see that as some badge of honour.

I look at it from the perspective of trying to settle all of these issues in a way that will pass domestic, political and foreign scrutiny. Politicians are not prosecuted for these type of policy issues because it leaves former and future politicians open to criminal accusations for policy failure.

Yes the policy failed. Not as disastrously as some people say it did on here, but still it failed.

This doesn't mean that it should be prosecuted for damages against the pm.

There are hundreds of failed policies in every govt everyday. This is the nature of govt. What Thailand has to do, if it wants to prosecute these types of things is to do so under the setting of an apolitical judiciary with an elected govt. Until then, there is always the accusation of bias.

They won't be able to get 500bm from her, and symbolically they will simply chuck another 10000 litres of fuel on the fire. There is practically nothing of benefit here and it is virtually impossible to make this convection stick and have anyone believe it was an apolitical judgement.

If they really want to start prosecuting every failed policy in Thailand that causes an extraordinary loss, they will end up locking up ad many good people as as many dishonest.

You're getting as desperate and imaginative as Ms. Yingluck's representatives, her legal team and her brother's Pheu Thai party.

Almost as if you're saying "we didn't mean that bit about responsibility and accountability; we didn't mean it applied to our Amply rich Thai pretty; democracy died when people started to talk about real responsibility and accountability". "hundreds of failed policies in every government every day" seems a wee bit overdone though.

Anyway, whether Ms. Yingluck should, can, or must pay back 500 billilon Baht depends on the outcome of her trial. A former Bank of Thailand governor was judged personally responsible for the loss of Thailands foreign reserves in 1997, but luckily jurisprudence is not part of the Thai legal system (as far as I know). So we start again. Ms. Yingluck has a fair chance, but doesn't seem to trust her own innocence. In that sense she doesn't seem to be so ignorant.

The suing of the bloke for however many billion over the baht was farcical also.

He went with what he believed to be an acceptable policy it failed.

If you really think Yingluck has a snowballs chance of getting an independent trial at the moment you are a very large optimist.

I would love for govt to try to find a way to prosecute failures all over the world, not just Thailand. Just read the international boards on here with people's love or hatred of America PMs. Some would sue the current bunch for implementing polices that in other parts of the world are deemed part of the national character.


Reason I don't want it to happen is because it causes more problems than it solves and can't be done without being accused of political witch hunt. I don't think chasing politicians for this type of issue is constructive in the long run unless done in an absolutely scrupulous and independent manner.

Hardly something that can be said about a junta that ousted her.

Optimist as I am I think your "causes more problems than it solves" is just as optimistic in trying to make Ms. Yingluck avoid her responsibility.

So a last time, democracy died when a poor little Amply rich girl was asked to show that responsibility and accountability she was so full of while being PM and smiling nicely in front of the camera talking about her government's dedication.

Al of the arguments you've giving only seem to try to distract from what in a democracy would be normal: hold a politician to his/her word and demand responsibility combined with accountability.

I can't think of the last time in a developed country they prosecuted a PM personally for a financial loss.

Can you? If we did that in the UK, there would be at least 2 out of the last 5 PMs bankrupted.

[musiclover]

Srely the day a politician was held to her word about responsibility and accountability democracy died. Also such action of holding her responsible sets a bad precedent.

As taxpayer I think you're getting somewhat ridiculous in your defense of a person who repeatedly stated to be in charge, repeatedly stated to listen and take into account reports from government commissions and the opposition.

As for lying in parliament, that falls under parliamentary immunity some have it. Probably the reason why Ms. Yingluck and her bunch of handpicked ministers didn't write down too much about how 800 billion Baht was paid directly to (poor) rice farmers.

I was a taxpayer at the time too, so, I don't see that as some badge of honour.

I look at it from the perspective of trying to settle all of these issues in a way that will pass domestic, political and foreign scrutiny. Politicians are not prosecuted for these type of policy issues because it leaves former and future politicians open to criminal accusations for policy failure.

Yes the policy failed. Not as disastrously as some people say it did on here, but still it failed.

This doesn't mean that it should be prosecuted for damages against the pm.

There are hundreds of failed policies in every govt everyday. This is the nature of govt. What Thailand has to do, if it wants to prosecute these types of things is to do so under the setting of an apolitical judiciary with an elected govt. Until then, there is always the accusation of bias.

They won't be able to get 500bm from her, and symbolically they will simply chuck another 10000 litres of fuel on the fire. There is practically nothing of benefit here and it is virtually impossible to make this convection stick and have anyone believe it was an apolitical judgement.

If they really want to start prosecuting every failed policy in Thailand that causes an extraordinary loss, they will end up locking up ad many good people as as many dishonest.

You're getting as desperate and imaginative as Ms. Yingluck's representatives, her legal team and her brother's Pheu Thai party.

Almost as if you're saying "we didn't mean that bit about responsibility and accountability; we didn't mean it applied to our Amply rich Thai pretty; democracy died when people started to talk about real responsibility and accountability". "hundreds of failed policies in every government every day" seems a wee bit overdone though.

Anyway, whether Ms. Yingluck should, can, or must pay back 500 billilon Baht depends on the outcome of her trial. A former Bank of Thailand governor was judged personally responsible for the loss of Thailands foreign reserves in 1997, but luckily jurisprudence is not part of the Thai legal system (as far as I know). So we start again. Ms. Yingluck has a fair chance, but doesn't seem to trust her own innocence. In that sense she doesn't seem to be so ignorant.

Oh Please drop the Amply Rich cliche ......it's really getting tedious now..are you bereft of ideas ?????

[ginjag]

Srely the day a politician was held to her word about responsibility and accountability democracy died. Also such action of holding her responsible sets a bad precedent.

As taxpayer I think you're getting somewhat ridiculous in your defense of a person who repeatedly stated to be in charge, repeatedly stated to listen and take into account reports from government commissions and the opposition.

As for lying in parliament, that falls under parliamentary immunity some have it. Probably the reason why Ms. Yingluck and her bunch of handpicked ministers didn't write down too much about how 800 billion Baht was paid directly to (poor) rice farmers.

I was a taxpayer at the time too, so, I don't see that as some badge of honour.

I look at it from the perspective of trying to settle all of these issues in a way that will pass domestic, political and foreign scrutiny. Politicians are not prosecuted for these type of policy issues because it leaves former and future politicians open to criminal accusations for policy failure.

Yes the policy failed. Not as disastrously as some people say it did on here, but still it failed.

This doesn't mean that it should be prosecuted for damages against the pm.

There are hundreds of failed policies in every govt everyday. This is the nature of govt. What Thailand has to do, if it wants to prosecute these types of things is to do so under the setting of an apolitical judiciary with an elected govt. Until then, there is always the accusation of bias.

They won't be able to get 500bm from her, and symbolically they will simply chuck another 10000 litres of fuel on the fire. There is practically nothing of benefit here and it is virtually impossible to make this convection stick and have anyone believe it was an apolitical judgement.

If they really want to start prosecuting every failed policy in Thailand that causes an extraordinary loss, they will end up locking up ad many good people as as many dishonest.

You're getting as desperate and imaginative as Ms. Yingluck's representatives, her legal team and her brother's Pheu Thai party.

Almost as if you're saying "we didn't mean that bit about responsibility and accountability; we didn't mean it applied to our Amply rich Thai pretty; democracy died when people started to talk about real responsibility and accountability". "hundreds of failed policies in every government every day" seems a wee bit overdone though.

Anyway, whether Ms. Yingluck should, can, or must pay back 500 billilon Baht depends on the outcome of her trial. A former Bank of Thailand governor was judged personally responsible for the loss of Thailands foreign reserves in 1997, but luckily jurisprudence is not part of the Thai legal system (as far as I know). So we start again. Ms. Yingluck has a fair chance, but doesn't seem to trust her own innocence. In that sense she doesn't seem to be so ignorant.

Oh Please drop the Amply Rich cliche ......it's really getting tedious now..are you bereft of ideas ?????

Looks like your not commenting on what valid points were posted. Avoidance is accepted as an OPT OUT, hence the Amply Rich remark.

Defending is very difficult when the odds are stacked against a person who was paid big money to take care of the country.

Avoiding accountability as though it has a right, Imagine an accountant who doesn't keep records of money transactions.

Being PM, she was never up for the job-----being rice chairperson she was never up for the job,----being Defense Minister she never had a clue about the subject.

Now you gang on TVF argue these facts, and slag off the PM, every day give no credit, coup or not---elected or not, but defend a family set up, that was in my mind illegally controlled from Dubai, yes a criminal, who appointed his sister to run the job via Skype it has been said. The said lady was not elected by the Thai people. ONLY appointed for the purpose of the above point made.

No doubt this minority group on TVF will defend to the teeth anything that is against their rhetoric.

[Chupup]

Congrats to LannaGuy, mission accomplished ! You jumped right on this topic, made the first comment which was sure to attract attention, and received no less than 7 responses to it so far, all of them shooting it/you down or criticizing it/you. Well done !

We know you're a Junta fan but i prefer to seek out the truth and not blindly believe the Army propaganda. You spin a nice story about the Junta but care not for the light of truth. One day it will all come out and you will look a complete fool for falling for it hook, line and sinker.

Seek out the "truth ", well you haven't looked far, in fact it is you that is trying to "Spin " as for looking a fool you have managed that quite nicely by falling hook line and sinker for the total BS that is your posts .............

[mikemac]

Oh Please drop the Amply Rich cliche ......it's really getting tedious now..are you bereft of ideas ?????

Actually, the fact that she is ultra-wealthy has a lot to do with the topic. The rich are treated very differently to the poor in Thailand and it is very rare that they are held responsible for their crimes, they usually buy their way out of it or keep stalling justice by way of appeals etc.

I would love to see that trend abolished and taking down a Shinawatra is a great place to start. It would set an example to the rest of the crooks that everyone must pay for their sins.

Even the "Amply Rich".

[MZurf]

Oh Please drop the Amply Rich cliche ......it's really getting tedious now..are you bereft of ideas ?????

Actually, the fact that she is ultra-wealthy has a lot to do with the topic. The rich are treated very differently to the poor in Thailand and it is very rare that they are held responsible for their crimes, they usually buy their way out of it or keep stalling justice by way of appeals etc.

I would love to see that trend abolished and taking down a Shinawatra is a great place to start. It would set an example to the rest of the crooks that everyone must pay for their sins.

Even the "Amply Rich".

Unfortunately it would only set an example for the new elite not to push the old elite away from the trough...ever again. Hence their plan to have eternal old elite control of whatever government exists built into the constitution.

[Thai at Heart]

Oh Please drop the Amply Rich cliche ......it's really getting tedious now..are you bereft of ideas ?????

Actually, the fact that she is ultra-wealthy has a lot to do with the topic. The rich are treated very differently to the poor in Thailand and it is very rare that they are held responsible for their crimes, they usually buy their way out of it or keep stalling justice by way of appeals etc.

I would love to see that trend abolished and taking down a Shinawatra is a great place to start. It would set an example to the rest of the crooks that everyone must pay for their sins.

Even the "Amply Rich".

Unfortunately it would only set an example for the new elite not to push the old elite away from the trough...ever again. Hence their plan to have eternal old elite control of whatever government exists built into the constitution.

One forgets that basically they are all at it. Prosecution in an unusual situation like this is only going to make the retribution worse. There are very few honest players on any side.

If PTP win the next election the amount of prosecutions coming the other way will be staggering. Beyond that, PTP might just decide to remove the restricted industries from protection to foreign investment as payback.

Then, the pad will be called out in full force and the whole mess will start again.

[rubl]

You're getting as desperate and imaginative as Ms. Yingluck's representatives, her legal team and her brother's Pheu Thai party.

Almost as if you're saying "we didn't mean that bit about responsibility and accountability; we didn't mean it applied to our Amply rich Thai pretty; democracy died when people started to talk about real responsibility and accountability". "hundreds of failed policies in every government every day" seems a wee bit overdone though.

Anyway, whether Ms. Yingluck should, can, or must pay back 500 billilon Baht depends on the outcome of her trial. A former Bank of Thailand governor was judged personally responsible for the loss of Thailands foreign reserves in 1997, but luckily jurisprudence is not part of the Thai legal system (as far as I know). So we start again. Ms. Yingluck has a fair chance, but doesn't seem to trust her own innocence. In that sense she doesn't seem to be so ignorant.

The suing of the bloke for however many billion over the baht was farcical also.

He went with what he believed to be an acceptable policy it failed.

If you really think Yingluck has a snowballs chance of getting an independent trial at the moment you are a very large optimist.

I would love for govt to try to find a way to prosecute failures all over the world, not just Thailand. Just read the international boards on here with people's love or hatred of America PMs. Some would sue the current bunch for implementing polices that in other parts of the world are deemed part of the national character.

Reason I don't want it to happen is because it causes more problems than it solves and can't be done without being accused of political witch hunt. I don't think chasing politicians for this type of issue is constructive in the long run unless done in an absolutely scrupulous and independent manner.

Hardly something that can be said about a junta that ousted her.

Optimist as I am I think your "causes more problems than it solves" is just as optimistic in trying to make Ms. Yingluck avoid her responsibility.

So a last time, democracy died when a poor little Amply rich girl was asked to show that responsibility and accountability she was so full of while being PM and smiling nicely in front of the camera talking about her government's dedication.

Al of the arguments you've giving only seem to try to distract from what in a democracy would be normal: hold a politician to his/her word and demand responsibility combined with accountability.

I can't think of the last time in a developed country they prosecuted a PM personally for a financial loss.

Can you? If we did that in the UK, there would be at least 2 out of the last 5 PMs bankrupted.

Does that matter, apart from the fact that Ms. Yingluck positioned and defended her 'self-financing' scam AND even had the gall to let her 'politically inspired' crimes fall under her blanket amnesty bill.

Surely people get worried that some understand responsibility and accountability to mean more than 'the day democracy died'

[rubl]

Oh Please drop the Amply Rich cliche ......it's really getting tedious now..are you bereft of ideas ?????

Actually, the fact that she is ultra-wealthy has a lot to do with the topic. The rich are treated very differently to the poor in Thailand and it is very rare that they are held responsible for their crimes, they usually buy their way out of it or keep stalling justice by way of appeals etc.

I would love to see that trend abolished and taking down a Shinawatra is a great place to start. It would set an example to the rest of the crooks that everyone must pay for their sins.

Even the "Amply Rich".

Unfortunately it would only set an example for the new elite not to push the old elite away from the trough...ever again. Hence their plan to have eternal old elite control of whatever government exists built into the constitution.

One forgets that basically they are all at it. Prosecution in an unusual situation like this is only going to make the retribution worse. There are very few honest players on any side.

If PTP win the next election the amount of prosecutions coming the other way will be staggering. Beyond that, PTP might just decide to remove the restricted industries from protection to foreign investment as payback.

Then, the pad will be called out in full force and the whole mess will start again.

and yet another diversion.

Ms. Yingluck is charged with 'negligence'. Some seem ignorant (of that). Till now most defense seems aimed at any other aspects in the hope some will stick. Suggests the desperation is growing.

[rubl]

Srely the day a politician was held to her word about responsibility and accountability democracy died. Also such action of holding her responsible sets a bad precedent.

As taxpayer I think you're getting somewhat ridiculous in your defense of a person who repeatedly stated to be in charge, repeatedly stated to listen and take into account reports from government commissions and the opposition.

As for lying in parliament, that falls under parliamentary immunity some have it. Probably the reason why Ms. Yingluck and her bunch of handpicked ministers didn't write down too much about how 800 billion Baht was paid directly to (poor) rice farmers.

I was a taxpayer at the time too, so, I don't see that as some badge of honour.

I look at it from the perspective of trying to settle all of these issues in a way that will pass domestic, political and foreign scrutiny. Politicians are not prosecuted for these type of policy issues because it leaves former and future politicians open to criminal accusations for policy failure.

Yes the policy failed. Not as disastrously as some people say it did on here, but still it failed.

This doesn't mean that it should be prosecuted for damages against the pm.

There are hundreds of failed policies in every govt everyday. This is the nature of govt. What Thailand has to do, if it wants to prosecute these types of things is to do so under the setting of an apolitical judiciary with an elected govt. Until then, there is always the accusation of bias.

They won't be able to get 500bm from her, and symbolically they will simply chuck another 10000 litres of fuel on the fire. There is practically nothing of benefit here and it is virtually impossible to make this convection stick and have anyone believe it was an apolitical judgement.

If they really want to start prosecuting every failed policy in Thailand that causes an extraordinary loss, they will end up locking up ad many good people as as many dishonest.

You're getting as desperate and imaginative as Ms. Yingluck's representatives, her legal team and her brother's Pheu Thai party.

Almost as if you're saying "we didn't mean that bit about responsibility and accountability; we didn't mean it applied to our Amply rich Thai pretty; democracy died when people started to talk about real responsibility and accountability". "hundreds of failed policies in every government every day" seems a wee bit overdone though.

Anyway, whether Ms. Yingluck should, can, or must pay back 500 billilon Baht depends on the outcome of her trial. A former Bank of Thailand governor was judged personally responsible for the loss of Thailands foreign reserves in 1997, but luckily jurisprudence is not part of the Thai legal system (as far as I know). So we start again. Ms. Yingluck has a fair chance, but doesn't seem to trust her own innocence. In that sense she doesn't seem to be so ignorant.

Oh Please drop the Amply Rich cliche ......it's really getting tedious now..are you bereft of ideas ?????

Terribly sorry and all that, but it's the Shinawatras who came with the idea. Ms. Yingluck is part of the Shinawatra clan, she's Amply Rich. You'd rather I wrote 'Thaksin clone' ?

Anyway, again a diversion. Some are getting desperate to see their ignorant Thai pretty charged, with 'negligence'. Failure to stem the enormous loss of 800 billion Baht paid directly to all poor rice farmers who voted Pheu Thai and are now so rich, 'Amply Rich' might be applied to them as well. Not bad for a 'self-financing' scam.

[thelonius]

Oh Please drop the Amply Rich cliche ......it's really getting tedious now..are you bereft of ideas ?????

Terribly sorry and all that, but it's the Shinawatras who came with the idea. Ms. Yingluck is part of the Shinawatra clan, she's Amply Rich. You'd rather I wrote 'Thaksin clone' ?

Anyway, again a diversion. Some are getting desperate to see their ignorant Thai pretty charged, with 'negligence'. Failure to stem the enormous loss of 800 billion Baht paid directly to all poor rice farmers who voted Pheu Thai and are now so rich, 'Amply Rich' might be applied to them as well. Not bad for a 'self-financing' scam.

To be fair your continual references to ‘Amply Rich” detract from your argument, whatever it is, not to mention being wearisome. See, it’s already distracted me.

“Thaksin Clone’ would be no better - that would be, in your words, the “criminal fugitive Thaksin”, would it not.? Can you not bring yourself to write “the ex Prime Minister of Thailand, Yingluck Shinawatra”or even just plain "Yingluck Shinawatra", is it that hard? You go on to describe the ex PM as an “ignorant Thai pretty” but attempt to distance yourself from that remark by adding the pronoun “some”, as if these are not your thoughts at all. Look, we know what your opinion of the Shinawatra family is, but can you not just get to the point of your argument ...............................which is?

[Thai at Heart]

Oh Please drop the Amply Rich cliche ......it's really getting tedious now..are you bereft of ideas ?????

Actually, the fact that she is ultra-wealthy has a lot to do with the topic. The rich are treated very differently to the poor in Thailand and it is very rare that they are held responsible for their crimes, they usually buy their way out of it or keep stalling justice by way of appeals etc.

I would love to see that trend abolished and taking down a Shinawatra is a great place to start. It would set an example to the rest of the crooks that everyone must pay for their sins.

Even the "Amply Rich".

Unfortunately it would only set an example for the new elite not to push the old elite away from the trough...ever again. Hence their plan to have eternal old elite control of whatever government exists built into the constitution.

One forgets that basically they are all at it. Prosecution in an unusual situation like this is only going to make the retribution worse. There are very few honest players on any side.

If PTP win the next election the amount of prosecutions coming the other way will be staggering. Beyond that, PTP might just decide to remove the restricted industries from protection to foreign investment as payback.

Then, the pad will be called out in full force and the whole mess will start again.

and yet another diversion.

Ms. Yingluck is charged with 'negligence'. Some seem ignorant (of that). Till now most defense seems aimed at any other aspects in the hope some will stick. Suggests the desperation is growing.

Excuse me... Where did I say she wasn't accused of negligence. You don't think part of this game of politics in Thailand is that everyone largely keeps a blind eye to everyone's dodgy business so that they can all make money.

At minimum every MP is guilty of conflict of interest by Western standards. Apparently that is the norm in Thailand.

So, back to what I said. I expect that if they go after Yingluck like this, when ptp win the election they will go mercilessly after everyone.

You really believe prayuth accumulated all his wonga completely honestly? Every satang?

[rubl]

Oh Please drop the Amply Rich cliche ......it's really getting tedious now..are you bereft of ideas ?????

Terribly sorry and all that, but it's the Shinawatras who came with the idea. Ms. Yingluck is part of the Shinawatra clan, she's Amply Rich. You'd rather I wrote 'Thaksin clone' ?

Anyway, again a diversion. Some are getting desperate to see their ignorant Thai pretty charged, with 'negligence'. Failure to stem the enormous loss of 800 billion Baht paid directly to all poor rice farmers who voted Pheu Thai and are now so rich, 'Amply Rich' might be applied to them as well. Not bad for a 'self-financing' scam.

To be fair your continual references to ‘Amply Rich” detract from your argument, whatever it is, not to mention being wearisome. See, it’s already distracted me.

“Thaksin Clone’ would be no better - that would be, in your words, the “criminal fugitive Thaksin”, would it not.? Can you not bring yourself to write “the ex Prime Minister of Thailand, Yingluck Shinawatra”or even just plain "Yingluck Shinawatra", is it that hard? You go on to describe the ex PM as an “ignorant Thai pretty” but attempt to distance yourself from that remark by adding the pronoun “some”, as if these are not your thoughts at all. Look, we know what your opinion of the Shinawatra family is, but can you not just get to the point of your argument ...............................which is?

Well thank you for your kind remarks. Maybe I should ask the forum admins to change the topic title from

"Pheu Thai issues statement in defence of Ms Yingluck over rice pledging scheme"

to

"Lots of TVF posters comes to the aid of Ms. Yingluck and try their best to let anyone forget the issue of 800 billion Baht directly paid to Pheu Thai voters in the biggest scam this century"

Edited October 27, 2015 by rubl

[rubl]

and yet another diversion.

Ms. Yingluck is charged with 'negligence'. Some seem ignorant (of that). Till now most defense seems aimed at any other aspects in the hope some will stick. Suggests the desperation is growing.

Excuse me... Where did I say she wasn't accused of negligence. You don't think part of this game of politics in Thailand is that everyone largely keeps a blind eye to everyone's dodgy business so that they can all make money.

At minimum every MP is guilty of conflict of interest by Western standards. Apparently that is the norm in Thailand.

So, back to what I said. I expect that if they go after Yingluck like this, when ptp win the election they will go mercilessly after everyone.

You really believe prayuth accumulated all his wonga completely honestly? Every satang?

Topic subtitle:

"TVF posters come with anything they can think of in defence of Ms Yingluck over rice pledging scheme"

[Thai at Heart]

and yet another diversion.

Ms. Yingluck is charged with 'negligence'. Some seem ignorant (of that). Till now most defense seems aimed at any other aspects in the hope some will stick. Suggests the desperation is growing.

Excuse me... Where did I say she wasn't accused of negligence. You don't think part of this game of politics in Thailand is that everyone largely keeps a blind eye to everyone's dodgy business so that they can all make money.

At minimum every MP is guilty of conflict of interest by Western standards. Apparently that is the norm in Thailand.

So, back to what I said. I expect that if they go after Yingluck like this, when ptp win the election they will go mercilessly after everyone.

You really believe prayuth accumulated all his wonga completely honestly? Every satang?

Topic subtitle:

"TVF posters come with anything they can think of in defence of Ms Yingluck over rice pledging scheme"

This is where you are wrong again. It could be, people with a decent grasp of reality explain the consequences of prosecuting a previously elected PM during a period of an openly biased military junta. Edited October 27, 2015 by Thai at Heart

[rubl]

and yet another diversion.

Ms. Yingluck is charged with 'negligence'. Some seem ignorant (of that). Till now most defense seems aimed at any other aspects in the hope some will stick. Suggests the desperation is growing.

Excuse me... Where did I say she wasn't accused of negligence. You don't think part of this game of politics in Thailand is that everyone largely keeps a blind eye to everyone's dodgy business so that they can all make money.

At minimum every MP is guilty of conflict of interest by Western standards. Apparently that is the norm in Thailand.

So, back to what I said. I expect that if they go after Yingluck like this, when ptp win the election they will go mercilessly after everyone.

You really believe prayuth accumulated all his wonga completely honestly? Every satang?

Topic subtitle:

"TVF posters come with anything they can think of in defence of Ms Yingluck over rice pledging scheme"

This is where you are wrong again. It could be, people with a decent grasp of reality explain the consequences of prosecuting a previously elected PM during a period of an openly biased military junta.

Oh, you mean they should wait till the case is no longer prosecutable, or do you mean wait till her brother comes back and magnanimously grants everyone who counts amnesty?

It would seem the distractions and non-related reasoning continues. I get this Q.E.D. feeling.

[Thai at Heart]

and yet another diversion.

Ms. Yingluck is charged with 'negligence'. Some seem ignorant (of that). Till now most defense seems aimed at any other aspects in the hope some will stick. Suggests the desperation is growing.

Excuse me... Where did I say she wasn't accused of negligence. You don't think part of this game of politics in Thailand is that everyone largely keeps a blind eye to everyone's dodgy business so that they can all make money.

At minimum every MP is guilty of conflict of interest by Western standards. Apparently that is the norm in Thailand.

So, back to what I said. I expect that if they go after Yingluck like this, when ptp win the election they will go mercilessly after everyone.

You really believe prayuth accumulated all his wonga completely honestly? Every satang?

Topic subtitle:

"TVF posters come with anything they can think of in defence of Ms Yingluck over rice pledging scheme"

This is where you are wrong again. It could be, people with a decent grasp of reality explain the consequences of prosecuting a previously elected PM during a period of an openly biased military junta.

Oh, you mean they should wait till the case is no longer prosecutable, or do you mean wait till her brother comes back and magnanimously grants everyone who counts amnesty?

It would seem the distractions and non-related reasoning continues. I get this Q.E.D. feeling.

I think this should be dealt with by a court at a period of an elected govt. Write whatever rules they like about statute of limitations for govt dereliction of duty.

So, everyone trots out that thaksin was convicted under a trt govt but you say the courts can handle it under another democratically elected govt?

Any judgement now will never pass muster as independent.

[rubl]

This is where you are wrong again. It could be, people with a decent grasp of reality explain the consequences of prosecuting a previously elected PM during a period of an openly biased military junta.

Oh, you mean they should wait till the case is no longer prosecutable, or do you mean wait till her brother comes back and magnanimously grants everyone who counts amnesty?

It would seem the distractions and non-related reasoning continues. I get this Q.E.D. feeling.

I think this should be dealt with by a court at a period of an elected govt. Write whatever rules they like about statute of limitations for govt dereliction of duty.

So, everyone trots out that thaksin was convicted under a trt govt but you say the courts can handle it under another democratically elected govt?

Any judgement now will never pass muster as independent.

Zig-zag-zig-zag.

I didn't say, I just wondered if you meant something like that. Now you go on about what you state but what is your opinion. There's even the suggestion that Thaksin was not really guilty either, just unlucky.

Well, with all your arguments you just enforce my believe you try to avoid the real issue, Ms. Yingluck having been negligent or not'. What with her stating publicly to be in charge, to have a hand-picked, capable, knowledgeble and full of potencial cabinet working for the good of her voters, with Pheu Thai stating to have given their rice farming voters 800 billion Baht directly, one may wonder if the charge shouldn't be 'defrauding the State for own profit'.

It's interesting to see that most of these Yingluck's spokesperson, or legal team or Pheu Thai statements come a few days before Ms. Yingluck is supposed to appear in court again. Ms. Yingluck asked for justice but seem a bit timid.

[Thai at Heart]

This is where you are wrong again. It could be, people with a decent grasp of reality explain the consequences of prosecuting a previously elected PM during a period of an openly biased military junta.

Oh, you mean they should wait till the case is no longer prosecutable, or do you mean wait till her brother comes back and magnanimously grants everyone who counts amnesty?

It would seem the distractions and non-related reasoning continues. I get this Q.E.D. feeling.

I think this should be dealt with by a court at a period of an elected govt. Write whatever rules they like about statute of limitations for govt dereliction of duty.

So, everyone trots out that thaksin was convicted under a trt govt but you say the courts can handle it under another democratically elected govt?

Any judgement now will never pass muster as independent.

Zig-zag-zig-zag.

I didn't say, I just wondered if you meant something like that. Now you go on about what you state but what is your opinion. There's even the suggestion that Thaksin was not really guilty either, just unlucky.

Well, with all your arguments you just enforce my believe you try to avoid the real issue, Ms. Yingluck having been negligent or not'. What with her stating publicly to be in charge, to have a hand-picked, capable, knowledgeble and full of potencial cabinet working for the good of her voters, with Pheu Thai stating to have given their rice farming voters 800 billion Baht directly, one may wonder if the charge shouldn't be 'defrauding the State for own profit'.

It's interesting to see that most of these Yingluck's spokesperson, or legal team or Pheu Thai statements come a few days before Ms. Yingluck is supposed to appear in court again. Ms. Yingluck asked for justice but seem a bit timid.

Personally, if it was a private business she would be fired by the shareholders for negligence. Would they sue her successfully for repayment. Maybe.

In this situation, of a govt enacted payment system should the comeback be to sue her personally for negligence. No.

Private losses and govt policy losses are not the same.

[rubl]

Oh, you mean they should wait till the case is no longer prosecutable, or do you mean wait till her brother comes back and magnanimously grants everyone who counts amnesty?

It would seem the distractions and non-related reasoning continues. I get this Q.E.D. feeling.

I think this should be dealt with by a court at a period of an elected govt. Write whatever rules they like about statute of limitations for govt dereliction of duty.

So, everyone trots out that thaksin was convicted under a trt govt but you say the courts can handle it under another democratically elected govt?

Any judgement now will never pass muster as independent.

Zig-zag-zig-zag.

I didn't say, I just wondered if you meant something like that. Now you go on about what you state but what is your opinion. There's even the suggestion that Thaksin was not really guilty either, just unlucky.

Well, with all your arguments you just enforce my believe you try to avoid the real issue, Ms. Yingluck having been negligent or not'. What with her stating publicly to be in charge, to have a hand-picked, capable, knowledgeble and full of potencial cabinet working for the good of her voters, with Pheu Thai stating to have given their rice farming voters 800 billion Baht directly, one may wonder if the charge shouldn't be 'defrauding the State for own profit'.

It's interesting to see that most of these Yingluck's spokesperson, or legal team or Pheu Thai statements come a few days before Ms. Yingluck is supposed to appear in court again. Ms. Yingluck asked for justice but seem a bit timid.

Personally, if it was a private business she would be fired by the shareholders for negligence. Would they sue her successfully for repayment. Maybe.

In this situation, of a govt enacted payment system should the comeback be to sue her personally for negligence. No.

Private losses and govt policy losses are not the same.

Ms. Yingluck positioned her (brothers) RPPS as 'self-financing', used that as reasoning not needing a reservation in the National Budget, but only a 'revolving fund' of 430 billion Baht to pay out from and to return sales revenue into. She and her hand-picked cabinet defended the scam is succesfull. From the very start she was warned about lack of details, lack of transparancy, and no lack of opportunities for the state to lose money. She stated to see no concern, she stated to have listened and judges comments less significant, she stated to listen and have made minor adjustments, etc., etc., till even she dropped a minister and acknowledged a possible minor loss of less than 100 billion a year.

So, 'self-financing', defended, and still an enormous loss and even the statement of her party that 800 billion Baht was paid directly to rice farmers, her voters. That's voter pay off, but only allegedly as it would seem most rice farmers are not even close to better off than before.

I'm willing to believe Ms. Yingluck is ignorant, but with the money to buy a good legal team and with support of her brother's Pheu Thai party I think it's more a case of trying to avoid responsibility and the associated accountability.

For close to three years Ms. Yingluck was ever smiling and stating how responsible she and her government was. Now without her blanket amnesty covering her first two years in office she is suddenly no longer responsible? She can't remember having been in charge? Big Brother never told her about possible risks?