Yingluck is politically victimised: Boonsong

[rooster59]

Yingluck is politically victimised: Boonsong

BANGKOK: The exercise of Article 44 to protect all officials and organisations involved in the rice-pledging scheme is a proof that former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra and the scheme are political victims, said former commerce minister Boonsong Teriyapirom.

In his post on personal Facebook page, Boonsong said he was sadden to see Yingluck defend herself in the court.

He said that Yingluck had no direct responsibility in the scheme. Though it was a government policy, it was carried out by a sub-committee.

He insisted that Guangdong Stationary & Sporting Goods Import & Export Corp and Hainan Grain and Oil Industrial Trading Co, which purchased rice under government-government deals, were considered part of the Chinese government as they were 100 per cent owned by the government. They enjoy the same status as Guangxi Mingyang Biochemical Science & Technology which bought tapioca flour under a G2G deal with the Abhisit government in 2000 and China Hainan Rubber Industry Group Co which struck a similar deal for Thai rubber during the Prayut administration.

The tapioca flour and rubber deals "were conducted in the same way as the rice deals struck during theYingluck administration. The only difference is the deals did not face collusion charges from the NACC(National Anti-Corruption Commission)", Boonsong said.

Boonsong also countered the charges that the stockpiles were slowly released/or released below cost, leading to huge losses. "Rice is the commodity that naturally degrades. As such, selling the commodity below the price paid out to farmers is normal. This is also normal during the Abhisit or Prayut governments."

He also noted that warehouse operators are legally responsible for missing stockpiles or degradation. Demanding Yingluck or others to take responsibility is thus politically motivated, he said.

"The exercise of Article 44 to protect all individuals and organisations tasked to handle this matter is a proof that the rice-pledging scheme is used as a political tool to ruin Yingluck and Pheu Thai Party."

Boonsong now stands trial against charges that while in office, he sold rice to ghost companies.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/Yingluck-is-politically-victimised-Boonsong-30272027.html

-- The Nation 2015-11-01

[waitforusalso]

Like her brother, she is being politically persecuted in order to maintain power for the old clique.

[bangrak]

And another bucketfull of 'white lies' from Mr Boonsong, shamelessly negating evidences and re-arranging parts of the truth to convince ill-informed and manipulated people. IMO part of a well-organised campaign attempting to protect the Shins' wealth! Let's just hope it will not come to the same excesses as in 2009/2010, which, not to be forgotten, happened for a same reason...

[bangrak]

Like her brother, she is being politically persecuted in order to maintain power for the old clique.

You would like that to be true, wouldn't you? In the same way Boonsong would like his own lies to be true, maybe? But sorry for both of you, it isn't, can't be, won't be, even when it has to hit the Shins where it hurts them the deepest: in their pockets!

[trogers]

Why is a Puppet Master shouting out about his puppets being victimized? And shouting out through another puppet...

[Wilsonandson]

Like her brother, she is being politically persecuted in order to maintain power for the old clique.

You would like that to be true, wouldn't you? In the same way Boonsong would like his own lies to be true, maybe? But sorry for both of you, it isn't, can't be, won't be, even when it has to hit the Shins where it hurts them the deepest: in their pockets!

Is she being persecuted or is the evidence against her true? After reading this article I see why she's on trial. http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/NACC-accuses-former-ministers-of-fabricating-G2G-r-30258644.html

[bangrak]

Like her brother, she is being politically persecuted in order to maintain power for the old clique.

You would like that to be true, wouldn't you? In the same way Boonsong would like his own lies to be true, maybe? But sorry for both of you, it isn't, can't be, won't be, even when it has to hit the Shins where it hurts them the deepest: in their pockets!

Sorry, were you trying to make a point? ...And 'outright denial', alas, seems the only fitting way to react about what you wrote. As for calling me names, it only shows what kind of a person you are, allowing me to 'rest my case', about you and about your prosa.

[catterwell]

"Boonsong said he was saddened to see Yingluck defend herself in the court". But was he saddened by the fact that she needed to defend herself in court?

[halloween]

Perhaps he should have included 'I am not a crook'. Not that anybody would believe that either.

[Wilsonandson]

Like her brother, she is being politically persecuted in order to maintain power for the old clique.

You would like that to be true, wouldn't you? In the same way Boonsong would like his own lies to be true, maybe? But sorry for both of you, it isn't, can't be, won't be, even when it has to hit the Shins where it hurts them the deepest: in their pockets!

Sorry, were you trying to make a point? ...And 'outright denial', alas, seems the only fitting way to react about what you wrote. As for calling me names, it only shows what kind of a person you are, allowing me to 'rest my case', about you and about your prosa.

He never called you a name. The post was liked by baboon.

[worgeordie]

Thats what all MP"s say when they get caught,no one will take responsibility for their

actions, its always someone else's fault.

regards Worgeordie

[scorecard]

1. Yes the warehouse owners should be held responsible.

2. "He also noted that warehouse operators are legally responsible for missing stockpiles or degradation. Demanding Yingluck or others to take responsibility is thus politically motivated, he said."

This is the same as the CEO who says to the business owner 'We didn't achieve our business goals but you can't blame me, our company marketing manager is not so clever.'

Plain straight forward accountability, nothing whatever to do with 'politically motivated'.

If boonsong doesn't know that business operates like this / CEO's have ultimate responsibility then how come he was in the ministers seat?

Madam claims she decided / she appointed her ministers, so she's responsible for appointing a grossly inappropriate minister. Funny how there's a string of the same ilk, example kittirat the liar, also deeply involved in the rice fiasco.

Edited November 1, 2015 by scorecard

[Ricardo]

"He said that Yingluck had no direct responsibility in the scheme. Though it was a government policy, it was carried out by a sub-committee."

Do you think the former-Minister has forgotten, who was supposed to be chairing that sub-committee, but kept failing to attend meetings ?

[lovelomsak]

Like her brother, she is being politically persecuted in order to maintain power for the old clique.

You would like that to be true, wouldn't you? In the same way Boonsong would like his own lies to be true, maybe? But sorry for both of you, it isn't, can't be, won't be, even when it has to hit the Shins where it hurts them the deepest: in their pockets!

Sorry, were you trying to make a point? ...And 'outright denial', alas, seems the only fitting way to react about what you wrote. As for calling me names, it only shows what kind of a person you are, allowing me to 'rest my case', about you and about your prosa.

Gee and I thought he was right on and you were simply attacking him and Boonsong to creat confusion when someone states the bare truth.. Hid the truth by any means possible seems to be many peoples tactics onTV.

[billd766]

Like her brother, she is being politically persecuted in order to maintain power for the old clique.

You would like that to be true, wouldn't you? In the same way Boonsong would like his own lies to be true, maybe? But sorry for both of you, it isn't, can't be, won't be, even when it has to hit the Shins where it hurts them the deepest: in their pockets!

So if posters disagree with you they are either extremely ignorant or stupid.

It is only your opinion, which, along with mine and 99% of all the posters on the forum means nothing at all to the Thai people.

They will do what they will do, not necessarily what you, I or anybody else wants them to do.

We can either accept it or not. If you can't or won't accept what the Thai people do, then that is your problem and not theirs.

Edited November 2, 2015 by CharlieH

[bangrak]

Gee and I thought he was right on and you were simply attacking him and Boonsong to creat confusion when someone states the bare truth.. Hid the truth by any means possible seems to be many peoples tactics onTV.

Sorry, were you trying to make a point? ...And 'outright denial', alas, seems the only fitting way to react about what you wrote. As for calling me names, it only shows what kind of a person you are, allowing me to 'rest my case', about you and about your prosa.

Outright denial of my point is either a sign of extreme ignorance or stupidity.

You would like that to be true, wouldn't you? In the same way Boonsong would like his own lies to be true, maybe? But sorry for both of you, it isn't, can't be, won't be, even when it has to hit the Shins where it hurts them the deepest: in their pockets!

Like her brother, she is being politically persecuted in order to maintain power for the old clique.

Call it confusion, blindness, manipulation, obsession, ... many of us here know in whose brains it's more prone to be found, and it's not in those of the ones enjoying some plain common sense here, many of have though lost interest in reacting on, probably even in the reading of, what you guys are writing, but, hey,call me an idealist, I chose to go on with it...

[bangrak]

"He said that Yingluck had no direct responsibility in the scheme. Though it was a government policy, it was carried out by a sub-committee."

Do you think the former-Minister has forgotten, who was supposed to be chairing that sub-committee, but kept failing to attend meetings ?

Allow me to re-phrase: '...but was kept from attending meetings?', as, IMO, it was all bloody organised, IMO by the Shins' clan inner circle, in the same way Tacky's self-declared puppet and clone never attended sessions of Parliament wherein any matter possibly a tiny bit 'hitchy' for PTP/UDD/TS/Shins could come up, or when there was a controversial vote ahead (like the amnesty scam or the 2 Trillion loan just to name two), for her to remain 'out of shot range', further usable as some 'Snowhite' character both towards the international opinion as the red brainwashed troops, the same of course for the rice committee! Why? As simple as it comes: because 'they' knew from day 1 'they' could some day come under attack for their dishonest actions, and 'they', Thaksin(?) wanted at all, any price to keep (to stay with Disney fairy tales' characters) Dumbo to remain...as white as snow in the eyes of the media and supporters!

[tbthailand]

she's going up the river... that is pre-ordained.

the only problem the elite have is how to get her to do a runner so that they don't have to put her behind bars - an act that would instantly turn her into a martyr...

one way or another : bye-by Yingluck.

[tbthailand]

1. Yes the warehouse owners should be held responsible.

2. "He also noted that warehouse operators are legally responsible for missing stockpiles or degradation. Demanding Yingluck or others to take responsibility is thus politically motivated, he said."

This is the same as the CEO who says to the business owner 'We didn't achieve our business goals but you can't blame me, our company marketing manager is not so clever.'

Plain straight forward accountability, nothing whatever to do with 'politically motivated'.

If boonsong doesn't know that business operates like this / CEO's have ultimate responsibility then how come he was in the ministers seat?

Madam claims she decided / she appointed her ministers, so she's responsible for appointing a grossly inappropriate minister. Funny how there's a string of the same ilk, example kittirat the liar, also deeply involved in the rice fiasco.

ah, and when was the last time that a CEO was made to personally pay for losses incurred by the company ?

This is 100% political.

[Srikcir]

If the Prayut regime has the rule of law on its side, why must it exercise Article 44 to protect all officials and organisations?

Article 44 is used by the junta to bypass the vagaries of due process of law to assure persecution, prosecution and conviction. Frequently, where organic laws either do not apply or are not violated by a Thai citizen's actions, NCPO has applied Article 44 under its self-given powers to prosecute according to its own sense of law.

Application of Article 44 is an admission of failure to depend on the judicial process to carry out justice.

[Eric Loh]

If the Prayut regime has the rule of law on its side, why must it exercise Article 44 to protect all officials and organisations?

Article 44 is used by the junta to bypass the vagaries of due process of law to assure persecution, prosecution and conviction. Frequently, where organic laws either do not apply or are not violated by a Thai citizen's actions, NCPO has applied Article 44 under its self-given powers to prosecute according to its own sense of law.

Application of Article 44 is an admission of failure to depend on the judicial process to carry out justice.

All I see is poor judgement and indiscriminate use of power in 44. Prayuth always said he will use 44 constructively. This is certainly not and simply an abuse of power and abetting the judiciary and create worse off division. This will drive another nail to reconciliation and even if Yingluck and her ministers were found guilt, their supporters will see that as a conspiracy against the Shins and PT. Just like Thaksin conviction was not accepted by his supporters because the trial was held during the junta government. Better for Prayuth to rescind 44 and not even make any comment deemed to influence the case.

[lucky11]

1. Yes the warehouse owners should be held responsible.

2. "He also noted that warehouse operators are legally responsible for missing stockpiles or degradation. Demanding Yingluck or others to take responsibility is thus politically motivated, he said."

This is the same as the CEO who says to the business owner 'We didn't achieve our business goals but you can't blame me, our company marketing manager is not so clever.'

Plain straight forward accountability, nothing whatever to do with 'politically motivated'.

If boonsong doesn't know that business operates like this / CEO's have ultimate responsibility then how come he was in the ministers seat?

Madam claims she decided / she appointed her ministers, so she's responsible for appointing a grossly inappropriate minister. Funny how there's a string of the same ilk, example kittirat the liar, also deeply involved in the rice fiasco.

ah, and when was the last time that a CEO was made to personally pay for losses incurred by the company ?

This is 100% political.

A CEO of a company spending investors money does not equate to a pseudo PM of a country wasting 500 billion Baht of tax-payers money!!

Not a very good analogy I'm afraid.

If you really want to compare her situation as being similar to a CEO of a company then it Can't be political, can it!!

[Bignose]

While this individual is most definitely not isolated in his opinions and his support for the previous administration, I still find it breathtaking that they can still articulate such a one sided and deceitful defense of this massive fraud against the people of Thailand.

Not only was YS responsible for instigating this grotesquely expensive scheme, she was the Chairperson of the entire scheme during it's implementation. She was the person who had her hands on the steering wheel with total and free access to all details and facts. She was in charge when the alarm bells were ringing and when others were warning that there were irregularities and problems, this disaster did not take place overnight it was many, many months in the making and was visible to all.

Make no mistake this scheme did exactly what it was supposed to do, it removed many billions of Baht from the public coffers and deposited them into the bank accounts of the chosen few of the well connected. This was an exercise in the redistribution of a nations wealth, it was a flagrant and cynical theft of a nations assets with no regard for the people of that nation.

How many schools or hospitals could have been built or renovated with that money?

How many lives could have been improved with just a fraction of the lost billions?

The white noise, lies and plain propaganda from this side of the political fence cannot hide forever what happened here, that YS and her corrupt government were responsible for a massive fraud on the people who voted for her and who paid her wages, to believe anything else id delusional...

[Wombat6]

Like her brother, she is being politically persecuted in order to maintain power for the old clique.

Only your opinion...the truth is, they are a criminal family that the law is just catching up with

[mikemac]

1. Yes the warehouse owners should be held responsible.

2. "He also noted that warehouse operators are legally responsible for missing stockpiles or degradation. Demanding Yingluck or others to take responsibility is thus politically motivated, he said."

This is the same as the CEO who says to the business owner 'We didn't achieve our business goals but you can't blame me, our company marketing manager is not so clever.'

Plain straight forward accountability, nothing whatever to do with 'politically motivated'.

If boonsong doesn't know that business operates like this / CEO's have ultimate responsibility then how come he was in the ministers seat?

Madam claims she decided / she appointed her ministers, so she's responsible for appointing a grossly inappropriate minister. Funny how there's a string of the same ilk, example kittirat the liar, also deeply involved in the rice fiasco.

ah, and when was the last time that a CEO was made to personally pay for losses incurred by the company ?

This is 100% political.

Of course it is political tb, she was the leader of a political party at the time (well, actually her brother was) and so yes, it is political.

The Shin fans keep harping on about it being political, and guess what ? Nobody is disagreeing. You are arguing with yourselves.

It seems like whenever you have run out of things to say you go on about decisions being political and anyone who dares to have a different point of view to you is a rabid junta lover/fanboy/supporter.

Yingluck insisted "the buck stops with her", so to speak, that she was responsible for whatever happened, not her brother.

................"Ms Yingluck insists that the buck stops with her. She says she wants to govern in a spirit of compromise, and so far has eschewed direct attacks on her political opponents. Speaking when she received the royal command on August 8th (pictured above), she said she wants to “return happiness back to our brothers and sisters.” She promised to listen to all opinions and to use feminine qualities of “strength and gentleness” to solve the nation's problems.".........................

http://www.economist.com/node/21525930

Seems she coined a particular phrase as well - ...............“return happiness back to our brothers and sisters.”.................

(I hope she did not mean doing so by way of the rice scam.)

[tbthailand]

1. Yes the warehouse owners should be held responsible.

2. "He also noted that warehouse operators are legally responsible for missing stockpiles or degradation. Demanding Yingluck or others to take responsibility is thus politically motivated, he said."

This is the same as the CEO who says to the business owner 'We didn't achieve our business goals but you can't blame me, our company marketing manager is not so clever.'

Plain straight forward accountability, nothing whatever to do with 'politically motivated'.

If boonsong doesn't know that business operates like this / CEO's have ultimate responsibility then how come he was in the ministers seat?

Madam claims she decided / she appointed her ministers, so she's responsible for appointing a grossly inappropriate minister. Funny how there's a string of the same ilk, example kittirat the liar, also deeply involved in the rice fiasco.

ah, and when was the last time that a CEO was made to personally pay for losses incurred by the company ?

This is 100% political.

A CEO of a company spending investors money does not equate to a pseudo PM of a country wasting 500 billion Baht of tax-payers money!!

Not a very good analogy I'm afraid.

If you really want to compare her situation as being similar to a CEO of a company then it Can't be political, can it!!

you missed the point of the post.

I don't think that it is a valid analogy at all, and it was Scorecqrd's analogy, not mine.

which why it is so easy to break apart his comparison.

Now for your pseudo-PM, ... the current "PM" is a pseudo-self-appointed-PM. And there is no election in sight that will get rid of him... in fact he keeps threatening to stay on .... forever.

[tbthailand]

1. Yes the warehouse owners should be held responsible.

2. "He also noted that warehouse operators are legally responsible for missing stockpiles or degradation. Demanding Yingluck or others to take responsibility is thus politically motivated, he said."

This is the same as the CEO who says to the business owner 'We didn't achieve our business goals but you can't blame me, our company marketing manager is not so clever.'

Plain straight forward accountability, nothing whatever to do with 'politically motivated'.

If boonsong doesn't know that business operates like this / CEO's have ultimate responsibility then how come he was in the ministers seat?

Madam claims she decided / she appointed her ministers, so she's responsible for appointing a grossly inappropriate minister. Funny how there's a string of the same ilk, example kittirat the liar, also deeply involved in the rice fiasco.

ah, and when was the last time that a CEO was made to personally pay for losses incurred by the company ?

This is 100% political.

Of course it is political tb, she was the leader of a political party at the time (well, actually her brother was) and so yes, it is political.

The Shin fans keep harping on about it being political, and guess what ? Nobody is disagreeing. You are arguing with yourselves.

It seems like whenever you have run out of things to say you go on about decisions being political and anyone who dares to have a different point of view to you is a rabid junta lover/fanboy/supporter.

Yingluck insisted "the buck stops with her", so to speak, that she was responsible for whatever happened, not her brother.

................"Ms Yingluck insists that the buck stops with her. She says she wants to govern in a spirit of compromise, and so far has eschewed direct attacks on her political opponents. Speaking when she received the royal command on August 8th (pictured above), she said she wants to “return happiness back to our brothers and sisters.” She promised to listen to all opinions and to use feminine qualities of “strength and gentleness” to solve the nation's problems.".........................

http://www.economist.com/node/21525930

Seems she coined a particular phrase as well - ...............“return happiness back to our brothers and sisters.”.................

(I hope she did not mean doing so by way of the rice scam.)

funny, seems like scorecard just said it wasn't political.

Seems like the junta claims this is about letting justice run it's course.

When it is obvious that it is a political prosecution.

That is why it is clear that she is toast.

[lucky11]

1. Yes the warehouse owners should be held responsible.

2. "He also noted that warehouse operators are legally responsible for missing stockpiles or degradation. Demanding Yingluck or others to take responsibility is thus politically motivated, he said."

This is the same as the CEO who says to the business owner 'We didn't achieve our business goals but you can't blame me, our company marketing manager is not so clever.'

Plain straight forward accountability, nothing whatever to do with 'politically motivated'.

If boonsong doesn't know that business operates like this / CEO's have ultimate responsibility then how come he was in the ministers seat?

Madam claims she decided / she appointed her ministers, so she's responsible for appointing a grossly inappropriate minister. Funny how there's a string of the same ilk, example kittirat the liar, also deeply involved in the rice fiasco.

ah, and when was the last time that a CEO was made to personally pay for losses incurred by the company ?

This is 100% political.

A CEO of a company spending investors money does not equate to a pseudo PM of a country wasting 500 billion Baht of tax-payers money!!

Not a very good analogy I'm afraid.

If you really want to compare her situation as being similar to a CEO of a company then it Can't be political, can it!!

you missed the point of the post.

I don't think that it is a valid analogy at all, and it was Scorecqrd's analogy, not mine.

which why it is so easy to break apart his comparison.

Now for your pseudo-PM, ... the current "PM" is a pseudo-self-appointed-PM. And there is no election in sight that will get rid of him... in fact he keeps threatening to stay on .... forever.

I hope that he does as he has proved the most capable prime minister since Abhisit.

[metisdead]

Flame posts and replies have been removed.

[than]

As usual Mr Boonsong distort the truth.

Yingluck was president of this sub-commits.

In addition, the Chinese central government has acknowledged that the two agencies quoted M.Bonnsong had not received a mandate to deal with Thailand