Yingluck appears in Court

[JAG]

I suggested two years ago for her to run while she still could. To late now.
 
hmmmm. 1 billion $ divided by 5 generals + a bonus for the junta leader  a very good year indeed.

I doubt that the money is "to hand".

She has had ample opportunity to run but she won't. The Junta's only real card left is to imprison her or place her under some sort of house arrest. This would only serve to increase her popularity, and her popularity is her trump card.

Yingluck is playing a long game. She knows that she is popular, and she reckons that makes her pretty untouchable. I think she will remain in Thailand, in the public eye, (the junta are doing a pretty good job of keeping her there), so that when the time comes opposition will coalesce around her. It's been done before by female political figures in S E Asia....

[smedly]

PTP came up with the rice scheme to garish election votes along with several other unworkable nonsense vote enticements with the one aim of making sure they won the election at all costs - the ultimate goal was to get the convicted criminal Thaksin an amnesty which in the end the people eventually saw what was going on and were having none of it, all involved then systematically plundered and abused it in so many ways it is quite frankly obscene, the ultimate responsibility was with Yingluc who was not only PM but also chairman of the scheme, it is rather unfortunate that none of them will see the inside of a jail cell 

[smedly]

46 minutes ago, fobuff said:

I suggested two years ago for her to run while she still could. To late now.

 

hmmmm. 1 billion $ divided by 5 generals + a bonus for the junta leader  a very good year indeed.

so you are suggesting this money will not be going to the Thai people but into certain peoples pockets - that's a pretty serious accusation you are making

[realenglish1]

This is a dangerous precedent. Holding someone responsible  for a government project that went bad is a good thing. Putting them in jail and or fining them an amount that is a show of responsibility . But to hold someone accountable for the full value of the scheme without criminal prosecution is totally stupid without moral compass.

 

Hers is the message it sends to the little ones who could have been the next GREAT leader. "OMG I am not running for office I could be held accountable for for any government scheme I bring to the public if the next government does not like it .

 

Anyways you get the drift To hold her totally financially responsible  for everything is a joke Its just passing the buck Fine her throw her in jail for real criminal activity I'm fine with that

[Eric Loh]

The point that I find hard to reconcile is where did the huge sum of money went. It just didn't disappeared into thin air. If any sum of money went into any one pockets and corruption proven in court, throw the book at them and jail them. Fact is that the money went into the wider economy as consumption or as revenue taxes, terms used by economist as fiscal multiplier. What it meant to happen is that fiscal multiplier generate more than the sum invested. Somehow the junta seem not keen to talk about this or made any attempt to calculate this fiscal multiplier. Why? 

[performance]

The JUNTA are merely professional extortion police with a podium. They are really lost and corrupt bunch of ex army personal close to retirement. Never has any former PM been set up for the slaughter.  Prayut I await the time this happens to you. Those sections you wrote yourself. They will not save you.

[performance]

2 hours ago, yellowboat said:

There is NO check or balance for the Junta.  They will never be held accountable for anything do ever in Thailand.  It is not fair that her money is seized by such people.  You are just transferring her money to them.  What is the point ?  How does that help you ?

The JUNTA are freelance robbers with a get out of jail free card. Prayut he no business forcing his stay.

[George Graham]

16 hours ago, tbthailand said:

 

so does she have an Article 45?

'cuz that is what it's gonna take.

 

Yes she does, it's called the next round of musical chairs. This defines the entire history of Thailand.

[halloween]

2 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

 

Gamini must have missed the revelation by a former judge of the highest court that there were judgements compromised by political convenience. Heavily tinted yellow glasses. 

 

You do know he was talking about Thaksin's innocent mistake with his assets declaration?

[Chicog]

I would definitely take her furniture shopping.

[elgordo38]

18 hours ago, soalbundy said:

considering 70% of tax money is spent on Bangkok and that 0.01% own 50% of Thailand's assets i would have thought that the rice pledging scheme was only fair

Well said. This should pretty well put the kibosh to any budding politicians who feel that they want to run in the next election and work for the poor and downtrodden. Make one wrong move to pee off the generals in the senate who are non elected and you to will be up a river without a paddle. This whole case goes to prove that if you have money you better be on the right side of things.

[elgordo38]

On 10/21/2016 at 11:00 AM, webfact said:

But she insisted she would resort to all legal channels to fight and would give a press conference in due process and time.

"Legal channels?" Lady you have to be kidding. 

[Deez]

14 hours ago, gamini said:

plenty of stupid things. Why should she not get a fair trial? She has the best lawyers? The government does not dictate to the courtts. But of course the red shirt propaganda says so!

"The government does not dictate to the courtts."

 

LOL

[tbthailand]

8 hours ago, nomadicjunkie said:

considering 70% of tax money is spent on Bangkok and that 0.01% own 50% of Thailand's assets i would have thought that the rice pledging scheme was only fair

 

Where did you get these stats or I assume your just making them up

nope they're real... 

[tbthailand]

3 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

The point that I find hard to reconcile is where did the huge sum of money went. It just didn't disappeared into thin air. If any sum of money went into any one pockets and corruption proven in court, throw the book at them and jail them. Fact is that the money went into the wider economy as consumption or as revenue taxes, terms used by economist as fiscal multiplier. What it meant to happen is that fiscal multiplier generate more than the sum invested. Somehow the junta seem not keen to talk about this or made any attempt to calculate this fiscal multiplier. Why? 

it worked too. People here (Isaan) were doing much better and spending more money locally. 

 

Now it's very hard times... no one is spending money... 

[Eric Loh]

2 hours ago, halloween said:

You do know he was talking about Thaksin's innocent mistake with his assets declaration?

 

No, it was about the judge admitting that political expediency was a factor in determining the verdict. 3 other judges later collaborated with that admission. That is a damaging admission and weakened the legal system credibility. 

[carlyai]

.
 
 
Dear President baboon of England, please try to keep up.
 
 
Thank You.
 
 

Hey Rimmer....there's a name change here. [emoji10]

Sent from my SM-J700F using Tapatalk

[monkey4u]

11 hours ago, TunnelRat69 said:

Hey she's still kinda hot,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I'd give her a place to stay anyday

She may need it after loosing big bros money

Just think of the carry on at the next family gathering in Cambodia, she wont have  enough for a ticket to Dubai

[tbthailand]

6 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

 

Gamini must have missed the revelation by a former judge of the highest court that there were judgements compromised by political convenience. Heavily tinted yellow glasses. 

 

well we can give him the benefit of the doubt in that it is not always the "government" ... sometimes the courts are told what to do by the "future government"... 

[tbthailand]

3 hours ago, Chicog said:

I would definitely take her furniture shopping.

I wonder how many get the reference.... 

[MZurf]

5 hours ago, smedly said:

so you are suggesting this money will not be going to the Thai people but into certain peoples pockets - that's a pretty serious accusation you are making

We'll never know, will we, since the junta are unelected, unaccountable and, having given themselves the mother of all amnesties, unpunishable. You do realise this, right?

[ramrod711]

Seems to me that one billion dollars is what her government gave back to her brother, probably just a coincidence.

[candide]

2 hours ago, ramrod711 said:

Seems to me that one billion dollars is what her government gave back to her brother, probably just a coincidence.

 

2 hours ago, ramrod711 said:

Seems to me that one billion dollars is what her government gave back to her brother, probably just a coincidence.

As you probably know it was a supreme Court decision, not a government decision. And please don't try to explain us that the Supreme Court was pro-shins. :)

[Anthony5]

2 hours ago, MZurf said:

We'll never know, will we, since the junta are unelected, unaccountable and, having given themselves the mother of all amnesties, unpunishable. You do realise this, right?

 

After all we can be assured that if any inconsistencies  are found, a family member will launch an investigation, which will be concluded even before it was started and you may guess 3 times what the outcome will be.

[elgenon]

On 10/21/2016 at 4:20 AM, soalbundy said:

considering 70% of tax money is spent on Bangkok and that 0.01% own 50% of Thailand's assets i would have thought that the rice pledging scheme was only fair

 

it would have been nice for the money to go to poor farmers rather than into the pockets of cronies.

[soalbundy]

1 hour ago, elgenon said:

 

it would have been nice for the money to go to poor farmers rather than into the pockets of cronies.

I can only speak from my own village but we did get the money although for the last harvest that we did we had to wait over three years to get it. The rice pledging worked well for us but now we get a maximum of 6 Baht a kilo, my mother-in-law got 2,000 Baht profit from a 12,000 Baht harvest after paying off the harvest costs, we have had two farmers taken to hospital due to stress induced illness.

[ramrod711]

16 hours ago, candide said:

 

As you probably know it was a supreme Court decision, not a government decision. And please don't try to explain us that the Supreme Court was pro-shins. :)

Of course the court is not pro shin, despite decisions that judges publicly regretted later and cake boxes offered by those same shins. Thousands wouldn't believe you when you say the court is neutral and unbiased...but I do, sure I do. Please remember your approval of the courts next time a decision favors the present government.

[halloween]

1 hour ago, soalbundy said:

I can only speak from my own village but we did get the money although for the last harvest that we did we had to wait over three years to get it. The rice pledging worked well for us but now we get a maximum of 6 Baht a kilo, my mother-in-law got 2,000 Baht profit from a 12,000 Baht harvest after paying off the harvest costs, we have had two farmers taken to hospital due to stress induced illness.

One of the reasons the price is so low is that they are still trying to sell the stuff they overpaid for. Seems there's no such thing as a free rice lunch.

[djjamie]

Considering the scheme did not target poor farmers anyway not many Thai's will really care about this especially in the current subdued climate.

[candide]

2 hours ago, ramrod711 said:

Of course the court is not pro shin, despite decisions that judges publicly regretted later and cake boxes offered by those same shins. Thousands wouldn't believe you when you say the court is neutral and unbiased...but I do, sure I do. Please remember your approval of the courts next time a decision favors the present government.

Where did I say I approve or not the court decision? I just corrected your false assertion that it was a government decision. The court initially froze his assets and when the case was over, kept only a part of it. No idea if it was too much or too few. But was is sure is that it was not the government that returned money, as you insinuate.