Jump to content

Smarter Than You

Advanced Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

919 Excellent

About Smarter Than You

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Location

Previous Fields

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1,555 profile views
  1. You are wrong. The longer you are in government the more enemies you accrue, the more ammunition the opposition amasses and the more people weary of you. If the military would just leave Thai democracy alone for a minute or two - Thaksin's party would eventually get voted out.
  2. "The Yingluck government has set aside Bt400 billion for the rice pledging scheme. It has spent Bt260 billion, over two harvests, to buy up paddy from farmers – with white rice at Bt15,000 per tonne and homali fragrant rice at Bt20,000 per tonne. Kittiratt said that by September the government is expected to use the remaining Bt170 billion in the budget to purchase more rice from farmers in order to fulfil its policy obligation. The rice price pledging scheme is funded largely via borrowing. The FinanceMinistry has borrowed short-term money to the tune of around Bt260 billion to finance the scheme, operated by the Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives." There is an endless list of sources I can quote. Poor Robblok .....reality beckons.
  3. Man you are really committed to the cause... "After the Yingluck’s government won the election and came to the of ce in 2011, many policies were announced and formed including economic policies. One of the largest economic policies in terms of the government budgeting involved was rice pledging scheme....." Rice Pledging Scheme - ThaiJO The real problem with the off-budget stuff in Thailand is the military's refusal to allow their own off budget revenue to be taxed.
  4. "The mobile Cabinet yesterday approved the rice pledging scheme for the 2012/2013 fiscal year, worth Bt105 billion in total, proposed by the Commerce Ministry". Mate, you are living in one very, very quickly dwindling fantasy land.
  5. This article must have been so hard for you to read... three years of nonsense refuted in a single page. The rice scheme was included in the budget. http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/Economy/30203114 It was the 2 trillion high speed rail loan that was going to be off budget - it never eventuated because the courts ruled against it. This article has got you in such a tizzy that you're getting your propaganda all mixed up.
  6. Smarter Than You

    Vorayuth extradition on hold for police documents, says source

    perceived delay.....
  7. Your analogy is wrong. Try this... You go into an alley and don't take a piss but I see you in the alley and say that you did take a piss. Judge believes me, you go to jail - end of story. Are you so keen to see punishment meted out to anyone related the the Red side of Thai politics that you are seriously supporting such dubious judicial undertakings?
  8. Lame. Interesting why the judge agreed to a follow up meeting with the alleged briber, don't you think? Especially as there is no recording - if the second meeting wasn't to gather evidence of a crime what was it for? Also interesting, no comment from you on whether you would mind being convicted solely on the word of another with no other evidence.
  9. No, I don't look at occupation when deciding credibility. The Thai courts did and Than did. I completely disagree with the use of occupation as a measure of credibility, if you read what I have written my position abundantly clear. He was a former class mate of the judge who was visiting to pass on an invitation to a class reunion - probably explains why the judge agreed to see him. Given the political situation at the time of the meeting - the joke seems entirely reasonable. Would you be happy to be convicted solely on other man's word without a shred of supporting evidence? I would not.
  10. Don't understand what you've written here. ???
  11. Do keep up. The accusers claims that there were two encounters. The first at his place of work where the alleged bribe was 15 million. The second at the accusers house where the alleged bribe was upped to 30 million. The accuser, having been offered a bribe at his place of work then hosts the alleged briber at a future date at his own house - there is ample opportunity to record the conversation. I would go as far to say that if the accuser were truly interested in justice and the events really did occur as he says they did - then surely he is obligated to record the conversation that he knows is coming. I would also question how it is the the judges adjudicating on this case didn't raise the same doubts ... why is there no recording? why is there no other evidence at all besides the accusers own unverified claims? How could one be convicted on so flimsy a case?
  12. I have been simply responding to Than's posts. If you have a problem, hit the report button. How about you - would you be happy to be convicted on the heresy of one man who happens to be on the opposite side of the political divide to you?
  13. Do you think this case has set a good legal precedent? Would you be happy to be convicted on such flimsy "evidence"? Why do you think the accuser never bothered to record the conversations - especially the second encounter at his own house when he had time to prepare?
  14. Smarter Than You

    Yingluck plans to make her own closing statement

    http://www.khaosodenglish.com/politics/2016/11/04/everything-afraid-ask-thai-rice-subsidies/ http://www.khaosodenglish.com/politics/2016/10/24/fining-yingluck-rice-subsidy-grey-area-critic-policy-says/
  15. Smarter Than You

    Yingluck plans to make her own closing statement

    So no details about the rice scheme then? I'm not surprised.