BritTim

The minister said the issue of citizenship should be separated from access to basic education.

This is hugely important. I am convinced that the issue of stateless persons would be largely solved in a generation if the younger generation was able to acquire an education.

So a response at last from the UK police just announced by Andy Hall. Confirms the UK police did very little and raises serious questions about the statements from the families: https://twitter.com/atomicalandy

One part of the response strikes me as especially bizarre. They state that no help for the defense (in potentially avoiding the execution of the accused) could be offered because, under Thai law, the charges potentially carry the death penalty!

Apparently, though, it is fine to facilitate statements (by the families) that make a guilty verdict more likely.

This is UK diplomacy at its worst. They will do nothing that risks the larger relationship with Thailand.

This is what gripes me.

The families say the evidence is convincing yet the UK police have told the lawyers defense team that they didn't really investigate much. This stinks to high heaven.

The evidence is convincing? This is probably what the Thai Police relayed to the UK Detectives.. hence the quote from the victim's families..

Total waste of time... UK Detectives going to Thailand... -IMO

This clip is interesting...

I watched this discussion when it first appeared. My Thai is reasonable so I followed the drift then. It is relaxing to be able to see the subtitles on this snippet. The full discussion is much longer, and contains various other allegations. What is really interesting is that no defamation suit has been instigated. I assumed this would happen and be the opportunity for a proper investigation. To allow these allegations to go unanswered speaks volumes IMHO.

Note to those who are unaware. View the clip on YouTube and click the appropriate icon bottom right to enable subtitles.

So a response at last from the UK police just announced by Andy Hall. Confirms the UK police did very little and raises serious questions about the statements from the families: https://twitter.com/atomicalandy

One part of the response strikes me as especially bizarre. They state that no help for the defense (in potentially avoiding the execution of the accused) could be offered because, under Thai law, the charges potentially carry the death penalty!

Apparently, though, it is fine to facilitate statements (by the families) that make a guilty verdict more likely.

This is UK diplomacy at its worst. They will do nothing that risks the larger relationship with Thailand.

I read the linked above report the other day:

“We can’t designate that every witness is important. Their testimony should take affect over the case. If we have that kind of witness ..."

NB: IF

Let's look at this quote in context:

“We can’t designate that every witness is important. Their testimony should take affect over the case. If we have that kind of witness, we can ask the government to provide security and expenses,” said lawyer Aung Myo Than.

The true meaning is that the promised support is only for the most important witnesses, not every witness the defense might like to use.

Meanwhile, this snippet from the article is, perhaps, more significant:

“Five Myanmar workers returning from Thailand came from Koh Tao. Thailand told witnesses to stay away from the case and bribed them not to make telephone conversations. That’s why some workers are afraid to testify,” said Aung Myo Than.

I have not seen this reported anywhere else.

I found this interesting. It gives some new insight into the progress being made by the defense to line up witnesses to testify on the B2's behalf:

http://www.elevenmyanmar.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8443

All indications are that Myanmar really is going to do its utmost to try to ensure a fair trial.

I found this interesting. It gives a little more insight on the defense's progress in lining up witnesses to testify of the B2's behalf:

http://www.elevenmyanmar.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8443

Free unhindered movement of people across borders is a death sentence to the sovereignty of that country and is a silly fantasy that some people ignorant of history - including recent history bathe in ... Just look at the migrant invasion into the U.K. Just look at the Hispanic - Mexican - Central American migratory invasion of the USA...

Well, the native Americans might agree with you, but I do not.

Immigrants, in general, are a self selecting group of highly motivated, ambitious individuals. Recipient countries tend to resent new immigrant arrivals, only recognizing the immense economic benefits they bring in retrospect.

I shall not pretend there are no downsides. Local culture certainly comes under pressure from the different ideas of the arrivals. However, "death sentence to the sovereignty of that country"? No way. For all the immigration into the UK of the last 5,000 years, the UK armed forces remain firmly under Westminster control and Ireland, Jamaica, Pakistan, India, Poland, Nigeria, Hong Kong and all the other sources of immigration into the country have no influence whatsoever on how they are used.

As I understand it, the Acmecs (Single Entry visa for Cambodia and Thailand) is worthless for almost everyone. First, it does not save visa fees. The way it operates, is that you must pay on entry to the country whose embassy you did not use to apply for the visa. This means, say you applied at a Cambodian embassy, that on entry to Thailand you must queue up in the visa on arrival lane to pay your 1,000 baht. Further, if you are in Thailand and leave for a short visit to Cambodia, the visa is no longer valid for your return to Thailand. The only saving is a bit of space in your passport. This is sad, as it could be very convenient if it provided what it sounds like it provides.

200 hundred witnesses ?

Even the most ardent CTs are going to have trouble defending this one.

I'm sorry but the defence is doing their clients no favours with some of their tactics and statements.

That depends on what they are testifying to. The RTP and marine police were aggressively pursuing Burmese on Koh Tao and on boats that could have visited Koh Tao. Their "inquiries" may have extended to threats and violence aimed at creating suspects and/or witnesses of the murders. I find it credible that 200 Burmese could testify to this kind of background. The question is: would this be admissible in court? That is up to the judge, so I suspect the answer is "no".

http://www.irrawaddy.org/burma/koh-tao-suspects-innocent-govt-investigation-team.html

Your comments doesnt make sense. If the witnesses are back in their native Myanmar , then why dont they talk to the Myanmar defence team ? If they have information to share that will give us other suspects than B2, of course they will speak , they are safely back in Myanmar and have nothing to lose. .

More correctly stated, they probably have nothing to lose as long as they never intend setting foot in Thailand again. That is a major proviso when they can earn far more working in a place like Koh Tao than they can back home.

Anyway, say they were willing to talk openly to the defense team, even give videotapes interviews, how much impact would this have on the court proceedings? Most likely none. The prosecution would claim (with justification) that the statements should not be admissible with no chance for cross examination. Sure, if leaked to the press, such statements might be embarrassing. However, the Thais would just laugh them off.

From Deutsche Welle English:

Evidence , please show us some evidence that they are not guilty, its hardly a surprise that Myanmar found them to be innocent.....

The way I read it: the Burmese investigators have been convinced of the B2's innocence for weeks, based on what they have been told by the Burmese community on Koh Tao. No one with first-hand knowledge is willing to come forward officially, giving the reason that they are fearful of retaliation. This makes sense to me, but the claimed first-hand accounts might not be truthful. I doubt the B2's guilt, but the defense is sounding desperate.

So in the video around 2:00 it says that the investigators have interviewed 40 Burmese witnesses now in Myanmar who may have witnessed the attacks. Don't the 40 potential Burmese witnesses know if they witnessed the attacks or not?

Yes, they know. However, the people who interviewed them must allow for the possibility that their testimony is false, aimed at helping their worker friends.

So why didn't they just say that?

Perhaps, they felt a single word rather than a multiple sentence explanation fitted better for a statement where sound bites are all important. There was nothing obviously dishonest in what they presented. Quite the contrary: I think they believe what they said.

So in the video around 2:00 it says that the investigators have interviewed 40 Burmese witnesses now in Myanmar who may have witnessed the attacks. Don't the 40 potential Burmese witnesses know if they witnessed the attacks or not?

Yes, they know. However, the people who interviewed them must allow for the possibility that their testimony is false, aimed at helping their worker friends.

And of course, had the police said the toxicology reports showed the victims had drugs in their systems before their deaths, then that would open up another crate load of worms that they would have to deal with.

(No, I do not believe the B2 are guilty, but ...) if David had really been strung out on drugs, it would be slightly more credible that the B2 could overpower him without suffering any injury themselves. Just maybe, the RTP pitched this to the British cops and made them believe it. This would tie in with the statements by the families.

Why do so many British citizens leave it until the last minute to renew an expiring passport.

Time left on an existing passport is added to your new one up to a maximum of 9 months.

If you have at least 3 blank pages left you can also extend your current passport for 12 months.

https://www.gov.uk/renew-adult-passport

The complication is that you cannot travel on the old passport once you apply for the new one. I postponed renewing a fast filling passport when the horror stories about 9-12 weeks started, and was considering a trip to the UK only to renew my passport. Hopefully, this will not now be necessary.

What does it mean to be exocuted? Could someone give me the meaning of this word. Please, pretty please.

The word is "executed". It means that a person or persons has decided that your life is of no value, and they want you to die. They acted accordingly. In civilized societies, this barbarism is limited to those outside the law. In some countries (and in the past most) such killing is also carried out by the state.

8 floors=3 years

Not so if you bring over experts from Australia.

I can arrange that.

Reducing from 24 floors to 8 (removing 16 floors). Is the remaining building going to be worth the cost of the dismantlement? What happens if the owners just decide to abandon the hotel to cut their losses? Can the owners sue the BMA for negligence?

You just bit you lip:

I said 100% sure, not I think, not 99% sure, but 100% sure. Read my post again. You are day dreaming about serious shit here. Mistakes, misunderstandings, blah, blah, blah. Stupid Joke, Huh? There are no misunderstandings or mistakes because these individuals have been suspects for a long time, even with supporting Intel from from other Countries. Next time you're in swampy, tell the security there not to check your bag because it has a bomb in it. Yeah, that's a stupid joke, that will get you beat senseless, if that were possible. There are very, very few mistaken identities regarding possible terrorist suspects. Governments know who they are because they have been on watch lists a very long time. Are you aware that up to 40% of "supposedly innocent" Gitmo releases have returned to terrorist activities? So, stop day dreaming and let's not say if, "I was picked up by a foreign intelligence service." Look what's going on right now in the Lindt Cafe in Sydney. 40 innocent hostages taken by a suspected terrorist with a black flag. (ISIL?) Some how he fell through the cracks in order to pull this off. Failure in Intel? "Our approach is to resolve this peacefully. It might take a bit of time but that is our approach,"Deputy NSW Police Commissioner Catherine Burn told journalists .Authorities want to resolve this peacefully? Dealing with terrorists, peacefully? Not me. 1) Qualified Sniper 2) H ead Shot 3) Bang 4) Hostages released unharmed 5) Perp to the Morgue. You day dream with your fantasies. I'll stand by my Post.

There are many sources that confirm, sadly, that many "known" terrorists are eventually cleared and released after years of mistreatment. Here is a short article that may encourage you to check facts rather than stating what you want to believe without evidence:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/04/former-state-department-official-team-bush-knew-many-at-gitmo-were-innocent/275327/

I walked right through the 'danger zone' this afternoon. Didn't see a single copper.

I was in the Asoke Sukhumvit area yesterday afternoon and had the same experience. It is probably too soon to say the harassment is over, though.

BritTim, your full of crap..

(Minor grammatical point: the contraction of you are is you're. Your is a possessive pronoun.)

On the "substance" of your post, I assure you I am quite regular with no symptoms of constipation.

If you want to express disagreement on the content of my post, you would do better by trying to point out where you believe it is incorrect rather than just using an infantile insult.

Let me get this right. Some Forum Board members are totally against "enhanced interrogation" techniques such as sleep deprivation, water boarding, electro shocking of the genitals, etc. All this because it violates the "Human Rights" of known or suspected terrorists whose only goal right now is to kill innocent civilians through acts of terror. The same ones who will chop your head off while praising "Allah". I am totally against those techniques my self, due to time constraints utilizing them. Hours, perhaps days wasted to gather necessary Intel to prevent an upcoming slaughter of innocents. What about the basic "Human Right" to Life for the intended victims of a Terror Attack?. Reading most of these Posts, they're mostly regarding the CIA, interrogation facilities, sovereignty of Thailand and the usual bashing of America, and really nothing about saving lives or preventing terror attacks. My solution is simple and quick. I'll gather up five suspected terrorists, who I am 100% sure they know something about to happen. I'll cuff them and blindfold them and place them in a chopper. My crew will fly out over the Sea at about 1500 meters in elevation. I'll open the chopper door and ask the one who I think is the toughest of the bunch of them, questions on what He knows. If He refuses to talk or spits in my face, I'll thrown him out the open door with the others watching. I guarantee you, the others will sing like canaries and valuable Intel will be gathered to prevent an upcoming terror attack. Fly back to base for debriefing. Mission Accomplished. I don't believe that anyone who is willing to kill innocent Men, Women, Children and Babies has any rights to be called "Human" in the first place. They lost that, along with any compassion or sympathy from me. Who has a quicker or better Intel gathering technique than mine? Let me know.

How are you 100% certain they know something? Are you aware that over 50% of those sent to Guantanamo were totally innocent, and turned in for reward money or to settle personal scores?

In your hypothetical scenario, the ones who are true believers (and probably know something) will embrace their chance of martyrdom. Bang goes your chance of learning anything useful there (and the reason fake executions are used but not real ones). The others (who likely know nothing) will tell you whatever they think you want to hear.

There is no evidence that torture, even using truth drugs, will elicit any information you can rely on. Meanwhile, you create sympathy for extremely dangerous groups, and reduce the chance of others coming forward to voluntarily provide genuinely useful intelligence. The use of torture was the biggest mistake the UK made in Northern Ireland in the 1970s. On practical, as well as moral, grounds, such methods should not be used.

The Prime Minister also asked all sides not to demand involvement from Thailand as the current situation in the country is peaceful.

What on Earth has "the country is peaceful" got to do with demanding involvement from the government in investigating torture on its soil? Does the PM have any idea about what he has said?

A bizarre statement indeed!

This is what I think he is saying. If Thailand admits to have participated, even to the extent of agreeing to look the other way, certain violent groups may well become ill-disposed towards the country. The effect could be destabilizing violence. There may, indeed, be something to worry about here, but he is sure choosing a strange way of trying to defuse the situation.

"maybe I need a coffee but is 180 days pretty close to 6 months more or less?"

Close, but not the same.

Don't you know the difference?

2.5 days

Only 1 day, if my calculations are correct, if it is Jan-Jun of a non leap year.