Thaksin has been humbled by his recent experiences. I doubt very much he wants to have complete and total dictatorship control of Thailand.

I do agree that he is not the complete answer, but he is in some way part of the solution.

Thaksin has been humbled by his recent experiences. I doubt very much he wants to have complete and total dictatorship control of Thailand.

I do agree that he is not the complete answer, but he is in some way part of the solution.

He is far too corrupt and working for self interests to be considered something like that. The only beneficial light I can see him in is that he will inspire people to serve their country selflessly and truly, without corruption, through his propaganda.

Your not one of those who cry foul about using force against drug dealers are you? It would be strange to now say use force against Thai working class.

Mania , given that half the people killed, in Thaksin's 'War on Drugs', were later found to be totally innocent, what do you have to say about those 1,500 working-class Thais who were murdered in the campaign he instigated and supported ?

Many posters on TV were appalled by the way the executions were carried-out, and that nobody has ever since been convicted of those killings, would you agree that Thaksin should carry part of the blame for the mess which he created ? Especially now that he has become a born-again fighter for justice ??

Thaksin ordered the police to kill hard-drug dealers. Any officer that made the decision to kill innocent people instead should be prosecuted to the limit for their crimes.

If Thanksin ordered anyone to kill innocents, he should be prosecuted as well.

The Thai government is invoking the rather harsh Internal Security Act in anticipation of potential violence during this Sunday's red shirt pro-Thaksin rally in Bangkok. The obvious justification is the history of violence by the red shirts during Black Songkran, just this April. So, do you support these harsher measures, or not?

I voted: NO, I oppose.

Your poll question, Jingthing, is one-sided and only covering the red side of the story.

Your poll would have been more fair if you would have described previous situations also, like the occupations by the yellow shirts of Government House and airports, causing immense damage to the economy and Thailand's face abroad.

Now you just point at Black Songkran....

Did the government, at any stage, implement the Internal Security Act when many thousands of people (steered by PAD/Limthngkul) occupied -ILLEGALLY- the premises above?

LaoPo

Your poll question, Jingthing, is one-sided and only covering the red side of the story.

No it isn't:

Do You Support The Governments Use Of The Internal Security Act, for this Sunday's red shirt pro-Thaksin rally?

Yes, it is justified [ 33 ] ** [43.42%]

No, I oppose this measure [ 40 ] ** [52.63%]

Don't know/no opinion/not aware of the issue [ 3 ] ** [3.95%]

If Thanksin ordered anyone to kill innocents, he should be prosecuted as well.

Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. None of those killed were proven guilty. Does this part of the law confuse you?

If Thanksin ordered anyone to kill innocents, he should be prosecuted as well.

Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. None of those killed were proven guilty. Does this part of the law confuse you?

Yeah but they were just poor people. Not Thaksin. He's rich. He's special. He's very rich. He's very special.

If Thanksin ordered anyone to kill innocents, he should be prosecuted as well.

Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. None of those killed were proven guilty. Does this part of the law confuse you?

People who sell heroin and methedrine to children are never innocent.

If Thanksin ordered anyone to kill innocents, he should be prosecuted as well.

Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. None of those killed were proven guilty. Does this part of the law confuse you?

People who sell heroin and methedrine to children are never innocent.

How true that is. But how do you determine guilt? Just start shooting to kill at people that are SUSPECTED of these crimes and also those who happen to be hanging around the suspects at the moment? It is shameful that a westerner would even BEGIN to try to justify extrajudical MURDERS.

If Thanksin ordered anyone to kill innocents, he should be prosecuted as well.

Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. None of those killed were proven guilty. Does this part of the law confuse you?

People who sell heroin and methedrine to children are never innocent.

What part of "everyone is innocent until proven guilty" are you not getting?

Love of the Thaksin can make people blind ...

If Thanksin ordered anyone to kill innocents, he should be prosecuted as well.

Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. None of those killed were proven guilty. Does this part of the law confuse you?

People who sell heroin and methedrine to children are never innocent.

I won't shed any tears over child molesters or serial murderers either.

The issue of course is due process and whether suspects deserve a trial before being murdered by the state. Nobody of any political stripe is likely to be arguing that the world doesn't contain many people who have committed serious crimes and that such people deserve to be punished, under the LAW.

Ulysses, please tell us you don't actually believe it is OK for governments to go around murdering people only SUSPECTED of crimes? Say it ain't so!

Known heroin and speed dealers sometimes stick out like a sore thumb, but it is not always easy to infiltrate their network and make a purchase from them directly. The police know exactly who they are. Should they be allowed to operate with impunity?

The Thai people voted no and it is not my country.

Known heroin and speed dealers sometimes stick out like a sore thumb, but it is not always easy to infiltrate their network and make a purchase from them directly. The police know exactly who they are. Should they be allowed to operate with impunity?

For the upteenth time, do you understand the concept of "innocent until proven guilty"? Does it mean anything to you?

The Thai people voted no and it is not my country.

First you blame it on the police. Now you blame it on Thai people?!

Please enlighten me. When exactly did Thai people vote on the matter of execution without trial?

If Thanksin ordered anyone to kill innocents, he should be prosecuted as well.

Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. None of those killed were proven guilty. Does this part of the law confuse you?

People who sell heroin and methedrine to children are never innocent.

I won't shed any tears over child molesters or serial murderers either.

What about parents who force their kids to work in go-go's to pay for the odd flutter here and there?

Known heroin and speed dealers sometimes stick out like a sore thumb, but it is not always easy to infiltrate their network and make a purchase from them directly. The police know exactly who they are. Should they be allowed to operate with impunity?

For the upteenth time, do you understand the concept of "innocent until proven guilty"? Does it mean anything to you?

The Thai people voted no and it is not my country.

First you blame it on the police. Now you blame it on Thai people?!

Please enlighten me. When exactly did Thai people vote on the matter of execution without trial?

I did not mean that literally, but, it is not a secret that most Thais very much supported Thaksin's War on Drugs.

What about parents who force their kids to work in go-go's to pay for the odd flutter here and there?

Most Go Go Bars are completely voluntary and it would be very difficult to force anyone to work there. They would just save some money and split town. However, parents who sell their children to brothels should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Known heroin and speed dealers sometimes stick out like a sore thumb, but it is not always easy to infiltrate their network and make a purchase from them directly. The police know exactly who they are. Should they be allowed to operate with impunity?

For the upteenth time, do you understand the concept of "innocent until proven guilty"? Does it mean anything to you?

The Thai people voted no and it is not my country.

First you blame it on the police. Now you blame it on Thai people?!

Please enlighten me. When exactly did Thai people vote on the matter of execution without trial?

I did not mean that literally, but, it is not a secret that most Thais very much supported Thaksin's War on Drugs.

Ah, you didn't mean literally. OK, that all makes sense now.

So what you are saying is that based on the fact that Ulysses has this unsubstaniated feeling that Thai people supported execution without trial, that makes it all alright and absolves Thaksin of being held accountable or responsible for the decision he made to give the police this extraordinary power. Seems you want to point the finger at everyone bar your square-faced little friend.

And i'll ask this once again for you to ignore. Are you familiar with "innocent until proven guilty"? Do you not think it's the most fundamentally important part of modern law, without which the legal system not only collapses, it ceases to exist?

Strange this poll... an identical poll in the bangkok post online version has 62% in favour and 37% against.

First you blame it on the police. Now you blame it on Thai people?!

Most Thai people strongly supported Thaksin's policy -that is a fact - but they don't deserve any blame for the actions of those who did not carry out orders and killed innocents.

Policemen who killed innocent people while claiming they were drug dealers deserve to go to jail, but most people do not care all that much about actual dealers of hard drugs. "Fair" trials, or not, They probably deserve their fate.

Most Thai people strongly supported Thaksin's policy -that is a fact

No it's not a fact. It's your opinion. Were it a fact there would be proof.

Facts are no different from guilty verdicts - there must be proof. If proof doesn't exist all you are left with is one person's opinion.

And to repeat, whether people support government action or not is completely irrelevant. When people elect a government they are putting their trust in those elected people to make the right decisions on their behalf. That's what politicians are paid to do. It's their responsibility. Prime Ministers have the ultimate responsibility. Although they alone can't make things happen without the support of others, what they absolutely can do is stop things from happening. Thaksin could have and should have said no to execution without trial. Had he done so, it would never of happened. It was within his power, but he did nothing. He must pay for that, just as all those involved must pay. Whether they will or not is quite another matter. There are too many people tied up in it all, including those still in power, for much to happen on this in my opinion.

They probably deserve their fate.

Neither you, nor Thaksin, nor the police can possibly say who deserved what. That's why we have courts and judges. They decide on guilt and punishment based on concrete facts and evidence, not hearsay, speculation, hunches, feelings or even grudges.

You are defending execution without trial. You do know that don't you?

People who throw Molotov cocktails and attack Asean conferences with world leaders attending and attempt to assassinate PM Abhisit most certainly DO NOT want stability. This isn't romper room. Thaksin is desperate. He will do anything.

Another clue: people who get behind such outrageous tactics as the red shirts are using are most certainly NOT pro-democracy.

What is this Jingthing? You start a thread asking for opinions so you can bash anyone who doesn't agree?

Lest you forget - Thaksin was removed illegally in the first place by a military coup, . Show of overwhelming force (tanks) was the only reason it ended without violence.

Violence and war are often necessary precursors to workable democracies.

Clue: American Revolution.

Another clue from Patrick Henry:

"If we wish to be free – if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending – if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained – we must fight!

You should thank your lucky 50 stars that once upon a time in your home country people had the courage to fight for their rights.

GO RED SHIRTS GO!

I think the brutal truth is it doesn't matter if you're Red Shirt, Yellow Shirt, Coat Of Many Colours, Thaksin, Aphasit or Mickey Bloody Mouse. If the real boys in charge don't want you then you're out. They own Thailand and the Thai people better not forget it.

Neither you, nor Thaksin, nor the police can possibly say who deserved what. That's why we have courts and judges. They decide on guilt and punishment based on concrete facts and evidence, not hearsay, speculation, hunches, feelings or even grudges.

This is Thailand, not the West, and not even you believe that.

tropo:

What is this Jingthing? You start a thread asking for opinions so you can bash anyone who doesn't agree?

Lest you forget - Thaksin was removed illegally in the first place by a military coup, . Show of overwhelming force (tanks) was the only reason it ended without violence.

Violence and war are often necessary precursors to workable democracies.

...

Bash? What bash. Stop making stuff up, just expressing opinions.

People can vote how they like and I can comment as I like, as can anyone, so please back off with your hyperbole about any supposed influence I have. If you don't like this poll, start another one yourself, and post on it all you like, that is not bashing, ...

The coup of caretaker PM Thaksin is history. It happened. Now we are talking about the current legally formed government of PM Abhisit.

Of course there have been revolutions throughout history that have resulted in positive change. There have also been ones that result in negative change. My perception is Thaksin is a horribly flawed corrupt dictator wannabe and putting him in power would not result in democracy here. In fact, he is on record as not being interested in democracy. He uses the word democracy for public relations and propaganda but the red shirt push is all about reinstalling Thaksin and really not about democracy.

Come on. The yellowshirts came out and actually said that poor people do not deserve the vote. They are much less interested in democracy than a man who would easily win the popular vote if there was one.

Come on. The yellowshirts came out and actually said that poor people do not deserve the vote. They are much less interested in democracy than a man who would easily win the popular vote if there was one.

Agreed that the yellow shirts are anti-democratic. I don't support the yellow shirts. In fact, it is clear to me that most people here, Thai and farang, do not support the red OR the yellow. One of the disgusting things the redheads tend to do is accusing anti-Thaksinistas of being pro yellow. Some are. MOST ARE NOT.

How about the current government?