britmaveric Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 ^exactly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 (edited) If 2,600 died without trials, then that puts him in the league of Latin American dictators like Pinochet, and, maybe not Idi Amin, Pol Pot and General Suharto, but Charles Taylor, Hugo Banzer, Vinicio Cerezo, Ian Smith, assorted Argentines, Mobutu Sese Seko and a few others come to mind. As a national leader this is unacceptable in this day and age. Edited February 22, 2010 by animatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petebkk Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 He should try the Cambodian Court. They are just down the road from here. He'll surely get the verdict he likes in less than 24 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 (edited) Anyways let's stay on topic here this is about the asset case, not the war on drugs. Edited February 22, 2010 by britmaveric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 Anyways let's stay on topic here this is about the asset case, not the war on drugs. The irony of a man on the run from justice who answered the charges that he is facing currently in Thailand asking for the World Court to help him is intense The fact that the guy COULD be tried for his extra-jusdicial murders in Thailand makes the irony even more intense! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geriatrickid Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 He will never do that. He risks being tried for the extrajudicial murders if he does so. How so? If charges were to brought, it would have happened by now. Even if some evidence could be strung together on your alleged extrajudicial murders, the military and police leadership would not encourage the charges, as they would have to answer for their conduct. Mr. Thaksin has every right to consider making a submission to the ICJ. Whether or not the court would accept his case would be judged upon its merits. If he can meet the requirements, he is certainly allowed to bring his case. The two cases are unrelated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 ^Irony or not - this is about the asset seizure case. Any rate World Court is worthless as I stated not even worth the consideration for Khun T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixalex Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 ^exactly! scorecard was right - complete waste of time Defender of the realm?! I pity the realm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 Ah, but the same mindset that allowed the need for this assets case was the same for the murderous cleanup campaign. No one disputes that stopping yabaa was not an excellent thing to do. The only dispute is that the methods were heinous... like a club to smash fleas in a basket of kittens. Some kittens inevitably get clubbed too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 complete waste of time You are not a waste of time - I enjoy your boring banter. My only suggestion is to get the blinkers off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 ^Irony or not - this is about the asset seizure case. Any rate World Court is worthless as I stated not even worth the consideration for Khun T. No .. this is about Thaksin crying to the World Court. Discussion of Thaksin's behavior that WOULD be in the jurisdiction of the World Court is certainly fair game. Thaksin's losing his ass in a domestic trial certainly isn't in World Court jurisdiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 complete waste of time You are not a waste of time - I enjoy your boring banter. My only suggestion is to get the blinkers off. Your response to extra-judicial killings being "som nam na" isn't totally blinkered? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 JD - rather obtuse observation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insight Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 My firsts thoughts when first seeing this reported was Dr Evil saying "get me the World Organisation!" Does anybody have that photo-shopped image of him and the cat that appears on here after his purchase of that island in Montenegro? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neverdie Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 I reakon it would be a 'fair' thing if that a world court could pass judgement on this issue of the money then perhaps Mr T would accept their judgement on all the issues surrounding the thaxsin debarkle and any such jail sentence so passed down by them. I know it will NEVER happen but it would be interesting to see what he thinks of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 "The U.N. is not my father!" "Dad?" "Daddy!?" "DADDY!!!!???" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpoint Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 How so? If charges were to brought, it would have happened by now. Even if some evidence could be strung together on your alleged extrajudicial murders, the military and police leadership would not encourage the charges, as they would have to answer for their conduct. Mr. Thaksin has every right to consider making a submission to the ICJ. Whether or not the court would accept his case would be judged upon its merits. If he can meet the requirements, he is certainly allowed to bring his case. The two cases are unrelated. Unfortunately for him, Thaksin is no longer in a position to be able to change Thai laws for his own benefit, let alone international ones. The ICJ does not accept submissions from private citizens, so unless he could buy, cajole, or beg a UN organ, or an authorised agency, to make one on his behalf, he has no rights under international law to make such a submission. The Thaksin circus is near the end. The clowns have cavorted, including Jatuporn, Sae Daeng and Chavalit, although the three stooges would be a better term for those particular ones, and the ringmaster has revealed himself to be the biggest clown of all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixalex Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 complete waste of time My only suggestion is to get the blinkers off. My only suggestion to you is in the future don't even pretend you have even the remotest interest in free and fair democracy, justice, or human rights. A person who not only advocates, but also celebrates the state killing citizens on the basis of nothing besides his own feeling, his own opinion, very clearly doesn't give a rats arse about any of those things. Easy to see why you hold Thaksin in such high esteem. A man after your own heart. He is single now you know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 (edited) Ditto Wait, there was a katoey in Pattaya called herself Mavarick, could there be moonlighting? Put on the red dress darling and maybe get a quick flight to Dubai and make the old man feel at home! Edited February 22, 2010 by animatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 ^rixalex, well go ahead and marry Khun T since you are concerned about his marital status! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 Back on topic please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonrakers Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 I'm not sure that Brit is being entirely serious! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 I asked nicely to get back on topic. This time I just deleted the post but I'm getting impatient with these silly fights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 Sorry Vic! As I have stated the world court wouldnt be much help for Khun T even if they ruled in his favour. I am sure the Thai powers that be would just laff that one off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkfish Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 Thaksin didn't say exactly what he would be seeking justice for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insight Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 Thaksin didn't say exactly what he would be seeking justice for. Well the breaking news update on the other popular English language news source has a quote from him, saying something along the lines of him insisting he isn't wrong, and if the Thai court doesn't give him any justice he'll go to the "world forum", and that he's also been holiding meetings to make preparations for it pretty much every day. The paragraph above pretty much the quote is related to Friday's court case. No rules broken there I think. Preparations!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ding Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 Som Nam Na.... Hmmm so the 16 month old child killed "deserved it" according to Brit ... classic! A pretty decent run down of some of the events complete with sources..... http://www.article2.org/mainfile.php/0203/84/ Seems like Mr T should be careful what he asks for. Life isn't fair. and some should be dam_n glad of it! "The persons killed were subject neither to judicial process nor effective investigation by the authorities, whether before or after death. Meanwhile, the major players in the drug trade were left untouched. " -from link. Extra-judicial execution is antithetical to what all civilized people agree to when we consent to be governed. And someone crying for "justice" when his looted exploits may be taken away is very telling. And that his apologists approve of extra-judicial execution is telling as well. Som nam nah? Really. What arrogance blinds with such unfounded certitude? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virtualtraveller Posted February 23, 2010 Share Posted February 23, 2010 Even if there was an international court of arbitration for individuals (which there will never be since it challenges the 'sovereignty' of countries and so many would never be a willing party to its jurisdiction), it would be good for Thaksin to take his case there, and when they failed to rule in his favour would he finally shut up and stop talking about 'injustice'. Clearly we have a man here who believes a court can and should be 'favourable' to influential people, that he's special and deserves special attention. He probably also thinks that if Thailand's courts are no longer 'friendly to him', perhaps an international court will be. The fact that he's pre-empting a guilty verdict before it's out shows that he has no respect for court rulings that might not favour him. Isn't this the crux of the matter here in Thailand? Scary to think someone who thinks like this wants to return as PM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coconutmonkey Posted February 23, 2010 Share Posted February 23, 2010 ^not at all, good to get rid of drug scum. To state that you must have known personally each and every one of the 2,500 odd people killed - how else would you be able to state as fact that they were "drug scum"? Truth is noone knows who these people were, nor their crimes - if they did indeed commit any. We'll never know. That's a crime. Agreed. It's sad to think people wish so ill of their fellow human brothers and sisters. The idea of putting people in prison is barbaric...... doesn't address the real issues in any way. Lock them up..... sounds like a remnant of the medieval times...... put your political opponents in a cell where no one can hear them scream, campaign or complain. For selling drugs what's the real issue society doesn't want to face? For using drugs yourself... in your own body? Once I thought each man owned his own body. It belongs to the economy. Definition for a Narcotic....something that causes a psychoactive response, is addictive and destructive for health. Are they talking about SUGAR? or ALCOHOL? Sugar, alcohol, marijuana or car accidents? I can't recall which one kills more people. Surely if safety was the issue, something would have changed. Some people throw around the blanket term "drug" way too lightly. Maybe off the topic a little; but certainly more appropriate than championing death for fellow humans. No offense Mr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khunjamespittman Posted February 23, 2010 Share Posted February 23, 2010 Is there any reason Thaksin could not apply to the world court of justice if he does not get his desired result?The local media have done an effective smear campaign,as if it was needed. That may lead to accusations of bias in respect of his accusers. Abhisit says he would have no grounds for appeal to the WCoJ, why would that be? I would think a good international lawyer could whip up a fairly reasonable embarrassing case. Grateful if one of the many forum lawyers could answer my queries. Does anyone know for sure if Thailand is a signatory to the World Court? Many countries are not. If thailand is a signatory then there might some basis for an appeal. If not then there is an untried premise of what jurisdction the World Court might or might not have. In other words the the World Court could offer an aopiion but it would be meaningless and non-binding. regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now