Thaksin tells Al Jazeera 'we saw it coming'

[aussieinthailand]

"The "shoot to kill" is an allegation, and neither YOU or anyone else has come up with proof irrefutable that Thaksin gave that order...

Is it not possible (in fact very likely) the words uttered were different but the meaning was clear?

Yu'p get what you are saying, unfortunately law has a different take on things, that would be fact and evidence, not hear say, interpretation etc,,,

So yet again to the Thaksin haters "kill on sight" tossers, bring the evidence or shut up, that simple really.

Aussie - did you miss my post on top regarding "shoot to kill"? or just trying to ignore the evidence? or are links from Human Rights Watch not reliable enough? how about an Amnesty International source?

Here is a Press Release from Amnesty International

https://www.google.co.th/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiRiKHDtaLLAhXFCY4KHYU1CxcQFggnMAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amnesty.org%2Fdownload%2FDocuments%2F108000%2Fasa390012003en.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHegwZ8IAck5o5cnO6Z2uE8f6JBuQ

Human Rights Article

https://www.hrw.org/bs/node/230107

Time Line of Events by Human Rights (same one I posted above if you bother to read it)

https://www.hrw.org/legacy/english/docs/2004/07/07/thaila9014.htm

Shut up or you still need more proof? or are you going to ignore these evidences again?

Here's the thing, the order may well have been given, and until undeniable evidence comes too light then he should be entitled to innocent until proven guilty.

These are reports, statements and opinion's of the agencies, Although recognized and trusted agencies regardless, STILL NOT PROOF.

Now if there was indeed proof irrefutable (That would be video/audio, or signed document giving orders of the "shoot to kill" so-called policy.Then he would have mass murder charges brought against him, But there isn't right, Why? that would be the burden of proof now wouldn't it.

So yes again put up or shut up

[robblok]

"The "shoot to kill" is an allegation, and neither YOU or anyone else has come up with proof irrefutable that Thaksin gave that order...

Is it not possible (in fact very likely) the words uttered were different but the meaning was clear?

Yu'p get what you are saying, unfortunately law has a different take on things, that would be fact and evidence, not hear say, interpretation etc,,,

So yet again to the Thaksin haters "kill on sight" tossers, bring the evidence or shut up, that simple really.

Aussie - did you miss my post on top regarding "shoot to kill"? or just trying to ignore the evidence? or are links from Human Rights Watch not reliable enough? how about an Amnesty International source?

Here is a Press Release from Amnesty International

https://www.google.co.th/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiRiKHDtaLLAhXFCY4KHYU1CxcQFggnMAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amnesty.org%2Fdownload%2FDocuments%2F108000%2Fasa390012003en.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHegwZ8IAck5o5cnO6Z2uE8f6JBuQ

Human Rights Article

https://www.hrw.org/bs/node/230107

Time Line of Events by Human Rights (same one I posted above if you bother to read it)

https://www.hrw.org/legacy/english/docs/2004/07/07/thaila9014.htm

Shut up or you still need more proof? or are you going to ignore these evidences again?

Here's the thing, the order may well have been given, and until undeniable evidence comes too light then he should be entitled to innocent until proven guilty.

These are reports, statements and opinion's of the agencies, Although recognized and trusted agencies regardless, STILL NOT PROOF.

Now if there was indeed proof irrefutable (That would be video/audio, or signed document giving orders of the "shoot to kill" so-called policy.Then he would have mass murder charges brought against him, But there isn't right, Why? that would be the burden of proof now wouldn't it.

So yes again put up or shut up

So you also will understand that Abisith and Suthep are completely innocent as nobody ever gave the order to kill the protesters.. Just following your logic.. if it goes for one it should go for all. Though even Abisith and Suthep have an extra decfense it was a quick one time mistake there..not a prolonged campaign like the drug war. Thaksin should have stopped it when it became obvious innocents had died.

Just following your logic.

[candide]

"The "shoot to kill" is an allegation, and neither YOU or anyone else has come up with proof irrefutable that Thaksin gave that order...

Is it not possible (in fact very likely) the words uttered were different but the meaning was clear?

Yu'p get what you are saying, unfortunately law has a different take on things, that would be fact and evidence, not hear say, interpretation etc,,,

So yet again to the Thaksin haters "kill on sight" tossers, bring the evidence or shut up, that simple really.

Aussie - did you miss my post on top regarding "shoot to kill"? or just trying to ignore the evidence? or are links from Human Rights Watch not reliable enough? how about an Amnesty International source?

Here is a Press Release from Amnesty International

https://www.google.co.th/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiRiKHDtaLLAhXFCY4KHYU1CxcQFggnMAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amnesty.org%2Fdownload%2FDocuments%2F108000%2Fasa390012003en.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHegwZ8IAck5o5cnO6Z2uE8f6JBuQ

Human Rights Article

https://www.hrw.org/bs/node/230107

Time Line of Events by Human Rights (same one I posted above if you bother to read it)

https://www.hrw.org/legacy/english/docs/2004/07/07/thaila9014.htm

Shut up or you still need more proof? or are you going to ignore these evidences again?

Here's the thing, the order may well have been given, and until undeniable evidence comes too light then he should be entitled to innocent until proven guilty.

These are reports, statements and opinion's of the agencies, Although recognized and trusted agencies regardless, STILL NOT PROOF.

Now if there was indeed proof irrefutable (That would be video/audio, or signed document giving orders of the "shoot to kill" so-called policy.Then he would have mass murder charges brought against him, But there isn't right, Why? that would be the burden of proof now wouldn't it.

So yes again put up or shut up

So you also will understand that Abisith and Suthep are completely innocent as nobody ever gave the order to kill the protesters.. Just following your logic.. if it goes for one it should go for all. Though even Abisith and Suthep have an extra decfense it was a quick one time mistake there..not a prolonged campaign like the drug war. Thaksin should have stopped it when it became obvious innocents had died.

Just following your logic.

In order to find proof, there must be an investigation. We all know why there won't be a full investigation on this issue (for those who don't know why, just go the the Wikipedia page on Thaksin and read the beginning of the war on drug chapter).

[mike324]

"The "shoot to kill" is an allegation, and neither YOU or anyone else has come up with proof irrefutable that Thaksin gave that order...

Is it not possible (in fact very likely) the words uttered were different but the meaning was clear?

Yu'p get what you are saying, unfortunately law has a different take on things, that would be fact and evidence, not hear say, interpretation etc,,,

So yet again to the Thaksin haters "kill on sight" tossers, bring the evidence or shut up, that simple really.

Aussie - did you miss my post on top regarding "shoot to kill"? or just trying to ignore the evidence? or are links from Human Rights Watch not reliable enough? how about an Amnesty International source?

Here is a Press Release from Amnesty International

https://www.google.co.th/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiRiKHDtaLLAhXFCY4KHYU1CxcQFggnMAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amnesty.org%2Fdownload%2FDocuments%2F108000%2Fasa390012003en.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHegwZ8IAck5o5cnO6Z2uE8f6JBuQ

Human Rights Article

https://www.hrw.org/bs/node/230107

Time Line of Events by Human Rights (same one I posted above if you bother to read it)

https://www.hrw.org/legacy/english/docs/2004/07/07/thaila9014.htm

Shut up or you still need more proof? or are you going to ignore these evidences again?

Here's the thing, the order may well have been given, and until undeniable evidence comes too light then he should be entitled to innocent until proven guilty.

These are reports, statements and opinion's of the agencies, Although recognized and trusted agencies regardless, STILL NOT PROOF.

Now if there was indeed proof irrefutable (That would be video/audio, or signed document giving orders of the "shoot to kill" so-called policy.Then he would have mass murder charges brought against him, But there isn't right, Why? that would be the burden of proof now wouldn't it.

So yes again put up or shut up

These are reports which quotes directly from Thaksins mouth, not "opinions", you think Amnesty and HR is in the business to make things up? Guess you also think all is well and jolly in North Korea too! People are all rich and living in prosperity like the dear leader claims ...I wonder if you even know whats going on in North Korea.

You claim these are recognized and trusted agencies, but you don't accept what they report! Still brushing it aside ....I see?

Here is official translated copy of Thaksins speech when he launch the campaign http://pioneer.netserv.chula.ac.th/~ppasuk/t2/thaksinspeechondrugwar14january2003.pdf

The shoot to kill is not in this speech, he said it another time. But here he mentions rewards, no mercy, controversial quote that there is nothing under the sun a police cannot do. Lots of red flags in his speech alone, though I agree nothing in there to charge him.

Official Prime Minister Order for War on Drug https://www.hrw.org/reports/2004/thailand0704/7.htm

Nothing wrong with the order, just putting it out there - memo for the campaign

Here is another link from Human Rights quoting more of what he says https://www.hrw.org/reports/2004/thailand0704/4.htm#_ftnref10

The following quotes are from when he spoke with reporters:

“In this war, drug dealers must die,” Thaksin said

"From now on if their trafficking caravans enter our soil, we won't waste our time arresting them, but we will simply kill them," he told reporters on Wednesday. (this was talking about drug problems involving flow of drugs from Burma)

Based from his speech to the public alone, its enough to show and prove the excessive force and shoot to kill policy he has implemented. These remarks were made when he was doing interviews with reporters, therefore its not on video or signed document.

If someone makes a threat to you saying he will kill you, does that person needs to put it in writting and sign it? does that person need to video tape himself as proof that he is serious? In any developed country, that would be enough to put the person behind bars!

I have even more sources and evidence regarding to police that were put on trial and investigations into the War on Drugs what type of orders were given. But they are all news citation, useless to show you as its not a signed or video proof. "Innocent Until Proven Guilty" does not work in Thailand and many parts of the world were laws are not strictly enforce - Do you think Kim Jong Un and Mugabe are all innocent until proven guilty too?

Its quite silly you demand video proof or signed documents even with citations from reputable agencies and news sources...but I guess I should shut up if you can't take in the mounting evidence I showed you ...I'm just Have a goood day Mr. Put Up or Shutup

[mike324]

In order to find proof, there must be an investigation. We all know why there won't be a full investigation on this issue (for those who don't know why, just go the the Wikipedia page on Thaksin and read the beginning of the war on drug chapter).

The proof is out there with independent investigations by journalist. There was even a trial back then sentencing 6 police to death and life in prison, although they got their charges some were said to be released on bail. Thaksins administration said of the 2500 death, only 35 or so were caused by the police. The rest they claimed were drug dealers killing each other. A lot of the evidence was destroyed and buried by the police. Abhisits administration did try to find and bring this case to the ICC, but they could not get any concrete evidence which is not surprising.

Not sure if you were here during the campaign back in 2003, but if you watch Thai news, there were reports daily regarding to deaths and interviews with family of the deceased.

This is a good read to freshen up what really went out during the campaign http://www.asiantribune.com/news/2003/02/24/thailand-drug-war-sows-fear-bloodshed

Thailands most famous forensic expert Dr. Pornthip Rojanasunand and a very unbias one also said bullets were removed from the body and drugs were planted to make the killing look like it was a gang fighting. If the government claims so many deaths are due to gang to gang fighting, shouldn't we be seeing at least 500-600 deaths monthly due to drug related violence? But ever since the end of campaign, there has been no deaths in such high numbers.

Just want to point out, there was an investigation by the DEMS, but they couldn't get any evidence, this is what I believe. Or perhaps its also what you suggested. Either way the campaign was handled badly resulting in the loss of many innocent lives. There are also reports that many politicains from both sides were linked with the drug trade, hence evidences were destoryed and the case was shut.

[candide]

In order to find proof, there must be an investigation. We all know why there won't be a full investigation on this issue (for those who don't know why, just go the the Wikipedia page on Thaksin and read the beginning of the war on drug chapter).

The proof is out there with independent investigations by journalist. There was even a trial back then sentencing 6 police to death and life in prison, although they got their charges some were said to be released on bail. Thaksins administration said of the 2500 death, only 35 or so were caused by the police. The rest they claimed were drug dealers killing each other. A lot of the evidence was destroyed and buried by the police. Abhisits administration did try to find and bring this case to the ICC, but they could not get any concrete evidence which is not surprising.

Not sure if you were here during the campaign back in 2003, but if you watch Thai news, there were reports daily regarding to deaths and interviews with family of the deceased.

This is a good read to freshen up what really went out during the campaign http://www.asiantribune.com/news/2003/02/24/thailand-drug-war-sows-fear-bloodshed

Thailands most famous forensic expert Dr. Pornthip Rojanasunand and a very unbias one also said bullets were removed from the body and drugs were planted to make the killing look like it was a gang fighting. If the government claims so many deaths are due to gang to gang fighting, shouldn't we be seeing at least 500-600 deaths monthly due to drug related violence? But ever since the end of campaign, there has been no deaths in such high numbers.

Just want to point out, there was an investigation by the DEMS, but they couldn't get any evidence, this is what I believe. Or perhaps its also what you suggested. Either way the campaign was handled badly resulting in the loss of many innocent lives. There are also reports that many politicains from both sides were linked with the drug trade, hence evidences were destoryed and the case was shut.

Well, I have no doubt that people have been actually killed by the police, even if it may be difficult to distinguish who killed whom. I was more referring to, hmm.., the unknown level of verticality in this war on drugs.

[NCFC]

He's back!

Well,sort of.

He never left, the only way to kill a snake is to cut its head off.

What democratic government in the world, where the PM is able to put his family and friends who have little or no political experience in key positions of government, even to be elected as PM?

What democratic government in the world, allows vote buying, via cash or intimidation.

Most would have to be elected in by elections and state elections first, would it be believable that all of TS friends and family were elected for these positions?

What democratic government in the world, would tell the people that they are going to take from the rich and give to the poor, then move the money that was promised to the poor to shelf companies and off shore accounts

What democratic government in the world, would have a militant group of thugs and violent offenders that will go out and disrupt the opposing governments, murder supporters the opposing governments including destruction of private property and burning down shopping centers.

Why didn't the al Jazeera interviewer ask him that?

Why would al Jazeera ask a load of bol locks?

[MAJIC]

He's back!

Well,sort of.

He never left, the only way to kill a snake is to cut its head off.

What democratic government in the world, where the PM is able to put his family and friends who have little or no political experience in key positions of government, even to be elected as PM?

What democratic government in the world, allows vote buying, via cash or intimidation.

Most would have to be elected in by elections and state elections first, would it be believable that all of TS friends and family were elected for these positions?

What democratic government in the world, would tell the people that they are going to take from the rich and give to the poor, then move the money that was promised to the poor to shelf companies and off shore accounts

What democratic government in the world, would have a militant group of thugs and violent offenders that will go out and disrupt the opposing governments, murder supporters the opposing governments including destruction of private property and burning down shopping centers.

Why didn't the al Jazeera interviewer ask him that?

What democratic government in the world, where the PM is able to put his family and friends who have little or no political experience in key positions of government, even to be elected as PM?

- the US springs to mind with the Kennedy, Bush, Clinton dynasties.

What democratic government in the world, allows vote buying, via cash or intimidation.

- the US and UK are two obvious examples they call a lot of it lobbying

What democratic government in the world, would tell the people that they are going to take from the rich and give to the poor, then move the money that was promised to the poor to shelf companies and off shore accounts

- cannot think of a single recent US president or UK prime minister that has not been a multi-millionaire after after a stint in a modestly paid job

What democratic government in the world, where the PM is able to put his faoob mily and friends who have little or no political experience in key positions of government, even to be elected as PM?

MAJIC said;

Politics the only job where no experience is needed,no qualifications either,and you vote your own pay rise (or you used to) and loyalties are sold wholesale! not forgetting the seat in the house of Lords,a licence to print your own money! or turn up for work and get £300 (15500 baht a day)

for having a good snooze!