 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Alleged?
editWas Naw Kham the actual leader of the trafficking ring or was he just accused of being so? In other words, did he admit to his crimes? I would be curious to know, as it pertains to the language in this article. Also, it would help to have a source for the first sentence besides a news network run by the Chinese State Administration of Radio, Film and Television. Cheers, ask123 (talk) 20:47, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
- So you would rather have a source that's controlled by the same people that's funding your politicians? Be my guest. 184.64.81.44 (talk) 03:05, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
- "Confession" is something they always tout in China. Why anyone in this day would believe a confession while in the hands of the authorities in China is beyond me. In fact, given that the end result was that China is now jointly patrolling an area not in their territory but that is very useful as a shipping/trade waterway, I would not be at all surprised if it was the Chinese government themselves who set this whole thing up so that they could make justified incursion into the area. Added to that the benefit of being able to drum up nationalistic tendencies already strong in the country, where they are told the whole world has discriminated against them for ever and is afraid of their new power. It's a win-win for them. I have no doubt that Naw Kham was guilty of this and worse and have no sympathy for him, but I suspect the crime in this case at least goes a lot deeper than just some easily caught pirates.24.85.252.83 (talk) 19:55, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
- Baseless conspiracy theories with no actual proof. 95.180.83.114 (talk) 14:20, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- "Confession" is something they always tout in China. Why anyone in this day would believe a confession while in the hands of the authorities in China is beyond me. In fact, given that the end result was that China is now jointly patrolling an area not in their territory but that is very useful as a shipping/trade waterway, I would not be at all surprised if it was the Chinese government themselves who set this whole thing up so that they could make justified incursion into the area. Added to that the benefit of being able to drum up nationalistic tendencies already strong in the country, where they are told the whole world has discriminated against them for ever and is afraid of their new power. It's a win-win for them. I have no doubt that Naw Kham was guilty of this and worse and have no sympathy for him, but I suspect the crime in this case at least goes a lot deeper than just some easily caught pirates.24.85.252.83 (talk) 19:55, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Naw Kham. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121227174728/http://mizzima.com/news/regional/8639-burmese-drug-lords-final-appeal-rejected.html to http://www.mizzima.com/news/regional/8639-burmese-drug-lords-final-appeal-rejected.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:51, 27 November 2017 (UTC)