Nisa Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Any word on the company and/or van driver having a legal license to transport people for a fee as is required in Thailand? If they didn't have one would this make them automatically responsible too? My understanding is these Vans operate pretty much unregulated as opposed to Taxis, buses, Tuk Tuks as the whole van transport business here started out illegally / underground. What even those vans that seem to be marked up with 'BMA' stickers/papers and the like? Lol, yea that is what I said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
473geo Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 If law is introduced to make seatbelts mandatory on coaches, and these type of minibus, then the deaths of these unfortunate people will have brought about a change that in time could save thousands of lives........surely this is where we should be using any influence we feel we may have. To raise some good from this carnage. and maybe the number of lives saved could be vastly increased by getting the under-age drivers and riders off the road. Of course....any ideas how to limit the amount of under-age drivers on the road? Know how many there actually are? What type of numbers we are looking to decrease?...........in the meantime shall we try and concentrate on the areas where there can be a major and lasting change in the life expectancy of every day Thai travellers. Pick a school, any school in Thailand. Stand outside between 1500-1600 hours any school day. If you think that the school that you picked is anywhere near average, count the number of obviously under-age riders/drivers that emerge and multiply by the number of schools in Thailand. More than a million, probably. These are every day travellers. And your solution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nisa Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 (edited) In my opinion, based on what is out there now, the main causes/results of this tragic incident are: 2. The Van making an unsafe lane change You make the assumption it was an unsafe lane change on what basis? hint: there is case law in Thailand that already exist in relation to a road user who is abiding by the traffic regulations & the reasonably expect of what they can expect in relation to fellow roadusers. I will see if I can find it for you. FOR EXAMPLE: Vehicle A is waiting at a 'T' intersection & has to give way to all other vehicles. The driver of the vehicle stops and waits until all is clear & no approaching vehicles can be seen & after checking all directions turns right through the intersection. At that exact moment vehicle B travelling at high speed, well above the posted speed limit rounds a curve near the intersection & collides with the vehicle A. In this scenario, at a criminal level, was the driver of vehicle A driving unsafely? See if you can apply the above scenario to what you already know about this situation, assuming you only know what has been released thus far regarding this collision. Are you still assuming that the van was driving dangerously? What other evidence do you have of this allegation? I personally have observed that there seems to be a misunderstanding amoungst drivers on the motorway/tollway or whatever you want to call it. People seem to think they can simply travel at whatever speed they like and as they approach other vehicles from behind they can simply FLASH THEIR HIGH BEAM and force their way through without taking all due care. These same people think that if that vehicle obstructing their lane doesnt move quickly enough then they can simply swerve from lane to lane & negate the situation that way. It isnt illegal in Thailand to overtake traffic travelling in the same direction on the left hand side (on a multi-laned road) and Section 34 of the Land Traffic Act of 1979 clearly states 5 reasons when a vehicle may use other lanes other than the left hand one on a multi-laned road. What, if anything, have you seen that would suggest that the van didnt have a lawful excuse to use one of those lanes? Have you not thought of the possibility that it was also approaching another slower moving vehicle & wanted to overtake? Please also note that the process of overtaking does not mean that posted speed limit does NOT apply. The speed limit cannot be exceeded by anyone who doesnt have an exemption under the act. I wonder what your definition of 'Driving Dangerously' actually is. Here you are nominating a deceased person to having had changed lanes dangerously, yet you are vigerously defending another person who at the outset of various reports appears to have been driving in a manner more extreme than this alleged illegal lane change? Are you now not doing to the deceased minivan driver what you have so vigerously accusing others of doing in relation to the other driver? Lol, yea that is what I said. If it takes you this much verbage to make a baseless point or ask ridiculous questions based on an out of context / partial post you are quoting of mine then you should rethink your motivations and/or point. Edited January 1, 2011 by Nisa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neverdie Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Lol, yea that is what I said. in the out of context / partial post you are quoting of mine. My apologies, delete the word 'dangerous' and insert 'unsafe'. That wasnt an intended mistake on my behalf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neverdie Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 (edited) No, now that you've edited that previous post of yours, what you are saying in reply isnt right. You made a series of points and I asked you about one of them. Nothing more, nothing less. Edited January 1, 2011 by neverdie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BwindiBoy Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 It's not like reckless Van drivers are unknown in Thailand. The girl looks like she's for certain guilty of driving without a licence, but neither that, nor her parents' station makes her at fault for the accident. Let the investigation play out. Wrong! Driving without a licence means that you don't know what you are doing, and in any accident that you are involved in, legally it has to be your fault, unless of course licences are now superfluous. Moreover she was too young to be driving in this country. Investigation or no! Unless it is going to be suddenly discovered that she has a special dispensation to drive at the age of 16 along with special training. In Thailand, driving with or with out a license says nothing about knowing what you are doing. I have seen ten year olds drive better than some people on Thai roads. The girl is guilty of driving without a license, but that doesn't mean she caused the accident. Ridiculous comment - proximate cause = the unlicensed, underage girl drove the car. Without that happening that particular accident wouldn't have happened. Ergo, it IS her fault! Comprende??!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mightyharriss Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 (edited) A lot of BS remarks from certain TV member on this and another thread... I can't believe people defending this girl that was so obviously in the wrong(if only for driving under age, without a licence) and by her mothers own admission SPEEDING .... Something that should be done is also to check her BB records for calls made/received and texts leading up to the time of the accident. There may be some interesting reading there also Edited January 1, 2011 by mightyharriss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzMick Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 and maybe the number of lives saved could be vastly increased by getting the under-age drivers and riders off the road. Of course....any ideas how to limit the amount of under-age drivers on the road? Know how many there actually are? What type of numbers we are looking to decrease?...........in the meantime shall we try and concentrate on the areas where there can be a major and lasting change in the life expectancy of every day Thai travellers. Pick a school, any school in Thailand. Stand outside between 1500-1600 hours any school day. If you think that the school that you picked is anywhere near average, count the number of obviously under-age riders/drivers that emerge and multiply by the number of schools in Thailand. More than a million, probably. These are every day travellers. And your solution? As many schools have a cop directing traffic at this time, perhaps he could multi-task a little. If the parents have a choice of B10 for the songthao or a B500 fine that their brat brings home on a regular basis, you would see change. Add mandatory vehicle confiscation for a 3rd offence, and even the rich will think twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojaco Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 How is it that her age has increased, at least in your post, when others are suggesting the opposite, that it is in fact only 15? The unnamed girl, who said for the first time that she was 17 years of age, was however cautious when answering questions on aspects that may put her at a disadvantage legally. News Clipping post from The Nation Just for general information - Thai young people almost ALWAYS promote their age to the age they will become in the current year. For example, if she actually becomes 17 on October 23, 2011, once January 1, 2011 comes, she would say "I am 17" but would have been saying "I am 16" all year long during 2010. You have to ask Thai young people "Are you FULLY 17?" to get the actual age they currently are (according to western custom.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywais Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Just for general information - Thai young people almost ALWAYS promote their age to the age they will become in the current year. Yes, but not always young people. The first "girl" I was with for 3 years in Thailand said she was 40 but ID was 39. Quite a switch from westerners who will be 39 for a few years. Came across this a few more times as Thais consider their first birth year to be 1 year old already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ginjag Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 The last comment is either meant as a joke or is an indication of a damaged mind. The power and influence that this family commands supercedes minor greed by an astronomical proportion - the suggestion that it would influence against the girl is inane. Interesting because if this was another minor without this last name, we wouldn't even know her name since it is illegal to name a minor the way the press has. Seems a cover-up, if one was going to take place, would have started with us not even knowing she was from an influential family. I,m sorry but I,m still not understanding where you coming from Nisa--minor--kids-child. why can,t you say young adult-befor you comment further. Or does the young ladies parents see her as a kid child minor--if anyone speaks NOT legally--minor would elude to something like under 11. juvenile up to 15 approx-young lady seems more fittin here. I said before this kiddy talk is silly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
473geo Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Pick a school, any school in Thailand. Stand outside between 1500-1600 hours any school day. If you think that the school that you picked is anywhere near average, count the number of obviously under-age riders/drivers that emerge and multiply by the number of schools in Thailand. More than a million, probably. These are every day travellers. And your solution? As many schools have a cop directing traffic at this time, perhaps he could multi-task a little. If the parents have a choice of B10 for the songthao or a B500 fine that their brat brings home on a regular basis, you would see change. Add mandatory vehicle confiscation for a 3rd offence, and even the rich will think twice. A fair suggestion for improvement, a major overhaul is clearly required in the school transportation system, perhaps the confiscated vehicles could be auctioned to provide funds for additional safer school transport. Maybe a government intiative to mobilise free school transport, in regulated and safe vehicles, would assist in breaking the under-age motorcycle driving. A small charge could perhaps be implemented later. I thank you for your positive input, maybe somebody out there will pick up and is able to influence the changes required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 In Thailand, driving with or with out a license says nothing about knowing what you are doing. I have seen ten year olds drive better than some people on Thai roads. The girl is guilty of driving without a license, but that doesn't mean she caused the accident. Ridiculous comment - proximate cause = the unlicensed, underage girl drove the car. Without that happening that particular accident wouldn't have happened. Ergo, it IS her fault! Comprende??!! Is that the standard "It's the farang's fault because if he wasn't there then there wouldn't be an accident" type of comment? Yes, she was unlicensed. That doesn't make it automatically her fault. She may have been a better driver than a lot of licensed drivers out there. I am not saying she didn't cause the accident. But just because she was unlicensed doesn't make her the cause of the accident. I know that driving on the expressways and major roads on Thailand, many cars will change into a new lane even though they are going much slower than the traffic in the lane. This means the cars in the new lane have to brake heavily to avoid running into the back of the car changing lanes. A driver (whether licensed or not) would sometimes have difficulty slowing down in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mightyharriss Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 "Maybe we should also be blaming the toll booth operator that let the under age driver on to said toll way " this may be a tongue in cheek remark By mothers admission in this latest statement the daughter was speeding, so she has to shoulder some blame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nisa Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 (edited) The last comment is either meant as a joke or is an indication of a damaged mind. The power and influence that this family commands supercedes minor greed by an astronomical proportion - the suggestion that it would influence against the girl is inane. Interesting because if this was another minor without this last name, we wouldn't even know her name since it is illegal to name a minor the way the press has. Seems a cover-up, if one was going to take place, would have started with us not even knowing she was from an influential family. I,m sorry but I,m still not understanding where you coming from Nisa--minor--kids-child. why can,t you say young adult-befor you comment further. Or does the young ladies parents see her as a kid child minor--if anyone speaks NOT legally--minor would elude to something like under 11. juvenile up to 15 approx-young lady seems more fittin here. I said before this kiddy talk is silly I have no clue what you are trying to say as she IS A MINOR, she is NOT AN ADULT ... this is both a legal definition and one you will find in a dictionary. As a minor, it is against the law to publish their name when they are accused of a crime and/or have authorities release their name under other circumstances where it would be okay to publish the name of an adult. Not sure what you are not getting here and why you want me to change my very accurate term in referring to her as a minor to something is is incorrect as she is neither an Adult or a Young Adult. EDIT: (below) See: http://thesaurus.com/browse/minor Part of Speech:noun Definition: person under legal age of maturity Synonyms:adolescent, baby, boy, child, girl, infant, junior,juvenile, lad, little one, schoolboy, schoolgirl,teenager, underage, youngster, youth Antonyms adult http://dictionary.re...om/browse/minor –noun 9. a person under the legal age of full responsibility. 10. a person of inferior rank or importance in a specified group,class, etc. and http://dictionary.ca...british/minor_3 minor noun /ˈmaɪ.nər//-nɚ/ [C] legalsomeone who is too young to have the legal responsibilities of an adult Edited January 1, 2011 by Nisa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nisa Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 By mothers admission in this latest statement the daughter was speeding, so she has to shoulder some blame I have not seen anybody dispute this here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nisa Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Just for general information - Thai young people almost ALWAYS promote their age to the age they will become in the current year. Yes, but not always young people. The first "girl" I was with for 3 years in Thailand said she was 40 but ID was 39. Quite a switch from westerners who will be 39 for a few years. Came across this a few more times as Thais consider their first birth year to be 1 year old already. So, do you two think she is 17 as she stated in the interview by her or 16 as the police initially reported? Based on your input, I am now thinking she may be 16 again since I would assume those initial reports were based on the ID she produced after the accident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywais Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 So, do you two think she is 17 as she stated in the interview by her or 16 as the police initially reported? Based on your input, I am now thinking she may be 16 again since I would assume those initial reports were based on the ID she produced after the accident. I would also assume that the original reported age would have been from her ID card. The information is pretty much a roller coaster ride. Wonder if a photo of her ID has been posted somewhere as they do with many cases. Being a minor they shouldn't, but hasn't stopped them from posting her full name and photo. I did listen to the phone conversation and she specifically said 17 but again, is that a Thai 17 or physical 17? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misterwhisper Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 According to a report in today's "Bangkok Post" she admitted that she was speeding and not wearing a safety belt. There should be now 4 charges brought against her: 1) steering a vehicle without driving license; 2) reckless driving causing death and injury to other parties; 3) not wearing a seat belt as required by law and 4) being below the legal age of steering a sedan. Charges also must be brought against the parents for neglection of duty and against the owner of the Honda Civic for letting the girlie drive, but I am dreaming. I know, she probably will get off scot-free and pay her "penalty" out of her monthly lunch allowance. Those obscure Thai laws like "...subject to imprisonment of 2 years and/or a penalty of 50,000 Baht" were devised by a certain class of people who intentionally stressed the "and/or" for very obvious reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 According to a report in today's "Bangkok Post" she admitted that she was speeding and not wearing a safety belt. There should be now 4 charges brought against her: 1) steering a vehicle without driving license; 2) reckless driving causing death and injury to other parties; 3) not wearing a seat belt as required by law and 4) being below the legal age of steering a sedan. Charges also must be brought against the parents for neglection of duty and against the owner of the Honda Civic for letting the girlie drive, but I am dreaming. I know, she probably will get off scot-free and pay her "penalty" out of her monthly lunch allowance. Those obscure Thai laws like "...subject to imprisonment of 2 years and/or a penalty of 50,000 Baht" were devised by a certain class of people who intentionally stressed the "and/or" for very obvious reasons. "and/or" is common throughout the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BwindiBoy Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 In Thailand, driving with or with out a license says nothing about knowing what you are doing. I have seen ten year olds drive better than some people on Thai roads. The girl is guilty of driving without a license, but that doesn't mean she caused the accident. Ridiculous comment - proximate cause = the unlicensed, underage girl drove the car. Without that happening that particular accident wouldn't have happened. Ergo, it IS her fault! Comprende??!! Is that the standard "It's the farang's fault because if he wasn't there then there wouldn't be an accident" type of comment? Yes, she was unlicensed. That doesn't make it automatically her fault. She may have been a better driver than a lot of licensed drivers out there. I am not saying she didn't cause the accident. But just because she was unlicensed doesn't make her the cause of the accident. I know that driving on the expressways and major roads on Thailand, many cars will change into a new lane even though they are going much slower than the traffic in the lane. This means the cars in the new lane have to brake heavily to avoid running into the back of the car changing lanes. A driver (whether licensed or not) would sometimes have difficulty slowing down in time. I should have used the word cause, not fault. So we both now agree the accident was caused by her (because she chose to ignore / consider herself above at least two laws). And, no, this isn't the same as "farang auto guilty" just by being there...unless farang is, say, too young to legally drive...etc. As for the actual accident, i.e. the contact and why that happened (e.g. Bad lane change), who knows? Not you or me that's for sure. But we do know she had no legal right to be driving there. Unlike the other driver, at least this little girl will have the opportunity to represent herself and speak her version of events... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I should have used the word cause, not fault. So we both now agree the accident was caused by her (because she chose to ignore / consider herself above at least two laws). And, no, this isn't the same as "farang auto guilty" just by being there...unless farang is, say, too young to legally drive...etc. As for the actual accident, i.e. the contact and why that happened (e.g. Bad lane change), who knows? Not you or me that's for sure. But we do know she had no legal right to be driving there. Unlike the other driver, at least this little girl will have the opportunity to represent herself and speak her version of events... If someone ran up her back, would she have been at fault / been the cause, just because she was unlicensed? She appears to be at fault since she was apparently speeding and because she apparently hit the van, not because she was unlicensed. That is a separate issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nisa Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 (edited) According to a report in today's "Bangkok Post" she admitted that she was speeding and not wearing a safety belt. There should be now 4 charges brought against her: 1) steering a vehicle without driving license; 2) reckless driving causing death and injury to other parties; 3) not wearing a seat belt as required by law and 4) being below the legal age of steering a sedan. Charges also must be brought against the parents for neglection of duty and against the owner of the Honda Civic for letting the girlie drive, but I am dreaming. I know, she probably will get off scot-free and pay her "penalty" out of her monthly lunch allowance. Those obscure Thai laws like "...subject to imprisonment of 2 years and/or a penalty of 50,000 Baht" were devised by a certain class of people who intentionally stressed the "and/or" for very obvious reasons. Not sure how they define "reckless driving" in Thailand but speeding doesn't usually automatically mean you can be charged with reckless driving. I believe in California you can be classified as reckless if you are going more than 20 MPH over the speed limit but reckless generally means you are driving a vehicle in a 'reckless" manner which doesn't mean simply speeding above the posted limit. If this was the case their would be no need to issue speeding tickets as they can all be charged with "reckless driving" But again, not sure of the laws here as it pertains to reckless driving. As for fines and/or imprisonment consequences this is common in most countries (fair or not) and it is not something obscure but VERY common. "Subject to" is also not obscure and again most countries have maximum penalties that certainly are not usually handed out especially depending on the circumstances such as being a minor, admittance of guilt (not going to trial), remorse and so on. Also, I doubt there is a separate charge for driving under the legal age. If there is then I think she will be charged with one and not both. Again, not sure about the laws here but to use California as an example again; When speeding you can be charged with "driving at an unsafe speed" or you can be charged with "driving above the posted limit" not both. There is also a law regarding needing to carry your license when you drive but I doubt she will be charged with this too since it would be redundant as well. But I understand what you are trying to say ... you want the book thrown at this young person because you see her as being one of the Elite. Edited January 1, 2011 by Nisa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojaco Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 So, do you two think she is 17 as she stated in the interview by her or 16 as the police initially reported? Based on your input, I am now thinking she may be 16 again since I would assume those initial reports were based on the ID she produced after the accident. I would also assume that the original reported age would have been from her ID card. The information is pretty much a roller coaster ride. Wonder if a photo of her ID has been posted somewhere as they do with many cases. Being a minor they shouldn't, but hasn't stopped them from posting her full name and photo. I did listen to the phone conversation and she specifically said 17 but again, is that a Thai 17 or physical 17? I just found from http://directorythailand.speedywap.net/ that she was born June 30, 2537 so that would make her 16 years old until June 30 of this year. (ประวัติแพรวา หรือ อรชร เทพหัสดิน ณ อยุธยา อายุ 16 ปี เกิดวันที่ 30 มิถุนายน 2537 ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaikahuna Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 And the families of the dead get nothing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojaco Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Keep in mind this is Thailand where 95% of the population are Buddhists and don't have the same thirst for revenge or eye-for-an-eye mentality and are much more forgiving and understanding than much of the western societies. I have been in Thailand 16 years, and 100% of the time with Thai people. They ALL warn that "Thai people WILL get even . . . even if it takes years". This because the only way to "gain face" back is to "get even", and "face" is all important in Thailand. So Nisa, you are very wrong on this particular concept of yours. Of course, this is against the Buddhist teachings . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lannarebirth Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Per capita Thailand rates 47 out the top 60 countries for when it comes to number of crimes. Per capita Thailand rates number 29 out of 31 for number of executions. Per capita Thailand rates number 44 out of 57 for number of assaults. You know Nisa, just because the police refuse to respond when a crime occurs doesn't mean it didn't happen. Most Thais know better than to even call them when they've been the victim of a crime, so as not to be victimized twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
473geo Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Keep in mind this is Thailand where 95% of the population are Buddhists and don't have the same thirst for revenge or eye-for-an-eye mentality and are much more forgiving and understanding than much of the western societies. I have been in Thailand 16 years, and 100% of the time with Thai people. They ALL warn that "Thai people WILL get even . . . even if it takes years". This because the only way to "gain face" back is to "get even", and "face" is all important in Thailand. So Nisa, you are very wrong on this particular concept of yours. Of course, this is against the Buddhist teachings . . . To get even can take many many forms, at times you can just wait, not always about vindictive harmful revenge. An example, somebody fails to repay a loan, years later they are desperate for cash and make a request on you.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojaco Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Per capita Thailand rates 47 out the top 60 countries for when it comes to number of crimes. Per capita Thailand rates number 29 out of 31 for number of executions. Per capita Thailand rates number 44 out of 57 for number of assaults. You know Nisa, just because the police refuse to respond when a crime occurs doesn't mean it didn't happen. Most Thais know better than to even call them when they've been the victim of a crime, so as not to be victimized twice. VERY VERY VERY TRUE!!! +100 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai at Heart Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 (edited) People tend to project their own thoughts and feelings upon others especially when it comes to things they don't understand.. 95% (or nearly) of Thais are Buddhists. This is a fact easily verified as is the teachings of Buddhism on these matters. Per capita the US and Russia have a bout double the number of people imprisoned than Thailand. Per capita Thailand rates 47 out the top 60 countries for when it comes to number of crimes. Per capita Thailand rates number 29 out of 31 for number of executions. Per capita Thailand rates number 44 out of 57 for number of assaults. Per capita Thailand rates number 63 out of 81 for number of robberies. The only place I could really see they fell short was on murders where Thailand rated 14 out of 62 but since these stats are about a decade old it could be the war in the south and/or Thaksin's war on drugs that skewed this number.. In no way did I say Thailand was perfect all forgiving and without hatred but I simply compared it to other western societies and this is a very unfair comparison since Thailand is at best a newly or developing industrialized nation. Ergo, being buddhist makes people very law abiding, non violent and respectful of the law?????????????? Oh, and I thought we were discussing Thai culture for a second. Edited January 1, 2011 by Thai at Heart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts