Bangkok Criminal Court Concludes Army Killed 14-Year-Old Boy During 2010 Violence

[masaomi]

Close to another casulity, whose death was already ruled, as military caused. Sounds like Thai logic to me.

*duh! So what's your logic then?

[masaomi]

Most people on this forum cannot reason anymore when it comes to this matter or the Thaksin subject in general.

Most of the comments, blindly supporting the yellows, Abhisit or the army, seem irrational...

Some people might say that these comments are just written by people who do not have the intellectual capabilities to analyze and comment on complex subjects... Could it be?

Even when a boy was shot in the back by the army, members on this forum will still find countless ways to put the blame on the reds, on the boy himself or his (inexistent) family, on Thaksin, on fate, on the stupidity of the demontrators ("This boy obviously run into the army's bullets while he knew very well he should have been at school"), ... T

They will always find an excuse to convince us that the army and the Abhisit government did a great job in dispersing these demonstrators, and that 90 deaths was totally reasonable taking into account the situation, ... and that, ... , euh, ... well if you don't agree, just shut up, ok?

If they could, they would even try to link the death of that boy (and all the others) to Chalerm or Yingluck.

They fully agree with the court decisions when it suits their version of the drama . They quickly praise the court when the reds are in trouble. They applaud the judges when the verdict is in favor of the yellows. But then, they come up with all sorts of speculation when the court favors the Thaksin camp and the reds. They, of course, close their eyes when the court is lenient in the yellow cases that started it all...

In this case, there were people injured and killed on both sides...

The funny thing is that as soon as the court will say that one soldier lost his nail while performing his duty to protect the citizens and restore order, most people here will say that Thaksin should be held responsible and thrown in jail for the rest of his life (together with his sister if possible).

I so totally agree with you! These people, as we say are like Devils citing scriptures from the bible for their own purpose! They are also the judge, jury & executioner with ridiculous sense of reasoning! I quote"no red no deaths" So I ask: "No yellow No Airport closure"?? DUMB!!

[NoshowJones]

Kunakorn was said to be in the vicinity of taxi driver Phan Kamkong

Sad, parental guidance failed. The boy should have been at home, not wandering about in a danger zone.

BTW May, 15th.? Was this in the 'live fire' zone on Ratchaprarop ?

When people carry on the way the red shirts did, then innocent people are always going to suffer. If a lot of Thai people are stupid enough to allow their children to ride motorbikes, then they will not have the common sense to keep them out of danger zones.

[NoshowJones]

And again , how given the order !!??

Whom gave the order for the Red Shirt to occupy central Bangkok and set fire on the town?

Whom payed for it.

Whoever it was must take the blame for all the deaths,destruction etc, and, if caught and found guilty, should be put in prison for life.

[Baerboxer]

Most people on this forum cannot reason anymore when it comes to this matter or the Thaksin subject in general.

Most of the comments, blindly supporting the yellows, Abhisit or the army, seem irrational...

Some people might say that these comments are just written by people who do not have the intellectual capabilities to analyze and comment on complex subjects... Could it be?

Even when a boy was shot in the back by the army, members on this forum will still find countless ways to put the blame on the reds, on the boy himself or his (inexistent) family, on Thaksin, on fate, on the stupidity of the demontrators ("This boy obviously run into the army's bullets while he knew very well he should have been at school"), ... T

They will always find an excuse to convince us that the army and the Abhisit government did a great job in dispersing these demonstrators, and that 90 deaths was totally reasonable taking into account the situation, ... and that, ... , euh, ... well if you don't agree, just shut up, ok?

If they could, they would even try to link the death of that boy (and all the others) to Chalerm or Yingluck.

They fully agree with the court decisions when it suits their version of the drama . They quickly praise the court when the reds are in trouble. They applaud the judges when the verdict is in favor of the yellows. But then, they come up with all sorts of speculation when the court favors the Thaksin camp and the reds. They, of course, close their eyes when the court is lenient in the yellow cases that started it all...

In this case, there were people injured and killed on both sides...

The funny thing is that as soon as the court will say that one soldier lost his nail while performing his duty to protect the citizens and restore order, most people here will say that Thaksin should be held responsible and thrown in jail for the rest of his life (together with his sister if possible).

I so totally agree with you! These people, as we say are like Devils citing scriptures from the bible for their own purpose! They are also the judge, jury & executioner with ridiculously absurd sense of reasoning! I quote them: "no reds no deaths" So I ask: "No yellow No Airport Closure"?? DUMB Bias Morons!!

To use your terminology - this is a good contender for the dumbest post of 2012! If the Reds had not been engaged in a violent and destructive illegal riot then there would not have been a any deaths, correct. If the Yellows had not illegally occupied the airport, the aiport would not have closed, correct.

Can you work out what is missing? Try the rule of law enforced by a professional police service for starters.

What is really sad is that an innocent young life has been needlesly lost. Rather than mourn and look at rectftying the many underlying ills that contributed, many prefer to finger point and look for a scapegoat; or even worse exploit it for political gain.

[DiamondKing]

Its all BS and both sides as bad as the other but when innocent people are killed people have to be held responsible and in this case AV has to be bought to trial and be judged by his peers just as Thaksin was and YES i would be scared Mr AV

I called it a crime at the time it was happening finally he is being bought to justice.

DK

Edited December 21, 2012 by DiamondKing

[whybother]

Its all BS and both sides as bad as the other but when innocent people are killed people have to be held responsible and in this case AV has to be bought to trial and be judged by his peers just as Thaksin was and YES i would be scared Mr AV

I called it a crime at the time it was happening finally he is being bought to justice.

DK

"as Thaksin was" ... Thaksin ran away from all but a minor charge.

[candid]

Personally, I don't know if this little boy lived in the area or not. However, one has to ask why the army were in the area. Was it for ceremonial duties? Was it to help flooding as happened in 2011? Were they training for some future event? Such as crowd control? Surely that would be a police function. It sure is in my country.

Or were they there to move a rabble from the streets, a gang of armed idiots who had already cause deaths, destruction and fear? And who were intent on going much further in their efforts to achieve their aims. Aims which originally included a demand for new elections, to which Abhisit said OK. Flushed with success, they decided that this wasn't enough, and set about the dismantling of any vestige of normality in Bangkok.

Getting back to the little boy. If he lived in the area, then the red shirts brought their plague to his location and are thus responsible. If he came with the red shirts, they are equally responsible for his death. Let us look for the root causes of his untimely, sad demise, not only at the unhappy ending

Absolute, shameless nonsense.

The people who shot him are entirely responsible for their actions and ALL ( all the way up through the chain of command ) should be brought to court and have their day.

It is nonsense to imply it's his fault for being there, in the same way that it is equally stupid for our dutch uncle to assert that the kid died because of lack of some sort parental control....

He was shot by soldiers who were, or were not,under the full control of their officers, and if they were under the full control of their officers, then the officers too are accountable.

A full enquiry is needed and it looks like it is going to happen.

A first for Thailand that should be celebrated.

I have long regarded you as a troll, an internet warrior with nothing to do except promote hatred of the Democratic party and their leaders. However, I will be fair to you as you and your sort would change sides in a heartbeat if the Dems came to power.

A little clique, a coterie if you will, has sprung up, all baying for Abhisit's blood. As a group, you have managed to deny the existence of any aggressive behaviour in the Red Shirt camp, have chosen to ignore the fact that weapons were first used by the red shirt side, have been unable to explain the inability of the Royal Thai Police to do their job in the situation which existed in 2010 in Bangkok. Compared to how they handled the recent Pitak Siam Rally, it is obvious they were under orders to stay out of the rebellion. Whose orders they were are also very apparent, but you lot chose to ignore that also.

A troll can be regarded by some as a thorn in the flesh, or maybe just a little prick. I know where I think you belong

[DiamondKing]

Personally, I don't know if this little boy lived in the area or not. However, one has to ask why the army were in the area. Was it for ceremonial duties? Was it to help flooding as happened in 2011? Were they training for some future event? Such as crowd control? Surely that would be a police function. It sure is in my country.

Or were they there to move a rabble from the streets, a gang of armed idiots who had already cause deaths, destruction and fear? And who were intent on going much further in their efforts to achieve their aims. Aims which originally included a demand for new elections, to which Abhisit said OK. Flushed with success, they decided that this wasn't enough, and set about the dismantling of any vestige of normality in Bangkok.

Getting back to the little boy. If he lived in the area, then the red shirts brought their plague to his location and are thus responsible. If he came with the red shirts, they are equally responsible for his death. Let us look for the root causes of his untimely, sad demise, not only at the unhappy ending

Absolute, shameless nonsense.

The people who shot him are entirely responsible for their actions and ALL ( all the way up through the chain of command ) should be brought to court and have their day.

It is nonsense to imply it's his fault for being there, in the same way that it is equally stupid for our dutch uncle to assert that the kid died because of lack of some sort parental control....

He was shot by soldiers who were, or were not,under the full control of their officers, and if they were under the full control of their officers, then the officers too are accountable.

A full enquiry is needed and it looks like it is going to happen.

A first for Thailand that should be celebrated.

A troll can be regarded by some as a thorn in the flesh, or maybe just a little prick. I know where I think you belong

Sounds Like it is where you belong

Edited December 21, 2012 by DiamondKing

[gerry1011]

Surely it is a sad event when a 14 year old boy loses his life in a senseless civil uprising.

The question would arise as to whether the army were rightful in firing upon the vehicle in which he was traveling.

I can't imagine any off course vehicle happening to drive through a no-go live fire zone. It would seem that the driver knew that he was running the gauntlet and risking being fired upon.

That being the case,... what role did the boy's parents play in allowing him to be in that truck with such a driver traveling through a live fire zone?

At the end of the day the army riflemen could not have known that a 14 year old boy was inside the vehicle. I would imagine also that Mr Abhisit could not have had any prior knowledge of those facts either!

All of that said,...none of it matters to the witch hunters that are running this Kangaroo Court!

Umf... Well, it seems that the level of reasoning and analysis in the posts on this forum is even worse than what I thought

We are presented a totaly new version of the facts here. Interesting

[gerry1011]

where was the boy from and did he receive 500 baht to attend the rally?

who funded the rally? who fueled the rally? who spawned the terror and

threatened to burn down the city including Siriraj hospital?

which soldier fired the shot and how can they prove it?

how can someone that has no respect for Thai law or it's courts be using

them for his own personal gain at again the expense of the Kingdom?

disgusting what this government will allow in the name of personal gain and profit.

Some people just cannot read the thread can they and if they could they would know the story of the boy who was an orphan with learning disabilites and had NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PROTESTS just an inncent bystander GUNNED down by the Militarys barrage of fire at a Van and stray bullets killed the poor kid

I am speechless

I wonder who had learning disabilities...

[khunken]

A boy was shot by the military - I accept that. But I cannot accept some of the rabid posts saying or implying that it was deliberate. There is no proof that it was anything other than an unfortunate boy caught in a live fire zone.

Then there is the equally raving posts that Abhisit gave the order to fire. Again no proof, just hate. One post even said he was responsible for all 90+ deaths. Ignorance has no ethnic boundaries & certainly not on TV.

No doubt this will be used by the Tarit body, under PTP control as further ammunition (sic) to try to stop Abhisit from opposing the Thaksin amnesty. Robert Mugabe must be proud of how Thaksin's mob are following his methods.

[Lormaak]

A boy was shot by the military - I accept that. But I cannot accept some of the rabid posts saying or implying that it was deliberate. There is no proof that it was anything other than an unfortunate boy caught in a live fire zone.

Then there is the equally raving posts that Abhisit gave the order to fire. Again no proof, just hate. One post even said he was responsible for all 90+ deaths. Ignorance has no ethnic boundaries & certainly not on TV.

No doubt this will be used by the Tarit body, under PTP control as further ammunition (sic) to try to stop Abhisit from opposing the Thaksin amnesty. Robert Mugabe must be proud of how Thaksin's mob are following his methods.

What's deliberate? Is deliberate pulling the trigger or is deliberate pulling the trigger with a kid in the crosshair? I am pretty sure the trigger was pulled deliberately.

[metisdead]

A post using all caps has been removed, no need to shout, turn off your all caps when posting, your post has a better chance of not being deleted. Other derogatory posts and replies have been removed as well.

[khunken]

A boy was shot by the military - I accept that. But I cannot accept some of the rabid posts saying or implying that it was deliberate. There is no proof that it was anything other than an unfortunate boy caught in a live fire zone.

Then there is the equally raving posts that Abhisit gave the order to fire. Again no proof, just hate. One post even said he was responsible for all 90+ deaths. Ignorance has no ethnic boundaries & certainly not on TV.

No doubt this will be used by the Tarit body, under PTP control as further ammunition (sic) to try to stop Abhisit from opposing the Thaksin amnesty. Robert Mugabe must be proud of how Thaksin's mob are following his methods.

What's deliberate? Is deliberate pulling the trigger or is deliberate pulling the trigger with a kid in the crosshair? I am pretty sure the trigger was pulled deliberately.

Well, in that case the original post applies. Crosshairs? ridiculous. These were not snipers and while it is perfectly obvious that the trigger was pulled deliberately there is no proof that the boy was shot deliberately. You are just mincing words or trolling.

Edited December 21, 2012 by khunken

[Lormaak]

A boy was shot by the military - I accept that. But I cannot accept some of the rabid posts saying or implying that it was deliberate. There is no proof that it was anything other than an unfortunate boy caught in a live fire zone.

Then there is the equally raving posts that Abhisit gave the order to fire. Again no proof, just hate. One post even said he was responsible for all 90+ deaths. Ignorance has no ethnic boundaries & certainly not on TV.

No doubt this will be used by the Tarit body, under PTP control as further ammunition (sic) to try to stop Abhisit from opposing the Thaksin amnesty. Robert Mugabe must be proud of how Thaksin's mob are following his methods.

What's deliberate? Is deliberate pulling the trigger or is deliberate pulling the trigger with a kid in the crosshair? I am pretty sure the trigger was pulled deliberately.

Well, in that case the original post applies. Crosshairs? ridiculous. These were not snipers and while it is perfectly obvious that the trigger was pulled deliberately there is no proof that the boy was shot deliberately. You are just mincing words or trolling.

No. I'm serious. Fair enough, open sights were mostly used. I'm just making the point that a spray of bullets can only be seen as a deliberate attempt to kill. The fact that the victim wasn't targeted directly doesn't mean that killing wasn't intended, and this is why the action was wholly inappropriate. I genuinely feel sorry for the poor guys who got given their guns and ammo and told to shoot on fellow citizens. I hope those that sanctioned this are brought to justice.

And just to be clear, I also wish for those that were responsible for innocents, including children, killed in 2003 to be brought to justice as well.

[khunken]

A boy was shot by the military - I accept that. But I cannot accept some of the rabid posts saying or implying that it was deliberate. There is no proof that it was anything other than an unfortunate boy caught in a live fire zone.

Then there is the equally raving posts that Abhisit gave the order to fire. Again no proof, just hate. One post even said he was responsible for all 90+ deaths. Ignorance has no ethnic boundaries & certainly not on TV.

No doubt this will be used by the Tarit body, under PTP control as further ammunition (sic) to try to stop Abhisit from opposing the Thaksin amnesty. Robert Mugabe must be proud of how Thaksin's mob are following his methods.

What's deliberate? Is deliberate pulling the trigger or is deliberate pulling the trigger with a kid in the crosshair? I am pretty sure the trigger was pulled deliberately.

Well, in that case the original post applies. Crosshairs? ridiculous. These were not snipers and while it is perfectly obvious that the trigger was pulled deliberately there is no proof that the boy was shot deliberately. You are just mincing words or trolling.

No. I'm serious. Fair enough, open sights were mostly used. I'm just making the point that a spray of bullets can only be seen as a deliberate attempt to kill. The fact that the victim wasn't targeted directly doesn't mean that killing wasn't intended, and this is why the action was wholly inappropriate. I genuinely feel sorry for the poor guys who got given their guns and ammo and told to shoot on fellow citizens. I hope those that sanctioned this are brought to justice.

And just to be clear, I also wish for those that were responsible for innocents, including children, killed in 2003 to be brought to justice as well.

Ok not trolling. There is a snowballs chance that anyone connected with the Thaksin dynasty will be brought to trial. I take it you are referring to the 'war on drugs' when, much later, people were asked to come forward, very few did - out of fear.

Sure, firing a gun is an intent to kill or injure, in this case someone who had broken a curfew. The dead boy got caught in the firing so there is no way it is murder as there is no proof he was a target.

The person or persons who gave the order to use the army were forced to do so by (a) armed protestors who had already killed army personnel & ( a police force who walked off the job. If that person is going to be charged with whatever the PTP mob wants, the person who organised the armed protestors should face the same 'justice'.

[rubl]

To paraphrase another poster:

Most people on this forum cannot reason anymore when it comes to this matter or the Abhisit subject in general.

Most of the comments, blindly supporting the red-shirts, Thaksin or the UDD, seem irrational...

IMHO of course

Now back to the court's decision that this young boy was one of two unfortunate people caught in a gun volley when a van driver crashed into an area he wasn't supposed to be. Most likely an area part of the 'live fire zone' which was setup after 'peaceful' protesters showed their displeasure somewhat forcefully. Always interesting to read about gunfire EXCHANGE between the army and unarmed, peaceful protesters. The case at hand didn't have a firefight, just a van driver not stopping in an area with frightened soldiers who feared to get shot in the dark, or as some have it 'trigger happy'.

Obviously like in the doctored tape which is still popular upcountry, Abhisit said 'kill me some'. The poor chap must have been getting impatient, the tape was allegedly about the April 2009 red-shirt Songkhran fun.

[rubl]

Since the i'in' crowd seems to be active and alert may I respectfully ask if the van driver had (has?) been apprehended. I mean, if he hadn't strayed in an area he shouldn't have been, the army wouldn't have needed to shoot and no innocent bystanders (not even those running out of the house to watch) would have been hurt.

Obviously the van driver caused two deaths in this instance. He needs to be charge with murder apart from driving in a prohibited area, speeding, broken right back light and fleeing the scene. Plus a ticket for parking at the wrong spot of course.

If only k. Thaksin had got his money back and not have it confiscated in the February, 2010 ruling

Glad to see the yellow-underpants brigade stooping to a new low. Making fun of the boy's death just about sums up the morality of your lot. Excuses, excuses and yet more excuses.....and if that doesn't work, blame the victims and denigrate the individual soldiers who were only obeying their orders! Wasn't your beloved AV overheard to say he wanted some red-shirts dead?

I consider this an insult, a deliberate insult. Let it be known I only have white, black and blue colored underwear!

BTW the 'kill me some red-shirt' tape from 2009 was doctored, not that is stops people from referring to it. It's oh so nice to merily hint at the possibility, isn't it?

PS any red-shirts found yet in the Rayong mass graves?

Edited December 21, 2012 by rubl

[rubl]

""Kunakorn was said to be in the vicinity of taxi driver Phan Kamkong""

Sad, parental guidance failed. The boy should have been at home, not wandering about in a danger zone.

BTW May, 15th.? Was this in the 'live fire' zone on Ratchaprarop ?

Don't you think you should read the inquest conclusions before passing judgement, particularly when you blame the child?

He was in the care of a children's aid group, He had no parents. The chlld was described as having learning disabilities, and was given to wandering off, as is common with kids like that. No evidence was presented that the child was a participant in the troubles. The facts that were given, and not disputed were that he was a bystander and was killed as the soldiers lay down multiple volleys of lethal gunfire at the van. In plain language, the soldiers opened fire in a public area, where there were non implicated parties, unarmed civilians who had nothing to do with the participants.

In case you do not get the point, the soldiers had a legal duty of care not to use lethal force under the circumstances. I won't mention the ethical and moral aspect, as I doubt it would register with you since you intimate that the homicide was justified. Unfortunately, when an unarmed child that is not involved in the targeted illegal activity is killed, it is a case of homicide.

Dear gK, I only used the info in the OP which is very limited. You seem to have a better source. Could you please provide a pointer for it?

An enquiring mind and the internet? Probably the first try would be another online english language newspaper and onwards from there - why not try the dead kids name, but thats just me thinking.

One really needs to do things themselves if one wants things done, now doesn't one? I did some searching, but didn't find the "described as having learning disabilities", only a reference to an NGO known as "Kunakorn Foundation", but no relation to the topic at hand.

So, where did gKid get his info from?

ADD: BTW searching I found this snippet from 2012-07-21:

""Department of Special Investigation officials told an inquest into the death of 44-year-old taxi driver Phan Khamkong in the same incident that Phan and Kunakorn were probably and unintentionally killed as they walked in the area by soldiers shooting at the van.""

Edited December 21, 2012 by rubl

[whybother]

No. I'm serious. Fair enough, open sights were mostly used. I'm just making the point that a spray of bullets can only be seen as a deliberate attempt to kill. The fact that the victim wasn't targeted directly doesn't mean that killing wasn't intended, and this is why the action was wholly inappropriate. I genuinely feel sorry for the poor guys who got given their guns and ammo and told to shoot on fellow citizens. I hope those that sanctioned this are brought to justice.

And just to be clear, I also wish for those that were responsible for innocents, including children, killed in 2003 to be brought to justice as well.

Does anyone know where he was standing in relation to the van? For all anyone knows a bullet passed through the van and hit him.

[nurofiend]

Kunakorn was said to be in the vicinity of taxi driver Phan Kamkong

Sad, parental guidance failed. The boy should have been at home, not wandering about in a danger zone.

BTW May, 15th.? Was this in the 'live fire' zone on Ratchaprarop ?

Blame the parents ???

Spin away..........

The army should have been in the barracks, not roaming the streets shooting Thai citizens going about their lawful business.

And another one crawls out.

And another one crawls out.

[rubl]

""Kunakorn was said to be in the vicinity of taxi driver Phan Kamkong""

Sad, parental guidance failed. The boy should have been at home, not wandering about in a danger zone.

BTW May, 15th.? Was this in the 'live fire' zone on Ratchaprarop ?

Blame the parents ???

Spin away..........

The army should have been in the barracks, not roaming the streets shooting Thai citizens going about their lawful business.

And another one crawls out.

And another one crawls out.

No need to announce yourself, dear fiend. Now do us all a favour, crawl back or post some meaningful stuff.

[nurofiend]

Blame the parents ???

Spin away..........

The army should have been in the barracks, not roaming the streets shooting Thai citizens going about their lawful business.

And another one crawls out.

And another one crawls out.

No need to announce yourself, dear fiend. Now do us all a favour, crawl back or post some meaningful stuff.

i'm simply mirroring one of your comrades idiotic comments, so why don't you do us all a favour and just crawl back down that moral black hole and keep blaming the parents of an innocent orphan kid for getting shot and just continue blaming everyone you can besides the army.

Edited December 21, 2012 by nurofiend

[rubl]

And another one crawls out.

And another one crawls out.

No need to announce yourself, dear fiend. Now do us all a favour, crawl back or post some meaningful stuff.

i'm simply mirroring one of your comrades idiotic comments, so why don't you do us all a favour and just crawl back down that moral black hole and keep blaming the parents of an innocent orphan kid for getting shot and just continue blaming everyone you can besides the army.

My comrade? The only reason I replied was that you still had my post in the quote, otherwise I would have ignored both crawlers.

Now that you start with the 'blame game', did you find references to gKid's remarks on Kunakorn being an orphan?

[nurofiend]

My comrade? The only reason I replied was that you still had my post in the quote, otherwise I would have ignored both crawlers.

Now that you start with the 'blame game', did you find references to gKid's remarks on Kunakorn being an orphan?

yes love, no love, whatever love.

[rubl]

My comrade? The only reason I replied was that you still had my post in the quote, otherwise I would have ignored both crawlers.

Now that you start with the 'blame game', did you find references to gKid's remarks on Kunakorn being an orphan?

yes love, no love, whatever love.

May I take that as a 'why bother', 'who cares', simply as an "I don't know", or just an "I'll crawl back now" ?

[nurofiend]

My comrade? The only reason I replied was that you still had my post in the quote, otherwise I would have ignored both crawlers.

Now that you start with the 'blame game', did you find references to gKid's remarks on Kunakorn being an orphan?

yes love, no love, whatever love.

May I take that as a 'why bother', 'who cares', simply as an "I don't know", or just an "I'll crawl back now" ?

take it that i find your input in this thread has been disgusting at times, regardless of whether he was an orphan or not.

Edited December 21, 2012 by nurofiend

[khunken]

My comrade? The only reason I replied was that you still had my post in the quote, otherwise I would have ignored both crawlers.

Now that you start with the 'blame game', did you find references to gKid's remarks on Kunakorn being an orphan?

yes love, no love, whatever love.

May I take that as a 'why bother', 'who cares', simply as an "I don't know", or just an "I'll crawl back now" ?

take it that i find your input in this thread has been disgusting at times, regardless of whether he was an orphan or not.

Well, at least he had something intelligent to say.

[rubl]

My comrade? The only reason I replied was that you still had my post in the quote, otherwise I would have ignored both crawlers.

Now that you start with the 'blame game', did you find references to gKid's remarks on Kunakorn being an orphan?

yes love, no love, whatever love.

May I take that as a 'why bother', 'who cares', simply as an "I don't know", or just an "I'll crawl back now" ?

take it that i find your input in this thread has been disgusting at times, regardless of whether he was an orphan or not.

May I remind you of what you wrote

"so why don't you do us all a favour and just crawl back down that moral black hole and keep blaming the parents of an innocent orphan kid for getting shot and just continue blaming everyone you can besides the army."

Whether or not my posts disgust you is immaterial. You accuse me of 'blaming the parents of an innocent orphaned child'. For one if the child was orphaned he probably wouldn't have parents anymore, and two we only have gKid's say-so Kunaporn "was in the care of a children's aid group, He had no parents. The chlld was described as having learning disabilities, and was given to wandering off", but no reference to be found. At least not by me. So do you want to go on disgustingly avoiding valid questions or will you help finding more details about the victim of an unfortunate incident?

Edited December 21, 2012 by rubl