Thai Legal Team: Romanian Expert Becomes Star At The I C J

[FarangTalk]

Thailand invaded Western Indochina in 1942, used their military to occupy the temple again in 1959 and used the temple as a political wedge in 2008 to oust the Samak government.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

[MikeThaison]

Does she have a Thai Work Permit?

Why would she need a Thai Work Permit, when clearly the Hague, WHERE THE WORK IS BEING DONE is NOT Thailand?

[FarangTalk]

Interesting to note 'lawyer' is one of the prohibited occupations for foreigners in Thailand.

Ironic that she can work at the Hague, when she can't perform the very same role in the country she is assisting.

[DoctorG]

A Romanian " expert " on a Thai - Cambodian border dispute ? Is she just another Yingluck who looks good and changes her clothes a lot ? Wonder how much she travels too ?

Yeah, that was the Thai legal team's strategy... Hire a pretty farang woman with good fashion sense to make the case, even though she is, in reality, useless. Why didn't the rest of us see this ruse for what it clearly is?

And how do you know she is useless? Is this an assumption or a fact?

We really do need a "tongue-in-cheek" icon on here

[tragickingdom]

Rumanian expert or not. The French maps are leading and the French do support the Cambodian claim. The entire saga is bizarre. Just swap a few rai of land and the problem is settled. There is nothing out there the entire circus is done for Neo-Fascists from the PAD and for ultra rightist newspapers like the Nation who lost the plot already 20 years ago.

The entire court case shows that Thailand is still a very immature country led by morons.

[BrianCR]

Now we are hitting out at a westerner helping in an International court case and making derisive comments about a person (and a country) that, it appears, many posters believe they understand but it truth they have no understanding of at all. I think the lady should be allowed to charm both Thailand and the court and do her job! My guess is that she would be well above the comments posted here

...especially yours!

What is that supposed to mean? It makes no sense. I don't know what medication you're on but I want some!

You understand very well!

Thank you very much, I understand somethings but some posts are really not worth understanding as even after you get to the bottom of them they make less sense than before you started - have a good day

[khunken]

Thais seem to think that the ICJ are fools not to understand that this "dispute" is/was initiated by Thailand as a "political" issue. It is clearly and has been a political issue raised to further agenda within Thailand. Cambodia knows this and so does the court. Anyone following Thai "happenings" would be clear that this about Thai politics and Thai posturing among themselves.

Can you share with us your inside information? By the way the ICJ is supposed to be impartial and made up of many judges, all from different countries, sitting together to hear both sides of a case

Which exactly they did, many years ago and ruled (as far as I know) that the temple belongs to Cambodia.

IMHO it is common sense, that the LAND on which the temple stands also belongs to Cambodia, otherwise how are the Cambodians to get there?

But as Common sense has not much space in Thailand, this has to be ruled again.

...and now put on your yellow shirt and praise Thailand as the paradise it is...

My you do twist things. The case is not about the land on which the temple stands, it's about adjoining land. Common sense is no more widespread in Cambodia than it is in Thailand.

I sometimes wonder why Farangs living in Thailand seem to hate the country so much. I live here & I support the Thai case even if it tends to be panned by the TV 'experts'.

[DocN]

Thais seem to think that the ICJ are fools not to understand that this "dispute" is/was initiated by Thailand as a "political" issue. It is clearly and has been a political issue raised to further agenda within Thailand. Cambodia knows this and so does the court. Anyone following Thai "happenings" would be clear that this about Thai politics and Thai posturing among themselves.

Can you share with us your inside information? By the way the ICJ is supposed to be impartial and made up of many judges, all from different countries, sitting together to hear both sides of a case

Which exactly they did, many years ago and ruled (as far as I know) that the temple belongs to Cambodia.

IMHO it is common sense, that the LAND on which the temple stands also belongs to Cambodia, otherwise how are the Cambodians to get there?

But as Common sense has not much space in Thailand, this has to be ruled again.

...and now put on your yellow shirt and praise Thailand as the paradise it is...

My you do twist things. The case is not about the land on which the temple stands, it's about adjoining land. Common sense is no more widespread in Cambodia than it is in Thailand.

I sometimes wonder why Farangs living in Thailand seem to hate the country so much. I live here & I support the Thai case even if it tends to be panned by the TV 'experts'.

yes...adjoining land...that is a) what the temple stands on and b ) makes a access- way for those, whos temple it is...right or wrong?

So If I tell you, you can use my toilet..do you have to pee from the doorstep and try to hit, or do I also and without further questioning, allow you to use the access and the floor around the ceramic- bus?

I live here and I DON'T support the case, not because I hate Thailand...but because it is ludacris.

Let me guess: you were pro- airport blocking...it is Thai, after all?!

And for the occupation of Ratjaprassong?

You just think everything is great that Thailand does, because ...you support everything?

The rascism towards the ethnic minorities and all of Thailands neighbors?

See...I just didn't leave my brain at the airport, when I came here!

my bad!

Edited April 19, 2013 by DocN

[khunken]

IMHO it is common sense, that the LAND on which the temple stands also belongs to Cambodia, otherwise how are the Cambodians to get there?

But as Common sense has not much space in Thailand, this has to be ruled again.

...and now put on your yellow shirt and praise Thailand as the paradise it is...

My you do twist things. The case is not about the land on which the temple stands, it's about adjoining land. Common sense is no more widespread in Cambodia than it is in Thailand.

yes...adjoining land...that is a) what the temple stands on and b

) makes a access- way for those, whos temple it is...right or wrong?

So If I tell you, you can use my toilet..do you have to pee from the doorstep and try to hit, or do I also and without further questioning, allow you to use the access and the floor around the ceramic- bus?

I live here and I DON'T support the case, not because I hate Thailand...but because it is ludacris.

Let me guess: you were pro- airport blocking...it is Thai, after all?!

And for the occupation of Ratjaprassong?

You just think everything is great that Thailand does, because ...you support everything?

The rascism towards the ethnic minorities and all of Thailands neighbors?

See...I just didn't leave my brain at the airport, when I came here!

my bad!

Adjoining land is where the temple stands on? No comment about the brain.

Why do you make ridiculous assumptions about what I do & don't support? I'm not going to go into off topic issues on this thread.

The rest of your post is senseless.

Edited April 19, 2013 by khunken

[Thereisnoif]

Thai delusion knows no limit

[khunken]

Post No: 38 above.

My apologies for garbling some of the replies after trying to sort out the usual 'too many posts' message. It was not deliberate.

[rametindallas]

Rumanian expert or not. The French maps are leading and the French do support the Cambodian claim. The entire saga is bizarre. Just swap a few rai of land and the problem is settled. There is nothing out there the entire circus is done for Neo-Fascists from the PAD and for ultra rightist newspapers like the Nation who lost the plot already 20 years ago.

The entire court case shows that Thailand is still a very immature country led by morons.

It's not a few rai of land, it's a few square kilometers of land. Every country is entitled to defend its borders and not give in for the sake of 'compromise'. Thailand is not disputing ownership of the temple or temple grounds nor Cambodia's having it declaring it a World Heritage site. Thailand is disputing Cambodia's claim to 4.2 kilometers of Thai territory adjacent to the temple that was not part of the ICJ 1962 settlement. There are Thai citizens, who have been there for ages, living on the disputed territory. It sounds like, from your last sentence, that you have a grudge against Thailand and you are the one acting immature. Don't even go down the road of small scale, self serving, inaccurate French maps drawn up at the turn of the last century and applied by duress on a weaker Thailand by France.

[hellodolly]

Thailand asking for help of a farang?

Clutching at straws, I presume?

I think the reason for that was covered in the article where it said.

"Miron is not Thai, she carried out her duty better than Thai officials"

They knew they were a bunch of inept bunglers so they went for an outside personality that makes their living with brains rather than corruption.

But let us remember this is a Nation article and that in itself can cast serious doubts on the validity of the report. Weather she wins or losses I hope both nations except the judgement and try to cooperate.

[jbrain]

So when is the verdict expected ?

[hellodolly]

Rumanian expert or not. The French maps are leading and the French do support the Cambodian claim. The entire saga is bizarre. Just swap a few rai of land and the problem is settled. There is nothing out there the entire circus is done for Neo-Fascists from the PAD and for ultra rightist newspapers like the Nation who lost the plot already 20 years ago.

The entire court case shows that Thailand is still a very immature country led by morons.

It's not a few rai of land, it's a few square kilometers of land. Every country is entitled to defend its borders and not give in for the sake of 'compromise'. Thailand is not disputing ownership of the temple or temple grounds nor Cambodia's having it declaring it a World Heritage site. Thailand is disputing Cambodia's claim to 4.2 kilometers of Thai territory adjacent to the temple that was not part of the ICJ 1962 settlement. There are Thai citizens, who have been there for ages, living on the disputed territory. It sounds like, from your last sentence, that you have a grudge against Thailand and you are the one acting immature. Don't even go down the road of small scale, self serving, inaccurate French maps drawn up at the turn of the last century and applied by duress on a weaker Thailand by France.

You are correct it is 4.2squre kilometers of land. My understanding of it was that it was fairly useless and Cambodians have been living in the area as long as Thais.

You talk about defend there borders. If that was the case why are they in court and not out there with the army storming the 4.2 square kilometers were the Cambodians claim is theirs.

[maddas]

So when is the verdict expected ?

5 months or so last I read

[rametindallas]

Rumanian expert or not. The French maps are leading and the French do support the Cambodian claim. The entire saga is bizarre. Just swap a few rai of land and the problem is settled. There is nothing out there the entire circus is done for Neo-Fascists from the PAD and for ultra rightist newspapers like the Nation who lost the plot already 20 years ago.

The entire court case shows that Thailand is still a very immature country led by morons.

It's not a few rai of land, it's a few square kilometers of land. Every country is entitled to defend its borders and not give in for the sake of 'compromise'. Thailand is not disputing ownership of the temple or temple grounds nor Cambodia's having it declaring it a World Heritage site. Thailand is disputing Cambodia's claim to 4.2 kilometers of Thai territory adjacent to the temple that was not part of the ICJ 1962 settlement. There are Thai citizens, who have been there for ages, living on the disputed territory. It sounds like, from your last sentence, that you have a grudge against Thailand and you are the one acting immature. Don't even go down the road of small scale, self serving, inaccurate French maps drawn up at the turn of the last century and applied by duress on a weaker Thailand by France.

You are correct it is 4.2squre kilometers of land. My understanding of it was that it was fairly useless and Cambodians have been living in the area as long as Thais.

You talk about defend there borders. If that was the case why are they in court and not out there with the army storming the 4.2 square kilometers were the Cambodians claim is theirs.

Thailand IS defending its borders, in court where civilized people should settle their differences. Would you rather they do it with the army? I wouldn't. Since the 4.2 square kilometers of land has NEVER been under the jurisdiction of Cambodia the only claim to that land by Cambodia is to say it is part and parcel part of the temple complex. The ICJ will settle that and not yours or my opinion. On a side note, if Cambodians were living in the disputed land as long as Thais, they would be Thai citizens by now. and also, to say the land is useless is not a good reason to give up Sovereign territory lol.

[DocN]

IMHO it is common sense, that the LAND on which the temple stands also belongs to Cambodia, otherwise how are the Cambodians to get there?

But as Common sense has not much space in Thailand, this has to be ruled again.

...and now put on your yellow shirt and praise Thailand as the paradise it is...

My you do twist things. The case is not about the land on which the temple stands, it's about adjoining land. Common sense is no more widespread in Cambodia than it is in Thailand.

yes...adjoining land...that is a) what the temple stands on and b

) makes a access- way for those, whos temple it is...right or wrong?

So If I tell you, you can use my toilet..do you have to pee from the doorstep and try to hit, or do I also and without further questioning, allow you to use the access and the floor around the ceramic- bus?

I live here and I DON'T support the case, not because I hate Thailand...but because it is ludacris.

Let me guess: you were pro- airport blocking...it is Thai, after all?!

And for the occupation of Ratjaprassong?

You just think everything is great that Thailand does, because ...you support everything?

The rascism towards the ethnic minorities and all of Thailands neighbors?

See...I just didn't leave my brain at the airport, when I came here!

my bad!

Adjoining land is where the temple stands on? No comment about the brain.

Why do you make ridiculous assumptions about what I do & don't support? I'm not going to go into off topic issues on this thread.

The rest of your post is senseless.

What is so difficult?

The temple is Cambodian, but the land around it is Thai?!

Does that make any sense in any known universe?

Besides that, everything was decided 50 years ago...

The rest of this trial is senseless!

[PaullyW]

I think it's safe to say that most of living here in Thailand will hope for them to lose. Anything to help the country grow up is good. If not destructive war, then perhaps at least a major international defeat on to lose substantial FACE

[Pi Sek]

Another good example that in Thailand, over substance, face is EVERYTHING.

There's one key difference to the other "pretty face" involved in the Thai political public eye: this one's qualified to do her job.

[Pi Sek]

I think it's safe to say that most of living here in Thailand will hope for them to lose. Anything to help the country grow up is good. If not destructive war, then perhaps at least a major international defeat on to lose substantial FACE

I think you should publicise your views in Thai language on a T-shirt and wear it for a week.

And some people call Thais two-faced...

[PaullyW]

I think it's safe to say that most of living here in Thailand will hope for them to lose. Anything to help the country grow up is good. If not destructive war, then perhaps at least a major international defeat on to lose substantial FACE

I think you should publicise your views in Thai language on a T-shirt and wear it for a week.

And some people call Thais two-faced...

I think you should publicise my views in Thai language on a T-shirt and wear it for a week.

And, also, I'm telling mom that you ate ice-cream before finishing your vegetables. You're in trouble now!

[cardholder]

Thais seem to think that the ICJ are fools not to understand that this "dispute" is/was initiated by Thailand as a "political" issue. It is clearly and has been a political issue raised to further agenda within Thailand. Cambodia knows this and so does the court. Anyone following Thai "happenings" would be clear that this about Thai politics and Thai posturing among themselves.

Can you share with us your inside information? By the way the ICJ is supposed to be impartial and made up of many judges, all from different countries, sitting together to hear both sides of a case

Which exactly they did, many years ago and ruled (as far as I know) that the temple belongs to Cambodia.

IMHO it is common sense, that the LAND on which the temple stands also belongs to Cambodia, otherwise how are the Cambodians to get there?

But as Common sense has not much space in Thailand, this has to be ruled again.

...and now put on your yellow shirt and praise Thailand as the paradise it is...

My you do twist things. The case is not about the land on which the temple stands, it's about adjoining land. Common sense is no more widespread in Cambodia than it is in Thailand.

I sometimes wonder why Farangs living in Thailand seem to hate the country so much. I live here & I support the Thai case even if it tends to be panned by the TV 'experts'.

You support the Thai case because you have rational evidence to support it .... or, because you live here and have learned to say "Thailand is the best" 3 times a day and blindly support any Thai cause.

Sounds like you have integrated !