Thai Lawyer: Kampucheans are not Khom the old Khmer
http://puthtannbona.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/54.jpg?w=460&h=343
From http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=169294&st=0&start=0
The Siems are doing it again. Now a Thai lawyer-professor named Sompong Sucharitkul (more like a CRAZY SOMPENG instead) told ABC Radio Australia that the Kampucheans are not the same as the Khom the old Khmer. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/embarassedlaugh.gif) The Thai so-called intellectulas are actually STUPID and retarded. The first two classic retarded Thais were Luang Vichetr and Seni Pramoj. And now the list is expanded to include this retarded dude named Sompong Sucharitkul. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/embarassedlaugh.gif)
Thai lawyer claimed that Thailand still claims Preah Vihear temple as Thai’s ownership because it was not built by Kampucheans but by Khom and others
Temple ruling against principles of justice: Thai lawyer
Monday, August 04, 2008
ABC Radio Australia
Cambodian and Thai forces continue to face off near the 900-year-old Preah Vihear temple.
The confrontation started earlier this month, when Bangkok backed Cambodia’s bid to have the temple listed as a World Heritage site. That sparked Thai nationalists, who seized the opportunity and swung into action. But there has been continued sentiment over the issue, ever since the International Court of Justice ruled in 1962 that the temple belonged to Cambodia.
Presenter: Paul Gates
Speaker: Professor Sompong Sucharitkul, one time member of the Thai Legal Representation before the International Court of Justice
Transcript
Professor Sompong Sucharitkul: The area on which the temple of Prah Viharn stands is within the territory of Thailand, and duh Kampuchea was suggesting that it was in Kampuchea’s territorial sovereignty. That was the heart of the dispute. That was actually what was claimed by Kampuchea that was in the application instituting proceeding against Thailand in 1959.
Paul Gates: And Professor, Cambodia said that Thailand had plenty of time to challenge the 1962 ruling, but never did. Why does it become an issue now?
Professor Sompong Sucharitkul: Well Let me hehehe reverse the question rather. Haha Thailand had complied with the decision of the court, and duh we had proceeded to inform to notify the secretary of the United Nations in a letter written by the foreign minister of Thailand a formal note explaining that we did not agree with the decision of the international court of justice, that it was against the wishes of the parties to the treaty. It is against the provision of the treaty, and it is against the international law. It is against all principles of justice. We complied with it under protest and also with an expressed reservation that we reserve all existing right and whatever right that we may have in the future to recover the temple of Prah Viharn by legal means legal process that would be available if not now also in the future so there is no time limit in the reservation.
Paul Gates: You’re saying that the government did that in goodwill but took the view that it would it could try to reverse it at anytime. Is that what you are saying?
Professor Sompong Sucharitkul: No, I am just saying this I am saying that the answer to your question I am saying it’s not Thailand that didn’t do anything. It was Thailand that did everything. It is a decision or judgement that gave Kampuchea virtually nothing because it couldn’t have access to the temple without coming through Thailand’s territory. So it faced itself at the mercy of Thailand. And that was the situation. And Kampuchea accepted that, and it was acquiescing (agreeing) in the situation for 40 years
Paul Gates: So the entry to the temple is from the Thai side, and the money is benefiting Thais. So why not let the status quo continue?
Professor Sompong Sucharitkul: Well it depends on what you meant by status quo. You see the dispute was not settled, and we should have settled it. We should have settled it. I don’t see why what has Cambodia or Kampuchea to lose when it could have been jointly nominated. That would have resolved the question completely. No one is losing anything because it is going to be the world heritage anyhow, and besides you see the temple wasn’t built by Kampuchean. They were built by Mon, Khmer, Thai, Lao, Siem — all the people — the local inhabitants in those days and we all populated the area. It’s not just exclusively by—I mean–the current generation of Kampucheans are not the same as the Khom the old Khmer that may have been successor in title but it’s long far removed from their ancestry.
One Comment from a Thai blogger:
QUOTE
After we Thais claimed our ownership over the Prah Viharn and Ta Moan Thom, there were hundreds of Prasat which Thailand will claim that those Prasats are the Thailand ancestral Prasats.
The Kumpuchean doesn’t have any of those prasats, the kampuchean come from vietnamese high lander and mixed with Meo and Hmong culture.
Thailand will stay firm for the principles, by protecting of our ancestral and the will use of forces of any means.
Ratthani,
Thailand.
12:16 PM
http://ki-media.blogspot.com/
ABCambodia 107.5fm 
