Watch wot yer say online then...

[chuckwoww]

Hi,

 

Erring on the side of caution usually.

 

I can fairly well figure out what is definitely not allowed, but it is the grey area that is rather large. Even a comment that you and I might find fairly innocent or even funny could easily be considered lese majeste if someone had it in for this board / me. It is that, that is the biggest problem.

 

Sanuk!

 

Which is why we have to be careful. But the limits seem clear to me. The law exists. Obviously a lot of people think it's restrictive, outdated and it get abused.

 

Like Thaihome I expect the Thais to fix the problem but it will take time.

[ozpharlap]

I don't mind Monarchies, why is it that western Monarchies are less politicized than eastern Monarchies? Monarchies provide stability, rightly or wrongly, history unites in some instances

[Flashermac]

As I mentioned, Takky used it to silence two Brit journalists - Rodney Tasker and Shawn Crispin - who reported something published IN SINGAPORE that he considered looked bad for him. Since both are based in Bangkok, they had to grovel and beg forgiveness to be allowed to remain in Thailand. (I think both have homes and families here too.)

 

 

 

 

[Gadfly]

KS is right: the gray area is very large. If a book is not banned in Thailand, how can it be a crime to link on it when you are in the US?

 

Even more troubling, the law is used in a politically manipulated way. Why the 1,500% increase in prosecutions since the Coup?

 

And how can it be "clear" when the proceedings are closed and the "evidence" - the offending material - cannot be disclosed or even discussed?

 

I don't think the increase in prosecutions or the way these laws are employed has anything to do with the Institution. It's simply another tool be used in an ongoing and not yet resolved political battle.

[ThaiHome]

So you are saying the incidents of people committing LM have stayed the same and only enforcement has increased 1500%?

 

I have a friend that used to run one of the largest Thai web sites for many years. It was only starting in 2006 or so that they even had to start monitoring posts for LM. Since that time the number of hugely insulting, often extremely childish, cases of insulting material being posted has increased to the point they have considered closing the site down as it is hardly worth it anymore. Almost all these posts come from Thais living overseas.

 

I do agree that LM is being used to suppress discussions on the appropriate role for the monarchy in Thailand future. But those cases are not the norm. From what my friend has told me (and shown a few times) most cases are irrational, childish insults. Do you think da Torpedo’s speech was rational discussion on the role of the monarchy? Or was it just a provocative, senseless, childish insult?

 

TH

[Gadfly]

Because no one really knows knows what constitutes LM, this unavoidably makes our discussion foggy and unclear. The definition seems to change depending upon whose in power.

 

But I seriously doubt that what could reasonably called LM under even the broadest of definitions has increased 1,500% That is an extraordinary number. I don't believe it can be explained by content.

 

You say:

Since that time the number of hugely insulting, often extremely childish, cases of insulting material being posted has increased to the point they have considered closing the site down as it is hardly worth it anymore. Almost all these posts come from Thais living overseas

 

I honestly don't know and there is no way of even commenting on this, is there? I am sure KS would not want you to post a link to the site (since the mere posting of a link might constitute LM that puts the poster and webmaster at risk), but lets assume its true. We don't have any choice here when this sort of claim is made, do we?

 

Assuming its ture, its not a reassuring is it? It means that large numbers of overseas Thais, starting since the time of the Coup, are posting insulting messages. What could explain that?

 

We agree: "that LM is being used to suppress discussions on the appropriate role for the monarchy in Thailand future." I honestly don't know if most of the discussion is childish, but is that really relevant? I suspect many would say the same about discussions about US politics.

 

If this sort of discussion is censored and hidden under a rock, it will fester and become more dangerous. It stifles criticism of the current status quo that may be warranted. It also legitimizes criticism of the current regime that may be entirely unwarranted. It abets in giving equal value to both, and at this moment in time, that is extremely foolish and dangerous.

[dave32]

Gadfly, didn't you know -- honest and thoughtful discussion of roles is permitted, only childish insults are rightfully prosecuted.

 

Sidenote: Good friend of mine grew up poor in East LA (this will have relevance in a second). Scholarship to Cal Poly. Met a Thai girl in one of his classes, fell in love, yada yada yada. Her family is wealthy (obvious). He went to BKK with her to talk to family about marriage.

 

They were a bit apprehensive because his family was poor and he wasn't established yet financially. Daughter was insistent. Parents gave the OK as long as they stayed in BKK several years and they gave him (future husband) a job at their business. Now he's an expat.

 

So, I go stay with them a little bit when I visit. One day in BKK we're at a restaurant talking about life there and I ask him - very innocuously - what happens when... and it was related to the monarchy. Not insulting, at all.

 

He just told me, don't talk about or discuss -- makes people uncomfortable and could easily get you into trouble by asking questions. And he was very serious. And I listened and respected the advice.

 

And I thought to myself, hmmmmmmm.

[Gadfly]

"hmmmmm...." says it all or at least all we or any Thai is permitted to say. And that's the problem.

 

Good story to demonstrate this is not just a problem with childish and insulting posts. The question make sense. I have heard and seen similiar stories.

 

 

[ThaiHome]

I never said this was a problem with just "childish and insulting postsâ€. I said it was being used to suppress rational discussions about the role of the monarchy and certainly the case of Somsak Jeamteerasakul and his open letters to Princess Chulabhorn and her appearance and comments on a local TV show this to be the case. (see the New Mandela site for a good discussion of that). If they were all rational discussions then sites such as New Mandela would be flooded with discussion such as this one. But what you have is one good discussion started by a respected academic. That would lead to think that the rest are not on the same level. My point was using the 1,500% increase in LM cases to say that enforcement has increased and therefore censorship in Thailand is increasing is not valid when you look at what the preponderance of the cases actually are. Nor are criticisms of the current government censored. What are censored are discussions, rational or irrational, of the role of monarchy.

 

Your comparison to discussions of US politics is irrelevant. Criticisms and discussions of the current Thai government can be easily separated from discussions of the monarchy. People, such as Jatupron that have tied the two together have done so purposely so they can claim the government is censoring them (or in his case also put him in jail for violating his bail conditions that said he would not make such speeches). This just again shows how the UDD and their strategist have manipulated the western press into portray the UDD as some sort of underdog, freedom loving organization with the goal of freeing Thailand from a oppressive government. The fact is the UDD is nothing more then one part of campaign to disrupt Thailand and return Thaksin to power.

 

Here is an excerpt from an article by William Barnes two weeks ago that sums up the UDD and it role and agenda nicely as well has how it is manipulating the LM laws in order to portray itself as a victim:

 

Link

 

Therdpoum Chaidee, a former communist and royalist People's Alliance for Democracy protest group supporter, notes that the pro-Thaksin camp's three-pronged attack, including political, militant and mass movement arms, bears a strong resemblance to Maoist guerrilla strategies taught in Hanoi in the 1970s to would-be revolutionaries like himself and certain UDD leaders, including current chairwoman Thida Thawornseth.

 

Therdpoum noted that in revolutionary theory a united front (the UDD in this case) gathers up anti-government forces in a display of popular resistance while shadowy fighters (the so-called "Men in Black" who launched grenades and opened fire on security forces) provoke, discombobulate and fracture their opponents. A political party (the Thaksin-controlled Puea Thai) then moves into the ensuing political vacuum to seize power as the discredited government collapses.

 

Historically, united front organizations are discarded or betrayed once the revolutionary party is strong enough to take political power. The point is not to tar the protesters as communists (which, with minor exceptions, UDD leaders certainly are not) but merely to underline that a feisty "people's movement" was created to perform the combative street work inappropriate for a political party aiming to form a legitimate government in a free election.

 

Revolutionary theory or mere political calculation dictates that the arms of the campaign must at least appear to run independently of each other for the strategy to succeed. Yet several Puea Thai politicians blurred those lines by sponsoring and supporting last year's UDD protests, with many of their photographs proudly displayed at the protest camp. Some spoke on the protest stage, where threats and vitriol were aimed at the government and military, but the party mostly kept its distance from the UDD's "Red Shirt" movement.

 

The UDD, on the other hand, not only failed to distance itself from the vicious "Men in Black" but last year saw several of its leaders boast of violence inflicted against officials or warn of destructive deeds to come. Outspoken UDD leader Jatuporn Prompan, who's also a Puea Thai party member of parliament, has continued the fiery rhetoric that has effectively redrawn the boundaries of political invective in Thailand. Last month, he made a speech that allegedly tilted against the monarchy, causing a former prime minister and army commander, Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, to resign from the party.

 

[Flashermac]

"hmmmmm...." says it all or at least all we or any Thai is permitted to say. And that's the problem.

 

Good story to demonstrate this is not just a problem with childish and insulting posts. The question make sense. I have heard and seen similiar stories.

 

 

 

Actually, it is buffalo dung. Thais DO and always have discussed things in private with those they trust. One does not do so in public, since one never knows how a stranger might react and misinterpret innocent comments. You wouldn't believe the things I hear in private, or maybe you would. Most stories are common knowledge, whether openly discussed or not. Also, quite a few of the tales I've heard turned out to be false - started for a selfish reason.