Timesonline Refuses To Release Thaksin Interview Tape To Thailand

[flying]

Just another bah towards any requests regarding silly notions along with demands for deportations etc.....

It is clear to the rest that any such demands from the current government amount to nothing more than the pot calling the kettle black. No country is going to take any requests from the current crop as valid regarding Thaksin.

The proof is in the pudding. Let history of such requests speak for itself.

Edited November 22, 2009 by flying

[caf]

Applicable principles, and in most of the West, law, are that anything published by privately owned and operated print media is the sole, exclusive and absolutely owned property of the journal and is thus unavailable to anyone, especially the government. However, an exception can occur in a criminal investigation or proceding because criminal law, which concerns public safety, is involved.

In instances of criminal law, a print news organization can either voluntarily comply with the request of the government for such property or contest the request in a court of law. The ruling by a court of law would be final and would need to be respected. This would be so whether the government were at the stage of investigating a charge or conducting a proceding in court. Normally, the court in either instance will side with the government. In other words, in criminal procedings the presumptive burden of proof generally lies with the press to prove its case that freedom of the press is of greater interest to the society than is the applicability of criminal law (also depending on the nature of the crime alleged, the accused person etc).

The question here is whether the government considers that Thaksin violated criminal law or civil law. Generally, if Thaksin were considered to be in violation of criminal law, the government should procede on that basis because doing so could make its case stronger in the UK. If the violation is considered to be of civil law, the government would need to know how the laws of the UK apply to the freedom of the press in similar cases of civil law and in applicable case precedent in the UK, especially pertaining to constitutional law. In an alleged violation of civil law, the presumptive burden on the government to prove its case is greater than that of the newspaper.

If the Thai government were serious in this matter, or if it knew the ropes, the government would go to a court of law to seek a legal ruling in Thai law. If the government were successful, its success in a Thai court of law would give the Thai government a legal basis on which it could appeal to the Times to release its taped interview with Thaksin. As we saw with the Thaksin case in the UK, the UK government was obligated to expel Thaksin by revoking his visa based on the principle that the UK government had to respect the ruling of the Thai judiciary in a finalized criminal proceding.

There of course would be the risk to the Thai government that it could lose its pleading in court, which certainly would weaken its claim to the Times. The government has to weigh this possibility. However, we have read the interview and we recognize that Thaksin trampled on Thai law so it's likely the government would win its case in a Thai court. The fact Thaksin already is a convicted criminal also would strengthen the position of the Thai government with the Times and in respect to the criminal laws of the UK, as would the fact the UK already had found itself legally obligated to the Thai government (judiciary) to respect its ruling in the Thaksin case.

If the government were serious.

Taking your points as you raise them.

It is a question of "D" notices Publicus, nothing to do with criminal law.

The courts in the UK often do not side with the government.

The presumption of innocence is paramount in the UK legal system. It would be for the government, or anyone else, to establish proof not the press. An academic point in this case anyway as the government is not getting involved and the Thai government has no jurisdiction ( though it could be a potential plaintiff on the same terms as anyone else)

The UK government did not expel Thaksin, they did not renew his visa. The action lay because he had broken visa regulations and did not concern the thai court case and result. That was not considered as there was no obligation or indeed procedure to respect the law of a different jurisdiction. A government could consider an extradition request but that was not made by Thailand for obvious reasons.

I clearly see that you speak from China. What part of the anatomy you are actually speaking out of is not so clear.

Stick to facts or you will get seen as a troll.

[caf]

... However, we have read the interview and we recognize that Thaksin trampled on Thai law so it's likely the government would win its case in a Thai court. ...

Publicus, thank you for the very interesting piece. In relation to laws being trampled, I too have read the article on line, and I can only see one law as being potentially breached ie lese majesty. Somehow I don't think the UK will view a breach of Thailand's lese majesty laws as serious enough to compel The Times to release its tapes, but I am not a lawyer. Were there other Thai laws trampled in that interview???

The UK government is not involved and will not compel the Times to do anything. It is not a watchdog for Thai interests. No law appears to have been broken in the UK and no actions have been started in the Uk and I suspect will not be.

[phetaroi]

I've taught journalism at the university level for six years running now, and one of the units I teach is regarding government control and censorship of the media. Disturbingly, each year I have more and more current examples of problems in Thailand to share with my students. In that time, I've had editors at the Bangkok Post and producers at Channel 11 tell me that they have no choice but to tow the government line on most controversial issues. As a westerner, it's a continual shock to me. My students handle it better than I do--like water off a duck's back--it's normal to them.

I know this comment will go over like a lead balloon, but here goes, anyway.

There seems to be an assumption in this thread that freedom of the press is the normal way of the world and that it is the way that (apparently) some great being has ordained it to be.

In reality, the press has never been that moral about the principle. They cite it and play it when it is to their advantage, and they trash it when it is not to their advantage.

For example, when they don't want to name a source, they bring in freedom of the press.

On the other hand, watch some of the American news magazine shows that commonly work with the police -- sometimes even setting up sting operations for the police -- to catch scammers, online predators, and so forth.

It's not that I have any problem that these low-lifes are getting caught, what bothers me is how the press is intentionally blurring the line between being in cahoots with the police/government...when convenient for them...just to get a sensationalistic story for ratings sweep weeks.

Make no mistake, in America the press does what it has to do to report or manipulate a story all in the name of selling newspapers, magazines, or advertisements on television. They are not acting on some moral mission.

And, by the way...I am generally supportive of the press. It's just that they're leaning toward being paparazzi...not serious reporters.

[phetaroi]

The Thai officialdom feels that 'outside' press need to adhere to the norms of info distribution here. Suppression, censorship, manipulation, and control.

True. Sort of like how Americans think everything should work here like it does back home.

[phetaroi]

As a fully paid up pedant the word continually mispelt is "Kudos"....the apostrophe is incorrect...it is a greek derivative from my memory...but in the memorable words of Peace Blondie, I may be wrong as I have been a million times...but how important is it for me to bring such trivia to the attention of TV....teaching spelling for one hundred years, I just could not resist making a comment...but we all fall into the trap of self indulgence either linguistically or otherwise....must be time for this old man to hit the mattress....my concern is the alleged assemblage of one million red shirts next Sataday and the following weaks ahead..can I reccommend that people read the Sunday Bangkok Post column by Khun Voranai.....as a thai he writes some of the most insightful pieces of journalism despite the fact that he received his eductation in Texas...but is not afraid to write of his culture and politics of the country of his birth...he addresses current issues with clarity and intelligence, a refreshing change from a lot of babble that one is subjected to in the Thai Press...wonder how long he will be permitted to so...I dont think the threats to Abishit life are to be taken too lightly...I have heard that several NGO'S already have evacuation plans in place..not to be alarmed but rather to be alert.... ..Dukkha

Off topic, but you have at least six misspellings yourself...not sure why it was even relevant for you to bring spelling into the conversation. Those who live in glass houses....

On the other hand, I quite agree with you about Khun Voranai. With rare exceptions, I find his writings to be not only interesting, but courageous. I worry for him.

[jamesthailand]

Lese Majeste, before you go popping off read very carefully the Thai law and what Lese Majeste entails.

Thaksin makes several comparisons that are in plain English and several actions and this is not allowed under the law

...

The 2007 Constitution of Thailand, and all 17 versions since 1932, contain the clause, "The King shall be enthroned in a position of revered worship and shall not be violated. No person shall expose the King to any sort of accusation or action

If you understand the law you realize that much of what TK was spouting on about was in fact a direct violation of the law.

He had requested action in clear violation of the law

I think you may be misunderstanding the word "action" in the English translation of the Constitution. The original Thai uses the word ฟ้องร้อง, which means to sue or to take to court; the English translation is using the word "action" in the sense of legal action. In other words, the Constitution is prohibiting anybody from suing the King.

You can get the Constitution in Thai from cda.parliament.go.th.

[Bagwan]

UK newspaper editors follow an agreed code of practice as part of a self regulatory process. It is common ground that sources and information received are of necessity protected unless this protection is waived by request of the source. Without this assurance there would be no whistle blowers and wrongdoings would go undetected. The UK Government may issue a 'D notice' which I understand is advisory only and sparingly used but flagrant ignoring of such guidance may lead to legal hearings. I should think that in this case The Times' backside is well covered.

Thaksin may have recourse to the law and it is relevant that he has not taken this route, against his normal practice you may note.

We can all be thankful that it is The Times involved in this bun fight. If it were one of the 'rags', the ones that use lots of pictures and words of less than three syllables because it's readership is so obtuse, then I would not put it past them to tell the Thai Government to zip it or they will run serials of all the scams against visitors and tourists commonly perpetrated in LoS. In the nicest possible way of course.

[321niti123]

No surprise there as everyone knew from when the request was made. And the request was purtely to be seen to be acting for home consumption as will the next one.

Exactly.

Effectively this is the government asking for his own words,

and if he DID say it as quoted, then that is already out there.

If he DID NOT say it as printed, then it actually exonerates Thaksin.

So for me the impression is the gov. trying to be

precise and fair on the issue by asking to exact clarification.

Thaksin slipped up big, and I don't see how this request could 'play into his hands'.

I agree with antimatic, the article is already out and it seems to be offensive towards the kind.

Accoding to thai law you cannot speak against the kind (Les Majeste).

Thaksin said that the times false reported the interview, i think the goverment is just trying to prove which party is telling the truth.

[jayboy]

There of course would be the risk to the Thai government that it could lose its pleading in court, which certainly would weaken its claim to the Times. The government has to weigh this possibility. However, we have read the interview and we recognize that Thaksin trampled on Thai law so it's likely the government would win its case in a Thai court. The fact Thaksin already is a convicted criminal also would strengthen the position of the Thai government with the Times and in respect to the criminal laws of the UK, as would the fact the UK already had found itself legally obligated to the Thai government (judiciary) to respect its ruling in the Thaksin case.

Absolute rubbish.Thank God people like you don't have a say in defending liberty.The UK government was under no legal obligation to deny Thaksin a visa but (I speculate) wanted to avoid hosting extradition proceedings, Thailand being a friendly country and the unsavoury Thaksin clearly not highly regarded.The Times interview was however seen by most reasonable people as respectful and as a Times editorial pointed out it's impossible to understand what offence had been committed.Thaksin has not been convicted of Lese Majeste in a Thai court.Lese Majeste is not an offence under UK law anyway and indeed Lese Majeste is seen as a Ruritanian legal relic.Fortunately Abhisit understands all this, notwithstanding the internal pressure he's under, and the chances of the Times being taken to court are in practice zero.I'm slightly sorry about this because the comic possibilities would have been endless though I wouldn't have enjoyed seeing Thailand becoming an international laughing stock.

Edited November 23, 2009 by jayboy

[wintermute]

This reminds me of when Thai officials paid a visit to the U.S. to try and lobby Bush to ban a certain notorious non sanctioned biographical book about a certain figure in Thailand. They were basically bluntly declined in all their queries regarding the banning and censoring of books in the U.S. They all left in a huff and made a big deal over it on various talk shows until the matter died down. Thai officials don't seem to understand how the world works outside of Thailand or have a innflated view of their own country's importance to world affairs.

Edited November 23, 2009 by wintermute

[animatic]

....

I clearly see that you speak from China. What part of the anatomy you are actually speaking out of is not so clear.

Stick to facts or you will get seen as a troll.

My friend Pub was just here in August and lived in Thailand for quite some time.

Location need not be a factor in understanding the situation here,

especially with many Thai's as personal friends and contacts on an ongoing basis.

He is far from as troll and better informed than far too many here.

If precision of fact was actually observed here in TVF, very few posters would make the cut.

And I find the anatomical jibe as being in very poor taste....

One man's rubbish is another mans logic filled fact.

Get over it.

Edited November 23, 2009 by animatic

[JetsetBkk]

blah blah blah ...

If the government were serious.

Actually it's more a case of if the current administration were taken seriously by the British press.

Jeremy Clarkson wrote in the Times a really irreverencious piece criticizing Peter Mandelson. Try to find it ...

Yes, an excellent article. I hope no one tells Clarkson about Thailand as an emigration destinaiton.

re. the OP, I read all 12 pages of the article and was neither offended nor could see anything that wasn't too far from the truth. But then, I'm neither Thai nor out to get Thaksin. There are far more bad things going on in this country that should have a higher priority than this subject.

[hammered]

... However, we have read the interview and we recognize that Thaksin trampled on Thai law so it's likely the government would win its case in a Thai court. ...

Publicus, thank you for the very interesting piece. In relation to laws being trampled, I too have read the article on line, and I can only see one law as being potentially breached ie lese majesty. Somehow I don't think the UK will view a breach of Thailand's lese majesty laws as serious enough to compel The Times to release its tapes, but I am not a lawyer. Were there other Thai laws trampled in that interview???

The UK government is not involved and will not compel the Times to do anything. It is not a watchdog for Thai interests. No law appears to have been broken in the UK and no actions have been started in the Uk and I suspect will not be.

I thought Thaksin said he was going to take action against the Times. I cant see him really doing it but.... He likely made the statement for Thai consumption. Thaksin is fully aware of the bits which have caught him out and they have nothing to do with LM imho but more to do with inappropriateness which can be damaging in Thailand.

The Thai government are going through the motions to keep the nationalists on their side happy and also do things for local consumption.

[Asa]

No surprise there as everyone knew from when the request was made. And the request was purtely to be seen to be acting for home consumption as will the next one.

Exactly.

Effectively this is the government asking for his own words,

and if he DID say it as quoted, then that is already out there.

If he DID NOT say it as printed, then it actually exonerates Thaksin.

So for me the impression is the gov. trying to be

precise and fair on the issue by asking to exact clarification.

Thaksin slipped up big, and I don't see how this request could 'play into his hands'.

I agree with antimatic, the article is already out and it seems to be offensive towards the kind.

Accoding to thai law you cannot speak against the kind (Les Majeste).

Thaksin said that the times false reported the interview, i think the goverment is just trying to prove which party is telling the truth.

The published version was edited, creating negative impact on readers, thus the protest from Thai Gov. Readers and TS himself. This I agree. Later, Times online shown full original 12 pages of what had been said on its site, so all parties can see and decide for themselves. This is fair enough. But Thai Gov. does not want to stop there. It demands the original tape from the press, this is where lacks of protocol cut in. Again The Thai authority did not show due respect for the worldly press freedom. Someone in the Gov. think they cannot trust the presented 12 pages letter. They believe they could do better with the interpretation than Times author. This absolutely ain't right. If they acepted the shorten version as real, why not consider the full version. Because it will exon TS, and the Gov. would become the one to cry wolf?

[caf]

....

I clearly see that you speak from China. What part of the anatomy you are actually speaking out of is not so clear.

Stick to facts or you will get seen as a troll.

My friend Pub was just here in August and lived in Thailand for quite some time.

Location need not be a factor in understanding the situation here,

especially with many Thai's as personal friends and contacts on an ongoing basis.

He is far from as troll and better informed than far too many here.

If precision of fact was actually observed here in TVF, very few posters would make the cut.

And I find the anatomical jibe as being in very poor taste....

One man's rubbish is another mans logic filled fact.

Get over it.

He may be better informed than many on TV . That is your view. Not everyone would agree I am sure. In the same way that not everyone agrees with you or agrees with me. Other posters have commented on his lack of facts - absolute rubbish I believe one called it. His views are never balanced. One definition of trolls might be keep pushing their own views to stir people up with no relevance to the matter in hand.

And if you can't recognise a joke on TV when you see it you are in for a hard time here. Perhaps you missed the

Get over it.

[toptuan]

I've taught journalism at the university level for six years running now, and one of the units I teach is regarding government control and censorship of the media. Disturbingly, each year I have more and more current examples of problems in Thailand to share with my students. In that time, I've had editors at the Bangkok Post and producers at Channel 11 tell me that they have no choice but to tow the government line on most controversial issues. As a westerner, it's a continual shock to me. My students handle it better than I do--like water off a duck's back--it's normal to them.

I know this comment will go over like a lead balloon, but here goes, anyway.

There seems to be an assumption in this thread that freedom of the press is the normal way of the world and that it is the way that (apparently) some great being has ordained it to be.

In reality, the press has never been that moral about the principle. They cite it and play it when it is to their advantage, and they trash it when it is not to their advantage.

For example, when they don't want to name a source, they bring in freedom of the press.

On the other hand, watch some of the American news magazine shows that commonly work with the police -- sometimes even setting up sting operations for the police -- to catch scammers, online predators, and so forth.

It's not that I have any problem that these low-lifes are getting caught, what bothers me is how the press is intentionally blurring the line between being in cahoots with the police/government...when convenient for them...just to get a sensationalistic story for ratings sweep weeks.

Make no mistake, in America the press does what it has to do to report or manipulate a story all in the name of selling newspapers, magazines, or advertisements on television. They are not acting on some moral mission.

And, by the way...I am generally supportive of the press. It's just that they're leaning toward being paparazzi...not serious reporters.

Excellent observations. However, when you teach, you need to uphold some ideals and a certain measure of ethics to give students a benchmark. And yes, there's a big gap between benchmark and reality. But we don't thrown out the baby with the bathwater.

[Samuian]

Kudo's to Timesonline. There is no obligation whatsoever.

"request again and ask the daily to "reply officially" as the article had hurt the feelings of the Thai people...."

what a bunch of bluff & hearsay. what the government wants to do with the tape is falsely accuse the Times.

Rubbish! The entire interview has been printed online and in fact it is very offensive to the Monarchy

Read the facts first before speaking

Nio,

I have read the facts. I've read the whole interview. I have no preference for red shirts, yellow shirts, or any side of Thai politics, and I have to say as a neutral observer the interview didn't strike me as offensive to the monarchy. Can you point out EXACTLY what was said that was so offensive and "hurt the feelings of the Thai people"?

Thanks.

Excerpt from post above:

"I have no preference for red shirts, yellow shirts, or any side of Thai politics, and I have to say as a neutral observer the interview didn't strike me as offensive to the monarchy"

This is not the question, the question is HE, as a Thai national and former Prime Minister must be very well aware of the LM and possible consequences!

He has a petition send in for review, where he should get a pardon granted, he has on several occasion made comments he must know he should not have made, which shows he is disgruntled, so stay away, don;t make ANY comments which could alert certain people, some of the very core of Thai-Elite Royalists are rather conservative and it is not up to them but up to a former Prime Minister on the run, sentenced to 2 years in prison, of treading really carefully and not to behave, as HE is the ONE who makes the rules!

If he can't play with the EXISTING rules, he will fall from grace, he is in a free fall situation already and with this kind of behavior, hitting outdated conservative views or not, it's up to him to behave, NOT anyoneelse and certainly not for the Government or other related Institutions - to put the facts right!

And still stuck with a overblown ego, which makes him believe he might win the uphill battle which (imho) he won't as he keeps stirring the pot.

The point is that HE touched the taboo territory he just can't stop, he has to stir the pot...and certainly this may have raised some eyebrows, whilst he mentioned that "after might be a shining time to come..." and "after" what he meant, everyone knows... this is certainly interpreted as disrespect - who is HE, demanding a pardon and then still not being able to sit on his hands?

he has every reason to show his fellow countryman that he feels sorry, a little regret, keep quiet, nope he can't - power mad he has to keep stirring, obsessed with himself, because he sells his story of "not guilty", we'll see, how the justice system will rule....imho his deck of cards get's worse and worse with every shuffle..

Posts #16 and #21 get a big thumbs up!

Edited November 23, 2009 by Samuian

[Publicus]

... However, we have read the interview and we recognize that Thaksin trampled on Thai law so it's likely the government would win its case in a Thai court. ...

Publicus, thank you for the very interesting piece. In relation to laws being trampled, I too have read the article on line, and I can only see one law as being potentially breached ie lese majesty. Somehow I don't think the UK will view a breach of Thailand's lese majesty laws as serious enough to compel The Times to release its tapes, but I am not a lawyer. Were there other Thai laws trampled in that interview???

The UK government is not involved and will not compel the Times to do anything. It is not a watchdog for Thai interests. No law appears to have been broken in the UK and no actions have been started in the Uk and I suspect will not be.

No disagreement there, caf.

Again, if the Thai government were serious it would secure a Thai court ruling in Thai law to strengthen its pursuit of the tapes from the Times. Once one has a legal ruling by a court of law you've got something to hang your hat on because it gets respect and attention.

And if you want balance put it into your diet because you won't find much balance at an internet forum. I really hadn't any idea I rankled the other side to such extents as you express, thanks.

[rkidlad]

I think it's all pretty simple. If you're easily offended and shocked in Thailand, don't read foreign news! Thai people can relax and enjoy the comfortable reading that the Thai press offer. No one has to get hurt, no one has to lose face. Just stay in your own little world and let the rest of the world continue as normal. And if you do happen to want to read it, just take it at face value. Not everything in the press is true. Form your own opinion.

'Thai' people were offended by this article? It's great when one man can speak on the behalf of 60 odd million people. I'd be a little aggrieved if I was Thai and he was speaking for me. But hey; who am I to have my own opinions?

If Thai people are one, share the same feelings, opinions, culture - shouldn't the rich Thais share some of the fortune as well? Maybe the government should open a telephone line so rich Thais can donate huge amounts of money to the poor. Then Thailand really can be one.

'What's yours is mine, and what's mine is mine' a quote from Somchai Cuntybollox.

[JetsetBkk]

The published version was edited, creating negative impact on readers, thus the protest from Thai Gov. Readers and TS himself. This I agree. Later, Times online shown full original 12 pages of what had been said on its site, <snip>

I didn't know there was a shorter, edited version. Anyone got a link, or was it only printed?

[endure]

As a fully paid up pedant the word continually mispelt is "Kudos"....

While we're at it it's 'toe the line'...

[clausewitz]

Kudo's to Timesonline. There is no obligation whatsoever.

"request again and ask the daily to "reply officially" as the article had hurt the feelings of the Thai people...."

what a bunch of bluff & hearsay. what the government wants to do with the tape is falsely accuse the Times.

Rubbish! The entire interview has been printed online and in fact it is very offensive to the Monarchy

Read the facts first before speaking

and it would be interesting if Thaksin really said so or if The Times lied like Thaksin is saying.

12 pages of interview would be quite a lot of lying if it was as you claimed? Use your head, this is not first time TK has popped off looking for sympathy

Umm he didn't object to the interview facts but to the headline that was attached with it.. but you knew that , right?

[hammered]

Umm he didn't object to the interview facts but to the headline that was attached with it.. but you knew that , right?

He also made a comment about wanting to bang his head on the floor for forgetting about something which related to a comment in the interview.

[Moruya]

Bear in mind that there could well be something in the interview tapes that was said off record.

If I were Aphisit, I would ask the Times if they have any objection to releasing the tape if Thaksin approves of it........

M

[Stumbo]

I've taught journalism at the university level for six years running now, and one of the units I teach is regarding government control and censorship of the media. Disturbingly, each year I have more and more current examples of problems in Thailand to share with my students. In that time, I've had editors at the Bangkok Post and producers at Channel 11 tell me that they have no choice but to tow the government line on most controversial issues. As a westerner, it's a continual shock to me. My students handle it better than I do--like water off a duck's back--it's normal to them.

Peforming content analysis of the NY Times before the Iraq invasion reveals equally troubling conclusions. The propaganda supplied by what is seen as a free media is far far more effective than the propaganda supplied by what is seen as a partially censored media which in turn is far far more effective than the propaganda supplied by a totally controlled media system.

The western media isnt as free as people think it is. The Thai media is worse. The important thing is to understand the reality of it all and not accept the myths.

This is a very good point, we like to point out the censorship and arm twisting that goes on in Thailand whilst believing the media in the west is actually free and true. Of course nothing could be further from the truth, it has sadly become all an illusion.

You really need to read very widely with non mainstream included to even hope to get a glimpse of reality. For some it seems to be too difficult or outside their comfort area or zone of acceptable reality. Hence the onward march or dumbed down sheeple. Not tin foil hats folks, just allowing those underused neurons a bit of a work out to to digest rather than just receive.

[shamus]

Bottom line is media organisations all around the world create more news than they report.

You are on a tour bus,you are not driving,merely a passenger. Try your best to see the sights not being pointed at.

[Publicus]

I've taught journalism at the university level for six years running now, and one of the units I teach is regarding government control and censorship of the media. Disturbingly, each year I have more and more current examples of problems in Thailand to share with my students. In that time, I've had editors at the Bangkok Post and producers at Channel 11 tell me that they have no choice but to tow the government line on most controversial issues. As a westerner, it's a continual shock to me. My students handle it better than I do--like water off a duck's back--it's normal to them.

Peforming content analysis of the NY Times before the Iraq invasion reveals equally troubling conclusions. The propaganda supplied by what is seen as a free media is far far more effective than the propaganda supplied by what is seen as a partially censored media which in turn is far far more effective than the propaganda supplied by a totally controlled media system.

The western media isnt as free as people think it is. The Thai media is worse. The important thing is to understand the reality of it all and not accept the myths.

This is a very good point, we like to point out the censorship and arm twisting that goes on in Thailand whilst believing the media in the west is actually free and true. Of course nothing could be further from the truth, it has sadly become all an illusion.

You really need to read very widely with non mainstream included to even hope to get a glimpse of reality. For some it seems to be too difficult or outside their comfort area or zone of acceptable reality. Hence the onward march or dumbed down sheeple. Not tin foil hats folks, just allowing those underused neurons a bit of a work out to to digest rather than just receive.

Yeah, some self examination of our own cultures by we ourselves is an idea and activity that likely would make Socrates rest more comfortably. Western 'mature' and further, sophisticated democracy(ies) have our own problems, especially in respect to voter turnout / participation and the herd mentality, as was created in the US during the leadup to the Iraq war (Words of Mass Deception).

I'd think tho that few among us have any delusions about our own democracy or mass communication media (print or broadcast). So I'd rather have our contemporary challenges in respect to the state of 'mature' democracies and mass media than have to deal from this Thai deck......I mean, here the House always, always wins.

[LaoPo]

This is the topic title:

Timesonline Refuses To Release Thaksin Interview Tape To Thailand

...and I really don't see how we could possibly discuss the topic in all honesty and fairness if we are not able to discuss LM as well as copy-and-paste parts of the (or total) content of the FULL TRANSCRIPT of the interview with The Times (online).

It doesn't make sense as we can't speak freely due to the circumstances.

We better leave it to peace and the Thai authorities; let them deal with it, if they can.

LaoPo

[animatic]

I think the issue is about the clarification of his statements.

He went on the record and now whines it wasn't what he said.

If an effort isn't made to find some clarification, then ONLY his printed quotes

are the standard by which his thoughts are judged as valid.

A quote is a quote.

Do we need to know exactly what phrases he uttered, maybe,

but the only one to be able to tell this journal to release his tapings,

is Thaksin himself... seems he is disinclined to give that instruction.

You may read into that which ever motivations you choose.

But it seems he does NOT want his actual words diffused,

but only to blame the reporter for some unknown changing of his words.

And we ONLY have his word that this is the case.