Pheu Thai Warns Of Legal Action Over Anti-Yingluck Remarks

[GentlemanJim]

Well, my dear Mike, it's not the case of me missing the point, but of you having difficulties to read. In my first post in this threat i have written:

"and the cyber police is indeed quite way out of bounds with their demands"

That means quite clearly that i do not agree with the cyber act as it is, and/or the use of it - by whomever.

You analogy about Germany also lacks logic. While with the loss of WW2 the "law" (if you can call it so) of Nazi Germany has been replaced with a democratic constitution and a completely different set of organic laws, any attempt to change the 2007 constitution by this government has been hindered by the opposition (both parliamentary and on the street) by any means available.

You may be quite right that the cyber act may be useful for this government as well, but the origin of it is clearly the coup. However, again for you to read - i do not agree with it, also not when police under this government uses this law. So far though, police threatened the use of this law against critics (which i do find very uncomfortable), but hasn't actually used it yet (as far as i know), while under the Democrat Party government this law was used regularly against opponents.

In your last paragraph you state that although you feel uncomfortable with police threatening to use the law against critics, they haven't actually used it.

Does that make the position of PTP okay? The threat to imprison people is all that is required, and it worked. The normal traffic on 'Line' and 'Facebook' from Thailand was slashed, and Pisit even grinned as he said my mission is accomplished, I have stopped the criticism. Journalists are supposed to be objective, are you trying to hedge your bets looking for a prominent job when Thaksin is President? Be careful, Thaksin and his cronies will be as popular as the Khmer Rouge and will suffer the same demise, however long it takes. As a journo, you should feel a lot more than uncomfortable about the Police silencing critics. The fact of democracy is that in general 40-49% of any population in a democracy are going to criticize any government, and here you are feeling 'uncomfortable' about a government and the police trying to completely silence any criticism in the media and on social networks. If you have any 'friends' who are journalists they won't be calling you a friend for much longer, as what is happening here should be a knife in the belly to any journalist worthy of the title. if you want to have any credibility it is time you got over your affinity for all things red, realise enough is enough, and started looking at truth, don't you think! Difficult for a leopard to change it's spots though.

[nicknostitz]

Well, dear Nick, we are missing the point again.

To make it simple: If the current German Government imprisoned people for listening to BBC Radio because of a law dating back to the 3rd Reich that made listening to "Feindsender" (enemy radio stations) a punishable offense, you certainly would not defend this action by claiming that they did not pass this law, but a preceding government. You would - at least I hope - rightfully question why this Government was still applying that law.

PTP and the Red Leaders have been trumpeting around for months after the last election that they want to do away with the "leftovers of the coup", they wanted to rewrite the whole constitution and "reconcile" the various factions of the Thai people. All that remained of these high-flying dreams is an amnesty law for their sponsor and his high-ranking followers.

The sad fact is that the Yingluck Government has recognized the usefulness of this and other laws for their own purposes and will use them to the fullest extent. Sorry - no chance to claim the moral high ground there. If the Redshirts wake up one day and start to turn against this Government, they will find out that the same laws that the "ammart have installed to keep themselves up and them down", will now be used against them by their beloved PTP. They will truly be in for a nasty surprise then.

Well, my dear Mike, it's not the case of me missing the point, but of you having difficulties to read. In my first post in this threat i have written:

"and the cyber police is indeed quite way out of bounds with their demands"

That means quite clearly that i do not agree with the cyber act as it is, and/or the use of it - by whomever.

You analogy about Germany also lacks logic. While with the loss of WW2 the "law" (if you can call it so) of Nazi Germany has been replaced with a democratic constitution and a completely different set of organic laws, any attempt to change the 2007 constitution by this government has been hindered by the opposition (both parliamentary and on the street) by any means available.

You may be quite right that the cyber act may be useful for this government as well, but the origin of it is clearly the coup. However, again for you to read - i do not agree with it, also not when police under this government uses this law. So far though, police threatened the use of this law against critics (which i do find very uncomfortable), but hasn't actually used it yet (as far as i know), while under the Democrat Party government this law was used regularly against opponents.

A rather cheap escape route you are taking here (btw Germany "grandfathered" a lot of pre-war laws, just check it out.) by hiding behind a negligeable legal technicality (that's why it is called an Analogy).

The current Government's threats to choke off the freedom of the press and the freedom of expression are extremely worrying (politely put) and not just "way out of bounds".

You attempt to minimize these blatant attacks on basic human rights (which you find "very uncomfortable" - shoes and chairs can be "very uncomfortable" - this is a different category) by claiming they so far haven't "actually [been] used". What are you going to do when they start to "use" them?

Will you find one more excuse?

Will you speak out or hope that your curriculum vitae and red shirt friends will protect you from being accosted?

My curriculum vitae has been so far that i have been speaking out, and i don't see a reason to change that.

You ask "what if"...

Well, so far i have seen threats being made to use a law that i have never agreed with. When that law is used in any unjustifiable way, i will speak out. Yet when libel cases are filed against the ones who do use terms such as "whore" etc against the PM, i will find that such libel cases are justified, as justified it was to withdraw Jeng Dokchik's bail for having publicized the phone numbers of the constitution court judges until he apologized.

My question to you is - can you show me a post that you have made it anytime in way critical when the Democrat Party government intimidated the media by the actual use of this and similar laws?

Any post critical of the Democrat Party government when it blocked Prachatai?

Or when it blocked one of my articles i published on New Mandala - the one which described the incident in which Channarong Ponsrila was killed by the military (not "allegedly" - the court has ruled already against the military)?

Or the time when on government controlled Channel 11 briefly after the crackdown Chirmsak Pinthong accused Dan Rivers of having an affair with Jakrapob Penkair - the same Dan Rivers who soon after had to leave Thailand because of constant death threats and no protection by the then Democrat Party led government?

What about the lese majeste cases filed against Ajarn Somsak, Chiranuch, and many others?

Or the regular attacks against Matichon and Khao Sod on Democrat Party stages nowadays, making those events such dangerous places for journalists from those two newspapers that they cannot go there safely with the press cards issued by those papers, and have to use generic cards instead? And before you resond with the usual what about the Red Shirts - i have written many times condemning attacks against journalists by Red Shirts, as i have done when Yellow Shirts have attacked journalists.

I could continue that list for a long time...

Or is it alright when the Democrat Party actually does what this government so far only threatens to do?

Do human rights not count anymore when they are broken by the side you quite obviously support?

Can you give me an honest answer to those questions?

[nicknostitz]

Well, my dear Mike, it's not the case of me missing the point, but of you having difficulties to read. In my first post in this threat i have written:

"and the cyber police is indeed quite way out of bounds with their demands"

That means quite clearly that i do not agree with the cyber act as it is, and/or the use of it - by whomever.

You analogy about Germany also lacks logic. While with the loss of WW2 the "law" (if you can call it so) of Nazi Germany has been replaced with a democratic constitution and a completely different set of organic laws, any attempt to change the 2007 constitution by this government has been hindered by the opposition (both parliamentary and on the street) by any means available.

You may be quite right that the cyber act may be useful for this government as well, but the origin of it is clearly the coup. However, again for you to read - i do not agree with it, also not when police under this government uses this law. So far though, police threatened the use of this law against critics (which i do find very uncomfortable), but hasn't actually used it yet (as far as i know), while under the Democrat Party government this law was used regularly against opponents.

In your last paragraph you state that although you feel uncomfortable with police threatening to use the law against critics, they haven't actually used it.

Does that make the position of PTP okay? The threat to imprison people is all that is required, and it worked. The normal traffic on 'Line' and 'Facebook' from Thailand was slashed, and Pisit even grinned as he said my mission is accomplished, I have stopped the criticism. Journalists are supposed to be objective, are you trying to hedge your bets looking for a prominent job when Thaksin is President? Be careful, Thaksin and his cronies will be as popular as the Khmer Rouge and will suffer the same demise, however long it takes. As a journo, you should feel a lot more than uncomfortable about the Police silencing critics. The fact of democracy is that in general 40-49% of any population in a democracy are going to criticize any government, and here you are feeling 'uncomfortable' about a government and the police trying to completely silence any criticism in the media and on social networks. If you have any 'friends' who are journalists they won't be calling you a friend for much longer, as what is happening here should be a knife in the belly to any journalist worthy of the title. if you want to have any credibility it is time you got over your affinity for all things red, realise enough is enough, and started looking at truth, don't you think! Difficult for a leopard to change it's spots though.

No - i think that the PTP is overreacting, and i do not find it OK when the PT issues such threats. But as long as the government is just issuing those lame threats and doesn't follow through, i am not overly worried. No government in the world likes critical media, and will issue threats to file cases which everyone knows will end up in nothing because no law has been broken. So far, it's just a storm in a teacup.

And your little snide asking me about looking for a job with the government. Hardly, i haven't done so now in those past two years (or at any time before), and see no reason why i should in the future. I am a street journalist. I don't fit into an office and a suit. I don't even care who wins or loses elections, as long as a government is popularly elected. I would actually rather prefer to be an adviser of the Democrat Party, as they seem to be in dire need of some good advice, especially after having made the decision to join ranks with the PAD, which i find astonishingly ill advised

But then - who would listen to me? I better save myself a headache, and remain what i am most comfortable with.

As to the remainder of your hyperbole - no, i will not become an activist for any side here. I report, i take pictures. That's it. You don't like it? I don't care.

My first post here in this thread was giving context, especially regarding the use of hate speech and profanity on protest stages which has not been reported in the English language local media. Which you said you don't really mind, quite contrary to what the handle you have chosen for yourself here would imply.

While quick to condemn Red Shirts for their bare existence i do not really detect any criticism from you of said hate speech and profanity used by the side you support. Which again, somewhat shines light on who really is biased here...

[MikeOboe57]

Well, dear Nick, we are missing the point again.

To make it simple: If the current German Government imprisoned people for listening to BBC Radio because of a law dating back to the 3rd Reich that made listening to "Feindsender" (enemy radio stations) a punishable offense, you certainly would not defend this action by claiming that they did not pass this law, but a preceding government. You would - at least I hope - rightfully question why this Government was still applying that law.

PTP and the Red Leaders have been trumpeting around for months after the last election that they want to do away with the "leftovers of the coup", they wanted to rewrite the whole constitution and "reconcile" the various factions of the Thai people. All that remained of these high-flying dreams is an amnesty law for their sponsor and his high-ranking followers.

The sad fact is that the Yingluck Government has recognized the usefulness of this and other laws for their own purposes and will use them to the fullest extent. Sorry - no chance to claim the moral high ground there. If the Redshirts wake up one day and start to turn against this Government, they will find out that the same laws that the "ammart have installed to keep themselves up and them down", will now be used against them by their beloved PTP. They will truly be in for a nasty surprise then.

Well, my dear Mike, it's not the case of me missing the point, but of you having difficulties to read. In my first post in this threat i have written:

"and the cyber police is indeed quite way out of bounds with their demands"

That means quite clearly that i do not agree with the cyber act as it is, and/or the use of it - by whomever.

You analogy about Germany also lacks logic. While with the loss of WW2 the "law" (if you can call it so) of Nazi Germany has been replaced with a democratic constitution and a completely different set of organic laws, any attempt to change the 2007 constitution by this government has been hindered by the opposition (both parliamentary and on the street) by any means available.

You may be quite right that the cyber act may be useful for this government as well, but the origin of it is clearly the coup. However, again for you to read - i do not agree with it, also not when police under this government uses this law. So far though, police threatened the use of this law against critics (which i do find very uncomfortable), but hasn't actually used it yet (as far as i know), while under the Democrat Party government this law was used regularly against opponents.

A rather cheap escape route you are taking here (btw Germany "grandfathered" a lot of pre-war laws, just check it out.) by hiding behind a negligeable legal technicality (that's why it is called an Analogy).

The current Government's threats to choke off the freedom of the press and the freedom of expression are extremely worrying (politely put) and not just "way out of bounds".

You attempt to minimize these blatant attacks on basic human rights (which you find "very uncomfortable" - shoes and chairs can be "very uncomfortable" - this is a different category) by claiming they so far haven't "actually [been] used". What are you going to do when they start to "use" them?

Will you find one more excuse?

Will you speak out or hope that your curriculum vitae and red shirt friends will protect you from being accosted?

My curriculum vitae has been so far that i have been speaking out, and i don't see a reason to change that.

You ask "what if"...

Well, so far i have seen threats being made to use a law that i have never agreed with. When that law is used in any unjustifiable way, i will speak out. Yet when libel cases are filed against the ones who do use terms such as "whore" etc against the PM, i will find that such libel cases are justified, as justified it was to withdraw Jeng Dokchik's bail for having publicized the phone numbers of the constitution court judges until he apologized.

My question to you is - can you show me a post that you have made it anytime in way critical when the Democrat Party government intimidated the media by the actual use of this and similar laws?

Any post critical of the Democrat Party government when it blocked Prachatai?

Or when it blocked one of my articles i published on New Mandala - the one which described the incident in which Channarong Ponsrila was killed by the military (not "allegedly" - the court has ruled already against the military)?

Or the time when on government controlled Channel 11 briefly after the crackdown Chirmsak Pinthong accused Dan Rivers of having an affair with Jakrapob Penkair - the same Dan Rivers who soon after had to leave Thailand because of constant death threats and no protection by the then Democrat Party led government?

What about the lese majeste cases filed against Ajarn Somsak, Chiranuch, and many others?

Or the regular attacks against Matichon and Khao Sod on Democrat Party stages nowadays, making those events such dangerous places for journalists from those two newspapers that they cannot go there safely with the press cards issued by those papers, and have to use generic cards instead? And before you resond with the usual what about the Red Shirts - i have written many times condemning attacks against journalists by Red Shirts, as i have done when Yellow Shirts have attacked journalists.

I could continue that list for a long time...

Or is it alright when the Democrat Party actually does what this government so far only threatens to do?

Do human rights not count anymore when they are broken by the side you quite obviously support?

Can you give me an honest answer to those questions?

Dear Nick,

Yes, but as an investigative reporter you could have found out yourself by simply checking when I joined this forum.

But it is interesting that you again tried to shift the focus of this thread to events that happened during the brief rule of the Democratic party (I assume that because: see 1st sentence). Frankly, I fail to see how their past deeds could possibly jeopardize our freedom of expression now and in the future, except maybe by giving a bad example and an excuse for the action of the current government.

[55Jay]

The end is nigh.

[nicknostitz]

Dear Nick,

Yes, but as an investigative reporter you could have found out yourself by simply checking when I joined this forum.

But it is interesting that you again tried to shift the focus of this thread to events that happened during the brief rule of the Democratic party (I assume that because: see 1st sentence). Frankly, I fail to see how their past deeds could possibly jeopardize our freedom of expression now and in the future, except maybe by giving a bad example and an excuse for the action of the current government.

As i thought... skirting from the answer.

If you fail to see what could possibly be a threat to freedom of expression by the Democrats now, may i remind you of what i have written in my post: presently, on Democrat Party stages the newspapers Khao Sod and Matichon are regularly and heavily attacked verbally since more than a year, making these events very dangerous places for journalists of those two papers. I would like to see the Thai Journalists Association and others issue some statement regarding this as well, at least for the sake of balance.

The regular accusations on those stages against their opponents and/or supporters of the government being of disloyal to the institution can under circumstances elevate the level of threat to extremely uncomfortable spheres for journalists known to be critical or from news outlets known or deemed to be critical (which covers, after 2010, almost every foreign news outlet).

The pure street movement stages can be at times even more threatening.

I am not particularly scared when any government threatens to use a law against me which i haven't broken. Let them file charges against me - and i will file counter charges, and sue for damages as well. While the cyber crime law is without doubt very problematic and can be in conflict with freedom of speech and reporting, it is particularly so when used instead of, or in connection with the lese majeste laws. And i guess i do not need to point out which side of the conflict here has filed the vast majority of these particular charges against opponents and journalists - Thai and foreign.

Any journalist even accused of such is well advised not to come close to any stage of either the Democrat Party or one of the different Yellow Shirt groups, as in this case the principle of innocent before judged guilty is not valid anymore. I have not seen the Thai Journalists Association, or the National Human Rights Commission, or the Senate Human Rights Commission making any strong statements at all to support journalists or academics of having been accused of such. Neither have i seen them doing so when journalists were shot by the military back in 2010...

If you look at most international journalists associations, freedom of expression advocacy groups, etc, you will find the main and major reason for the increasingly lower ranking of Thailand in their charts is the use and application of the lese majeste law, and second to that the cyber crime law, and especially when it is connected to perceived violations against the lese majeste laws.

The focus of the thread here is indeed the government warning to take legal action against criticism. Fine. Let them file cases. Let the courts decide. The threat of using legal procedure is not a guilty verdict by a court. But, i want to point out that I do *not* agree when the government threatens to file cases against legitimate criticism - legitimate means here: no use of profanity and slander. When a media outlets knowingly misreports, falsifies facts, and breaks codes of conduct - then any government, or damaged party, in the world is justified to file charges.

But lets not forget that this all stands in a context, and parts of that context some of you seem to refuse to acknowledge, and instead, if reminded, you accuse me of being "Red", or "biased" - an accusation which in itself is in some way an infraction against *my* freedom of speech and my professional honor. But, then, i guess you don't see the irony in that...

Edited August 18, 2013 by nicknostitz

[PoodMaiDai]

Does tha mean calling her a brainless bimbo, that is controlled by her brother could land us in trouble?

I'm almost afraid to LIKE this. Almost...

[MAJIC]

The noose is tightening everyday on freedom of speech.

The following is a Statement of Her Excellency Ms. Yingluck Shinawatra Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Thailand for The Foreign Correspondents' Club of Thailand 2013 Annual Correspondents' Dinner with the Prime Minister “An Evening with the Prime Minister” at Grand Ballroom, InterContinental Bangkok

"And in a democracy, ensuring freedom of speech is very important. Therefore, engaging with all of the international press here in Bangkok tonight is a key part of this process".

Yes! the seeds of Communism, Chairman Mao style are being sowed,Day by Day and the people don't even know it,and lack the intelligence to see it coming.

[Pimay1]

The noose is tightening everyday on freedom of speech.

The following is a Statement of Her Excellency Ms. Yingluck Shinawatra Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Thailand for The Foreign Correspondents' Club of Thailand 2013 Annual Correspondents' Dinner with the Prime Minister “An Evening with the Prime Minister” at Grand Ballroom, InterContinental Bangkok

"And in a democracy, ensuring freedom of speech is very important. Therefore, engaging with all of the international press here in Bangkok tonight is a key part of this process".

Yes! the seeds of Communism, Chairman Mao style are being sowed,Day by Day and the people don't even know it,and lack the intelligence to see it coming.

Boiling a frog anecdote comes to mind.

[NongKhaiKid]

This is all part of The Red Shirt Thugocracy , led by their DL who wants to wipe out any dissent.

and this government wants to hold a forum with international personalities on reconciliation yet criticism will not be tolerated.

[Ricardo]

Perhaps PM-Yingluck should give a speech, at some international-conference, about democracy and freedom and so-on, about how she wouldn't tolerate this sort of crack-down under her own government ?

[Robby nz]

It ( the Government) had never interfered in the work of the media nor limited its freedom of expression, PM's Office deputy spokeswoman Sunisa Lertpakawat said.

A quote from a Govt spokesperson today.

[gemini81]

Does tha mean calling her a brainless bimbo, that is controlled by her brother could land us in trouble?

I think it applies to rumors; brainless bimbo is indeed a fact.

[GentlemanJim]

As i thought... skirting from the answer.

If you fail to see what could possibly be a threat to freedom of expression by the Democrats now, may i remind you of what i have written in my post: presently, on Democrat Party stages the newspapers Khao Sod and Matichon are regularly and heavily attacked verbally since more than a year, making these events very dangerous places for journalists of those two papers. I would like to see the Thai Journalists Association and others issue some statement regarding this as well, at least for the sake of balance.

The regular accusations on those stages against their opponents and/or supporters of the government being of disloyal to the institution can under circumstances elevate the level of threat to extremely uncomfortable spheres for journalists known to be critical or from news outlets known or deemed to be critical (which covers, after 2010, almost every foreign news outlet).

The pure street movement stages can be at times even more threatening.

I am not particularly scared when any government threatens to use a law against me which i haven't broken. Let them file charges against me - and i will file counter charges, and sue for damages as well. While the cyber crime law is without doubt very problematic and can be in conflict with freedom of speech and reporting, it is particularly so when used instead of, or in connection with the lese majeste laws. And i guess i do not need to point out which side of the conflict here has filed the vast majority of these particular charges against opponents and journalists - Thai and foreign.

Any journalist even accused of such is well advised not to come close to any stage of either the Democrat Party or one of the different Yellow Shirt groups, as in this case the principle of innocent before judged guilty is not valid anymore. I have not seen the Thai Journalists Association, or the National Human Rights Commission, or the Senate Human Rights Commission making any strong statements at all to support journalists or academics of having been accused of such. Neither have i seen them doing so when journalists were shot by the military back in 2010...

If you look at most international journalists associations, freedom of expression advocacy groups, etc, you will find the main and major reason for the increasingly lower ranking of Thailand in their charts is the use and application of the lese majeste law, and second to that the cyber crime law, and especially when it is connected to perceived violations against the lese majeste laws.

The focus of the thread here is indeed the government warning to take legal action against criticism. Fine. Let them file cases. Let the courts decide. The threat of using legal procedure is not a guilty verdict by a court. But, i want to point out that I do *not* agree when the government threatens to file cases against legitimate criticism - legitimate means here: no use of profanity and slander. When a media outlets knowingly misreports, falsifies facts, and breaks codes of conduct - then any government, or damaged party, in the world is justified to file charges.

But lets not forget that this all stands in a context, and parts of that context some of you seem to refuse to acknowledge, and instead, if reminded, you accuse me of being "Red", or "biased" - an accusation which in itself is in some way an infraction against *my* freedom of speech and my professional honor. But, then, i guess you don't see the irony in that...

Good job your list doesn't include biasing a report or failing to report the holistic events in an attempt to create a false perception of a situation or event.

As for the last little bit, there is a jokes and pub humour thread on the site somewhere. It is quite laughable that you lecture us on context when not one bit of your reporting in 2010 was ever in context. We don't have to accuse you of being 'red' or 'biased', those words are conjured up in the minds of anyone that reads your work that has even the slightest knowledge of what actually goes on in this country. The rest of your post that is simply another 'but but but post'. I don't see anyone on here defending the actions of the Democrats, they are discussing the actions of a group who are currently infringing democracy and freedom of speech, the PTP. Instead of publicly condemning that yourself you whine and moan that the Democrats have done things in the past. Does that make it OK for the reds and PTP to do what they have been doing since 2010? Does it make it OK for them to do what they are doing now? Can you actually condemn their actions without saying 'But the Democrats did this..', doesn't it make every journalistic nerve in your body shiver when you hear Yingluck saying to the Army 'your job is to protect the nation', yet those that tried in 2010 face criticism at best and charges at worst.

Professional honour in journalism implies truth and objectivity and a determination to ensure the complete picture is shown to the public whenever possible. You put your work up for public viewing so it is up for public assessment and I have given you the benefit of the doubt and read a lot of it. It is biased, it is not objective and it is written in such a way as to offer a perception of events that does not reflect real life occurrences and their motivations ie...false. Go back to New Mandela where you can tell people whatever you want to and have them believe everything is as you say, and avoid places like this, where the majority of the readership can see their own BS detectors flashing red every time you put fingers to keyboard. You had every opportunity to position yourself as a journo that could have told the real story of events in 2010 to a world that needed to know, but you chose not to do that, so live with it.

Edited August 19, 2013 by GentlemanJim

[15Peter20]

The PTP scum don't seem to understand that Yingluck isn't royalty and can be criticized, especially since she's a bimbo who doesn't do anything except Skype with her brother. It sickens me to think eventually, the Shinawatra lackeys are going to clamp down on all free speech. TV posters beware. We're next.

"TV posters beware. We're next."

So it won't be all bad news, then.

[nicknostitz]

Good job your list doesn't include biasing a report or failing to report the holistic events in an attempt to create a false perception of a situation or event.

As for the last little bit, there is a jokes and pub humour thread on the site somewhere. It is quite laughable that you lecture us on context when not one bit of your reporting in 2010 was ever in context. We don't have to accuse you of being 'red' or 'biased', those words are conjured up in the minds of anyone that reads your work that has even the slightest knowledge of what actually goes on in this country. The rest of your post that is simply another 'but but but post'. I don't see anyone on here defending the actions of the Democrats, they are discussing the actions of a group who are currently infringing democracy and freedom of speech, the PTP. Instead of publicly condemning that yourself you whine and moan that the Democrats have done things in the past. Does that make it OK for the reds and PTP to do what they have been doing since 2010? Does it make it OK for them to do what they are doing now? Can you actually condemn their actions without saying 'But the Democrats did this..', doesn't it make every journalistic nerve in your body shiver when you hear Yingluck saying to the Army 'your job is to protect the nation', yet those that tried in 2010 face criticism at best and charges at worst.

Professional honour in journalism implies truth and objectivity and a determination to ensure the complete picture is shown to the public whenever possible. You put your work up for public viewing so it is up for public assessment and I have given you the benefit of the doubt and read a lot of it. It is biased, it is not objective and it is written in such a way as to offer a perception of events that does not reflect real life occurrences and their motivations ie...false. Go back to New Mandela where you can tell people whatever you want to and have them believe everything is as you say, and avoid places like this, where the majority of the readership can see their own BS detectors flashing red every time you put fingers to keyboard. You had every opportunity to position yourself as a journo that could have told the real story of events in 2010 to a world that needed to know, but you chose not to do that, so live with it.

Very funny you asking me to "Go back to New Mandela" (it's New Mandala, by the way, not Mandela), and stop posting here, in a thread that deals with "freedom of speech"...

Your rant and rave about my reporting on 2010 (which really isn't the topic of this threat), i am not commenting on other than that it is not my job to report what you would like to read, but what i see happening (and you quite obviously haven't). Reporting isn't the X-Factor, or some other talent show where the public decides, and you can decide to vote somebody out because it isn't following your opinion on things. Tough luck, and i don't care.

You also seem to have missed completely that i have stated that i do not agree with the government's threat's of filing charges against critics.

And yet again, you seem to have completely missed (by purpose?) that i have not just written about the Democrat Party then, but also now - such as their speakers attacking verbally on their stages two newspapers, making their events very dangerous places for reporters of those two papers. That's happening right now - another "group who currently infringing democracy and freedom of speech" . Any comment on that?

[Thait Spot]

Good job your list doesn't include biasing a report or failing to report the holistic events in an attempt to create a false perception of a situation or event.

As for the last little bit, there is a jokes and pub humour thread on the site somewhere. It is quite laughable that you lecture us on context when not one bit of your reporting in 2010 was ever in context. We don't have to accuse you of being 'red' or 'biased', those words are conjured up in the minds of anyone that reads your work that has even the slightest knowledge of what actually goes on in this country. The rest of your post that is simply another 'but but but post'. I don't see anyone on here defending the actions of the Democrats, they are discussing the actions of a group who are currently infringing democracy and freedom of speech, the PTP. Instead of publicly condemning that yourself you whine and moan that the Democrats have done things in the past. Does that make it OK for the reds and PTP to do what they have been doing since 2010? Does it make it OK for them to do what they are doing now? Can you actually condemn their actions without saying 'But the Democrats did this..', doesn't it make every journalistic nerve in your body shiver when you hear Yingluck saying to the Army 'your job is to protect the nation', yet those that tried in 2010 face criticism at best and charges at worst.

Professional honour in journalism implies truth and objectivity and a determination to ensure the complete picture is shown to the public whenever possible. You put your work up for public viewing so it is up for public assessment and I have given you the benefit of the doubt and read a lot of it. It is biased, it is not objective and it is written in such a way as to offer a perception of events that does not reflect real life occurrences and their motivations ie...false. Go back to New Mandela where you can tell people whatever you want to and have them believe everything is as you say, and avoid places like this, where the majority of the readership can see their own BS detectors flashing red every time you put fingers to keyboard. You had every opportunity to position yourself as a journo that could have told the real story of events in 2010 to a world that needed to know, but you chose not to do that, so live with it.

Very funny you asking me to "Go back to New Mandela" (it's New Mandala, by the way, not Mandela), and stop posting here, in a thread that deals with "freedom of speech"...

Your rant and rave about my reporting on 2010 (which really isn't the topic of this threat), i am not commenting on other than that it is not my job to report what you would like to read, but what i see happening (and you quite obviously haven't). Reporting isn't the X-Factor, or some other talent show where the public decides, and you can decide to vote somebody out because it isn't following your opinion on things. Tough luck, and i don't care.

You also seem to have missed completely that i have stated that i do not agree with the government's threat's of filing charges against critics.

And yet again, you seem to have completely missed (by purpose?) that i have not just written about the Democrat Party then, but also now - such as their speakers attacking verbally on their stages two newspapers, making their events very dangerous places for reporters of those two papers. That's happening right now - another "group who currently infringing democracy and freedom of speech" . Any comment on that?

Let's get back on topic here. As a supposed journalist that should be quite simple.

This ISN'T about what the Dems did or didn't do.

This IS about freedom of speech and the ability to criticise the Prime Minister in what claims to be a democratic nation without recrimination.

If you truly believe that the PM is beyond reproach then your previous comments on the LM laws are pure hypocrisy.

[hawker9000]

But...but....but... the democrats.....

Lord give me strength to point out the startlingly obvious one more time. The democrat party is not engaged in a hugely expensive war on all levels to thrust one of its party, or should that read family? members into a "head of state" position for eternity. They do not pursue an expensive cult of personality for their leader. They do not have forum members that love them. Nobody is upset when the democrats past bad deeds are aired on the forum, nobody gives a toss. It isn't a valid excuse for the current regimes failings so please stop doing so.

You are excusing the suppresion of free speech because what is being said doesn't suit your political bias. Sad to hear in light of apparent journalistic claims.

Maybe you should start reading my posts before coming up with the same lame blather about me being biased.

Insults such as i have listed here have nothing to do with political convictions but are about manners. I am sorry, but i cannot find anything remotely connected to political criticism when someone is called a "whore" and having rotten female genitalia. Maybe you find that this is legit political criticism, but i sure don't.

The same way i find the insults on opposition stages i have listed here disgraceful, i find insults on Red stages regarding Gen. Prem's alleged sexual preference quite revolting. I also found it quite out of order when last year Jeng Dokchik on a Red Shirt stage publicized phone numbers of constitution court judges and their families.

Anyhow, the only bias which i can detect is that some here [you] are completely ignoring the failings of the side you seem to support. Or do you find such insults acceptable part of the political discourse?

Actually, yes. Insults can very much be part of the political discourse. Just think of the slippery slope involved in banning, and then adjudicating that sort of thing. While I personally find insults of the sort you're referring to distasteful and unworthy, I wouldn't presume to gag anyone from, or punish anyone for, using them specifically for fear of suppressing his free speech, which most of us (I think) consider to be a very fundamental human right. If you want a public life (your choice), you must be willing to endure the slings & arrows, that's all there is to it.

[Bkungbank]

Should focus on inflations daily items like pork, eggs, gas where people feel the pitch, we are getting poorer and can't afford if the price keep increase.

Edited August 19, 2013 by Bkungbank

[gemini81]

Forget public servant, she and her cronies are just trying to build a dictatorship and pass it off as democracy.

[Markaew]

It's getting worse each day with these types of anti-democracy rantings from PTP. i'm starting to miss Chalerms weekly press conferences.

Yes, it's getting worse but not only in this country. It's happening in western countries as well.

I don't understand why some brainless Bimbo always likes to compare Thailand with the west. This is Thailand with its own ethics and culture, not some country in the west

I am the first complain about such comparisons, but in this case it's true. Freedoms are being quietly removed and it's rare the truth comes out.

[nicknostitz]

Let's get back on topic here. As a supposed journalist that should be quite simple.

This ISN'T about what the Dems did or didn't do.

This IS about freedom of speech and the ability to criticise the Prime Minister in what claims to be a democratic nation without recrimination.

If you truly believe that the PM is beyond reproach then your previous comments on the LM laws are pure hypocrisy.

Do i post in Swahili, Sami or Tamil?

How many times do i have to write in *plain English* that i do not agree with the government threatening to file legal cases against critics of the PM?

It is also about freedom of speech when the opposition on a regular base verbally attacks two newspapers (one of whom articles are linked to in this forum here as well), making it physically so dangerous for their reporters to enter their public stages that they have to remove any ID showing their affiliation. This is part of the present context here.

Not one of you has criticized the Democrat Party and the other opposition groups for that. Is that a truth too inconvenient for you?

[nicknostitz]

Actually, yes. Insults can very much be part of the political discourse. Just think of the slippery slope involved in banning, and then adjudicating that sort of thing. While I personally find insults of the sort you're referring to distasteful and unworthy, I wouldn't presume to gag anyone from, or punish anyone for, using them specifically for fear of suppressing his free speech, which most of us (I think) consider to be a very fundamental human right. If you want a public life (your choice), you must be willing to endure the slings & arrows, that's all there is to it.

Well, and if you want to insult or slander anyone, including a public figure, you may find out that for that most countries in the world have libel and defamation laws, consequences of which you then must endure.

While in Thailand libel is part of the criminal law, and not the civil law (which i disagree with) - there is an importance for the existence of such legal provisions.

[jaidam]

Let's get back on topic here. As a supposed journalist that should be quite simple.

This ISN'T about what the Dems did or didn't do.

This IS about freedom of speech and the ability to criticise the Prime Minister in what claims to be a democratic nation without recrimination.

If you truly believe that the PM is beyond reproach then your previous comments on the LM laws are pure hypocrisy.

Do i post in Swahili, Sami or Tamil?

How many times do i have to write in *plain English* that i do not agree with the government threatening to file legal cases against critics of the PM?

It is also about freedom of speech when the opposition on a regular base verbally attacks two newspapers (one of whom articles are linked to in this forum here as well), making it physically so dangerous for their reporters to enter their public stages that they have to remove any ID showing their affiliation. This is part of the present context here.

Not one of you has criticized the Democrat Party and the other opposition groups for that. Is that a truth too inconvenient for you?

Still you ignore the topic here and continue to rant on about the dems did this and that. We get it. You don't like the democrat party. Most people don't. Ok, good.

I would like to help you in your anti-dem quest. Are you aware that Abhisit had incorrect paperwork for his national service records from 30 years ago. This might mean that he has not been trained how to efficiently and nonchalantly kill and main women and children in a battle situation. The amount of DSI man hours it took to bring this repeatedly to national attention suggests it's a far greater and more relevant crime than say burning down a countries capital, whipping up an angry mob into a frenzy by reading a carefully prepared "burn list", and fomenting civil war to gain power, face and cash.

Now back to the topic if you don't mind.

Freedom of speech = good

Cracking down on freedom of speech because the PTP can't handle criticism = not good.

[jabek]

This is all part of The Red Shirt Thugocracy , led by their DL who wants to wipe out any dissent.

and this government wants to hold a forum with international personalities on reconciliation yet criticism will not be tolerated.

Oh so that's why the opposition refuse to attend this forum

[metisdead]

Your rant and rave about my reporting on 2010 (which really isn't the topic of this threat)

Correct, this topic has nothing to do with the events of 2010, any further diversions into that area will be removed without notice.

[MikeOboe57]

Dear Nick,

Yes, but as an investigative reporter you could have found out yourself by simply checking when I joined this forum.

But it is interesting that you again tried to shift the focus of this thread to events that happened during the brief rule of the Democratic party (I assume that because: see 1st sentence). Frankly, I fail to see how their past deeds could possibly jeopardize our freedom of expression now and in the future, except maybe by giving a bad example and an excuse for the action of the current government.

As i thought... skirting from the answer.

If you fail to see what could possibly be a threat to freedom of expression by the Democrats now, may i remind you of what i have written in my post: presently, on Democrat Party stages the newspapers Khao Sod and Matichon are regularly and heavily attacked verbally since more than a year, making these events very dangerous places for journalists of those two papers. I would like to see the Thai Journalists Association and others issue some statement regarding this as well, at least for the sake of balance.

The regular accusations on those stages against their opponents and/or supporters of the government being of disloyal to the institution can under circumstances elevate the level of threat to extremely uncomfortable spheres for journalists known to be critical or from news outlets known or deemed to be critical (which covers, after 2010, almost every foreign news outlet).

The pure street movement stages can be at times even more threatening.

I am not particularly scared when any government threatens to use a law against me which i haven't broken. Let them file charges against me - and i will file counter charges, and sue for damages as well. While the cyber crime law is without doubt very problematic and can be in conflict with freedom of speech and reporting, it is particularly so when used instead of, or in connection with the lese majeste laws. And i guess i do not need to point out which side of the conflict here has filed the vast majority of these particular charges against opponents and journalists - Thai and foreign.

Any journalist even accused of such is well advised not to come close to any stage of either the Democrat Party or one of the different Yellow Shirt groups, as in this case the principle of innocent before judged guilty is not valid anymore. I have not seen the Thai Journalists Association, or the National Human Rights Commission, or the Senate Human Rights Commission making any strong statements at all to support journalists or academics of having been accused of such. Neither have i seen them doing so when journalists were shot by the military back in 2010...

If you look at most international journalists associations, freedom of expression advocacy groups, etc, you will find the main and major reason for the increasingly lower ranking of Thailand in their charts is the use and application of the lese majeste law, and second to that the cyber crime law, and especially when it is connected to perceived violations against the lese majeste laws.

The focus of the thread here is indeed the government warning to take legal action against criticism. Fine. Let them file cases. Let the courts decide. The threat of using legal procedure is not a guilty verdict by a court. But, i want to point out that I do *not* agree when the government threatens to file cases against legitimate criticism - legitimate means here: no use of profanity and slander. When a media outlets knowingly misreports, falsifies facts, and breaks codes of conduct - then any government, or damaged party, in the world is justified to file charges.

But lets not forget that this all stands in a context, and parts of that context some of you seem to refuse to acknowledge, and instead, if reminded, you accuse me of being "Red", or "biased" - an accusation which in itself is in some way an infraction against *my* freedom of speech and my professional honor. But, then, i guess you don't see the irony in that...

Dear Nick,

I admire your sense of humour - accusing me of skirting the issue. The issue is the current threats of subordinate police officers and PTP members to hunt down anyone voicing criticism against the Government by insinuating that this "criticism" is damaging Thailand's reputation. This is a brazen attack on human rights, but in line with the recent actions of this Government and its supporting red shirts.

And what is your answer to it? A lengthy list of past events which are totally irrelevant unless the Democrats will be voted into office again. If they then try to undermine human rights like this current Government is prepared to we can all together voice our concern and criticism. Until then the "... but the Democrats..." is nothing but a decoy to divert attention.

Imagine a German Polizeidirektor making a statement on television that he will hunt down Government critics in the social media and that he already has obtained a secret agreement with a provider to share confidential customer data. He would be wiped off the political landscape the very day, and rightfully so.

Oh yes, this Government has so far just "threatened" to throw anyone criticising them into the slammer - at least we haven't heard otherwise. Does this mean we can continue as before, at least until we hear "Aufmachen, Gestapo!" ("Open the door, Gestapo!") one early morning?Or until someone sprays our front door with an assault rifle or tosses a frag into our garden to remind us who is the boss?

Thailand is moving on a dangerous path and you should not applaud or try to whitewash it.

I always thought that journalists usually were the first to sound alarm when a Government was trying to undermine human rights?

[mrtoad]

This is all part of The Red Shirt Thugocracy , led by their DL who wants to wipe out any dissent.

and this government wants to hold a forum with international personalities on reconciliation yet criticism will not be tolerated.

Oh so that's why the opposition refuse to attend this forum

it's not a forum, it's a circus. Red Shirt Thugs will not accept anything that does not meet all their demands. This "forum" is just grandstanding.

[mrtoad]

Does tha mean calling her a brainless bimbo, that is controlled by her brother could land us in trouble?

I think that criticism is no problem. But insult may be more sensitive. Exaggerated and unfounded insults can sometimes be difficult to accept by the person you direct the insult at...

It's a bit like if someone referred to you as a low life, old and fat, stinking, uneducated farang, whose empty life is dictated by the price of the cheapest beer, a miserable pension, and the 40 years younger bar girl who is sucking... his nearly empty wallet.

I wonder if the person saying something like that about you would end up in trouble or not...

Best is to criticize without exaggeration and insults I guess

Don't really know gerry, but it was kind of you to share some insights into what seems like something that you are familiar with

[jackr]

The allegation badly damages the reputation of the government and the ′image′ of Thailand

What image is that then? I think most outsiders already have an image, but it is likely light years from what you perceive it to be, my friend. What a baby.