Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship Government The Internet Your Rights Online

Thailand Cracks Down On Twitter, Facebook, Etc. 130

Posted by timothy
from the and-everybody-loves-the-king dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The ongoing poitical turmoil in Thailand has inspired the country's Ministry of Information, Computers, and Telecommunications to issue a stern warning that all users of the Internet in Thailand must 'use the internet in the right way or with appropriate purpose and avoid disseminating information that could create misunderstanding or instigate violent actions among the public', that 'all popular websites and social networks such as facebook, twitter, hi5 and my space [sic] will be under thorough watch,' and that 'Violators will be prosecuted by law with no compromise.' Thailand has draconian anti-lèse majesté laws which are routinely abused in order to settle political scores and silence dissent, and recently implemented a so-called 'Computer Crimes Act' which appears to be almost solely focused on thoughtcrimes and censorship, rather than dealing with, you know, actual crime. Several Web forums have recently been shut down, their operators charged because they failed to delete 'harmful posts' quickly enough to suit the Thai authorities."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Thailand Cracks Down On Twitter, Facebook, Etc.

Comments Filter:
  • China has been trying to censor the internet for years to dissuade it's population from rebelling. I recall an earlier post today that basically indicates that the more the government tries to oppress freedom of speech, the more clever those with drive will become to avoid such measures. I feel somewhat sorry for Thailand citizens, who will end up paying for an ultimately futile goal.
    • by Hatta (162192)

      I recall an earlier post today that basically indicates that the more the government tries to oppress freedom of speech, the more clever those with drive will become to avoid such measures.

      The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.

      • by Taco Cowboy (5327)

        I recall an earlier post today that basically indicates that the more the government tries to oppress freedom of speech, the more clever those with drive will become to avoid such measures.

        It's nothing new.

        China and Thailand are not the only ones doing this thing to their people.

        Malaysia is doing that too.

        In fact, they haul people to the slammer for "violating laws" - whatever trump up laws they can charge with, to people who dare to criticize the racist regime that is controlling Malaysia.

        Just in case you don't know, Malaysia is the only country in the world practicing legal Apartheid. And it's worse than the one that used to be practiced in South Africa.

        In South Africa it's the majority (th

        • Are you referring to Bumiputera [wikipedia.org]?

        • by Daengbo (523424)

          The situation there is not as it's represented in the summary. I lived through Thaksin's rise and fall, and I just moved from Bangkok (where most of the protests are) a week or so ago.

          Thaksin was probably the most corrupt PM in Thailand's history (that was a difficult record to break). The only reason he has the support of 90% of the geographic area of Thailand is because of all the pork barrel projects he shoved there -- free money, special programs, whatever. Imagine the President of the U.S. buying popul

          • by liloldme (593606)

            Thaksin was probably the most corrupt PM in Thailand's history (that was a difficult record to break).

            Hardly. He was just as corrupt as any other leader the country has had since 1932. The other totally corrupt guys didn't exile him because he was totally corrupt as well, they exiled him because he didn't agree to be corrupt along with the old power elite.

            the instigators (the army) immediately started making movements toward giving up power and restoring democracy. Coups aren't rare in Thailand. They hap

    • by Zerth (26112)

      I recall an earlier post today that basically indicates that the more the government tries to oppress freedom of speech, the more clever those with drive will become to avoid such measures.

      I do suddenly have an urge to register Bhumibol-Adulyadej-can-go-Phuket.com on behalf of the people of Thailand. But I wouldn't call it clever, really.

    • by Potor (658520)
      I lived there in 2004/5 - I remember surfing the Web and hitting police pages with a stern warning (in Thai) that the site I wanted was blocked, complete with a cartoon of a pissed-off looking cop.

      The first time I saw it, I was a bit frightened (you never know how the Thai cops will respond to foreigners).

      • by Daengbo (523424)

        Porn? That's the only kind of site I've seen like that. I used to get the warnings in Korea, too. Fuck morality laws.

    • It is not futile if the majority of people do not care enough about freedom of speech to put in effort to evade the filters. Generally, censorship works best to keep fringe positions at the fringe.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      You are right that censorship in general doesn't exactly have a track record of success, but you are comparing 2 very different situations (Thailand vs China)

      You may not be aware of it, but Thailand is currently undergoing something between mass civil disorbedience to a a full-scale revolution. They declared state of emergency (which bans the gathering of 5 or more people, among other things) and deploying soldiers in the capital, soldiers are firing live rounds in addition to tear gas and the typical crow

      • by LingNoi (1066278)

        Almost correct. It is the protestors that are firing live rounds at the police. I suggest everyone to read more about the situation that happened a few days ago where a lot of police and bystanders were killed by protesters that refused to stop blocking the streets.

        A lot of police have died because the protest leaders can't control their more violent members. However that doesn't mean they're not to blame since they've been lying to their followers about the government.

        The whole protest is about getting the

        • by patiwat (126496)

          > It is the protestors that are firing live rounds at the police.

          The government has already come out and admitted that troops actually fired live rounds directly at protesters. This contradicts earlier government statements that claim that only rubber bullets and not live rounds were fired at protesters.

          The only reason the government was forced to admit the truth is because of video footage shot by the foreign media - all footage that was shown on Thai media was critical of the protesters.

        • by liloldme (593606)

          It is the protestors that are firing live rounds at the police.

          You live in some kind of strange alternate reality. Even the government admits the military shot at the protesters. That's why the death toll reads 4 on the side of the military, 16 on the side of the protesters (and unfortunately one Japanese cameraman).

          I suggest everyone to read more about the situation that happened a few days ago

          Thank you for the suggestion. We are reading. And thankfully, we can do our reading without being brain-wash

  • by Pojut (1027544) on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @04:28PM (#31849400) Homepage

    Awesome food, bad government, traps, and Sagat. What haven't you given to the world??

  • Censorship (Score:5, Funny)

    by MrTripps (1306469) on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @04:29PM (#31849408)
    The worst thing about censorship on the Internet is [REDACTED].
  • Matter of time (Score:1, Redundant)

    by qrv9412 (1758922)
    My little brother is down in thailand now, and i want to e-mail him on this but am afraid to raise any red flags down there. I wonder when our government is going to try this in a national emergency, i am not trying to be a tinfoil hat guy. It does seem like something once done, its gone forever the true freedom of the internet.
    • Re:Matter of time (Score:4, Insightful)

      by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @04:57PM (#31849836) Journal
      Unless the Thai government has changed policies recently, they probably have fairly little incentive to go after foreign nationals(unless they happen to be citizens of some country with which Thailand is having a serious diplomatic spat, or they are doing blatantly suspicious stuff). Thailand has a pretty decent size tourist sector, a strong economic dependence on exports, and some nice weather and cultural sights. As long as foreign nationals aren't getting involved in local politics, the state has very little to gain by harassing them and something to lose.

      It isn't 100% ironclad(and, in the case of severely paranoid or introverted societies, being a foreigner can increase your risk of political repression); but it is often the case, and I am given to understand that Thailand generally operates along these lines, that as long as foreigners come, see the sights, spend their money, and don't do anything overtly stupid(insult the king, hang out with some banned political party, spend their time photographing military installations), the locals have nothing to gain by trying to hunt them down for thoughtcrimes.
      • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

        by stonewallred (1465497)
        I thought Thailand was also one of the kiddie-fucker destinations. Of course, I could be confused, as my grasp of geography and child molestation destinations are not all that good.
      • Re:Matter of time (Score:4, Insightful)

        by corbettw (214229) <corbettw@noSpAm.yahoo.com> on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @06:08PM (#31850780) Journal

        in the case of severely paranoid or introverted societies, being a foreigner can increase your risk of political repression

        You mean like Texas?

        • At all.

        • How do they oppress people there? Pray loudly?

          • by mjwx (966435)

            How do they oppress people there? Pray loudly?

            I've never heard of a Texan doing anything quietly.

          • This neither effects all of texas, nor is it confined to texas; but there are a number of parts(particularly small towns) where drivers of the Negro persuasion are very likely to get an involuntary demonstration of how asset forfeiture [chicagotribune.com] works in Sheriff Bubba's town.

            Those of a more Hispanic countenance may find themselves as "guests" in ICE's rather sinister network of semi-secret prisons, being shuffled from one to the next faster than their lawyers can keep up with them(if records even exist). The latte
        • Yo brother, dont be sarcastic about Texas until you have faced government harassment in some repressive countries ...
          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by corbettw (214229)

            I was just being my usual smartass self. I have no idea why some idiot modded me Insightful when I was going for Funny.

            The truth is, Texans are some of the warmest, most friendly people you'll meet, at least superficially. It generally takes a while to earn their trust, but once you have it it's hard to lose it (though if you do you probably won't ever earn it back).

      • by ekhben (628371)

        I've seen a number of photos of tourists standing on the sidelines watching the riots, unharmed and uninvolved. And one photo of a drunken westerner being marched out of the riot; both sides were happier to see the dickhead out of there, no matter what he was shouting in support of.

        The Australian travel advice for Thailand right now looks pretty much the same as for most south-east Asian countries: exercise a high degree of caution, stay the fuck out of the areas with armed militias, and avoid large gath

        • by jrumney (197329)
          The problem is not the Thai government, or the focus of the current riots. It is the type of person that rioting attracts - some of these are likely to be xenophobic psychopaths who would take the opportunity to assault any foreign looking bystanders. Lucky for westerners, most Thai xenophobes are probably focused on their immediate neighbours, especially the ones with significant economic migrants in Thailand - Laos, Cambodia, Burma, so westerners can usually stand around watching a riot unharmed, but I d
          • by mjwx (966435)

            The problem is not the Thai government, or the focus of the current riots. It is the type of person that rioting attracts

            You've never been to Thailand.

            What you say may be true of most nations but not SE Asia in general. the Thai population is overwhelmingly and devoutly Buddhist, they will not attack a foreigner (Farang in Thai) without any provocation. In fact the Thai's would be ashamed of a foreigner seeing the protests so they will try to direct foreigners away from it.

            Thai's do not attack witho

            • by jrumney (197329)

              I've traveled enough to know to leave the rose tinted spectacles at home [news.stv.tv]. Scum exist wherever you go in the world, and when theres riots happening, they gravitate.

              • by mjwx (966435)

                I've traveled enough to know to leave the rose tinted spectacles at home. Scum exist wherever you go in the world, and when theres riots happening, they gravitate.

                As have I, and I agree about the rose tinted glasses but...

                I've been to Thailand enough times that I could write a short novel on why you should never take a tuk tuk in Phuket but the fact remains, if you stay out of Thai affairs you wont get hurt. They are extremely nationalistic yet extremely accepting of foreigners (I know, it's a strange

        • by patiwat (126496)

          > I've seen a number of photos of tourists standing on the sidelines watching the riots, unharmed and uninvolved.

          A white tourist of unknown nationality was shot in the chest after he screamed "F*** you!" at shooting soldiers. An Italian journalist was shot in the leg. A Japanese journalist was shot dead in the chest. And all of this occurred on Khao Sarn road, a small street packed with cheap tourist hotels and cafes.

      • by aaarrrgggh (9205)

        Not true. Thaivisa.com, a local forum largely for expats, run by an American, seems to be especially cautious due to past issues. Everybody is a target if they de-stabilize the precarious "stability" in Thailand.

          It is a shame, as foreigners sometimes have curiousity about the monarchy, it's succession process, etc.

        • Obviously Thailand isn't perfectly safe(though my dad and two sisters were all there within the past year, and saw nothing other than slight travel delays because some protest was occupying the airport for a period of time). My point was just that, for a country that has gone through 17 constitutions since the 30's, had a coup d'état in 2006, and off-again, on-again unrest more or less continually, and is rather weak in terms of statutory rights and freedoms, Thailand is pretty damn safe for any foreig
        • by patiwat (126496)

          Thaivisa.com is blatantly pro-government and anti-Thaksin. They applauded the censorship news.

      • by patiwat (126496)

        > Unless the Thai government has changed policies recently, they probably have fairly little incentive to go after foreign nationals

        The Ahisiti Vejjajiva government has gone after the local head of the BBC, an Australian author, a British-Thai professor... The list goes on and one. Anybody that dares criticize the government is liable.

    • by Culture20 (968837)
      They _want_ people to know about this. If the people know, then they're more likely to keep such talk private. If they don't know, a "bad" comment could spread on twitter and they'd have to play clean up.
    • Re:Matter of time (Score:4, Insightful)

      by raju1kabir (251972) on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @05:07PM (#31850020) Homepage

      Don't be silly, email him if you want to email him.

      They are mainly looking for Thai-language material. The government doesn't care about foreigners unless they are seriously inciting trouble.

    • by mirix (1649853)

      Can't see that being an issue. there's always encryption too.

      • by patiwat (126496)

        > Can't see that being an issue. there's always encryption too.

        This is an issue.

        Because the majority of Thai internet users (or internet users anywhere, for that matter) don't use encryption. Encryption and rock-solid privacy add-ons are way to complex for most users.

    • Re:Matter of time (Score:4, Insightful)

      by mjwx (966435) on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @10:01PM (#31852900)

      My little brother is down in thailand now, and i want to e-mail him on this but am afraid to raise any red flags down there. I wonder when our government is going to try this in a national emergency, i am not trying to be a tinfoil hat guy. It does seem like something once done, its gone forever the true freedom of the internet.

      Dont worry about it.

      What is happening at the moment is a major civil disruption, it's not a civil war but people have been killed (less then 30). A large number of protesters are trying to overthrow the government. This may sound bad but this is how Thailand changes government, they've had 19 coups since 1932. The Government has declared a state of emergency and is attempting to quash the protesters (SOP for this scenario).

      But the thing about Thailand is that it is very nationalistic. THAIland is for THAI's, thus this is a THAI problem. So long as your brother, as a farang (Thai word for non-Asian foreigner) stays out of it he's perfectly safe. Most Thai's (taxi drivers, hotel staff, people on the street) will steer him away from the protests which are only happening in Bangkok. If he's in Phuket, Chang Mai or anywhere else he wont even know it's happening. You can email your brother, seeing as he's not Thai the Thai authorities wont care.

  • How long before someone creates another Internet where "The Man" can't go and fuck it up?
  • They just don't want to have all their peoples tweets stored in the Library of Congress.

  • Actual crime (Score:1, Informative)

    by Sarten-X (1102295)

    "actual crime"

    If it's declared criminal in that jurisdiction, it's a crime. Whether it's morally right or wrong is dependent on your society.

    I'm not saying I like it, but I'll respect Thailand's right to govern itself. If the people don't like it, revolt/leave/commit suicide. A leader without followers is just a person.

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Skyshadow (508) *

      By your logic you could criminalize or decriminalize anything just via a government's say-so. Political thinking dismissed that sort of justification three hundred years ago (you know, "unalienable rights"?).

      • Re:Actual crime (Score:4, Insightful)

        by BitZtream (692029) on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @05:07PM (#31850014)

        I think you have a serious lack of understanding of how the government actually works.

        The government can in fact criminalize or decriminalize anything it wants. I'm not sure what you are refering to happening 300 years ago but every government in the world still has the ability to change laws. Thats part of its job.

        It is the peoples job (that would be society) to tell the government how we want the laws set. If we don't like them, its our job to get the government to change them.

        Society determines what those 'unalienable rights' are, and the government criminalizes or decriminalizes things to fit those 'unalienable rights'.

        The government doesn't exist without societies support.

        • If society decides that certain groups of people don't have "inalienable rights", then the government is in the right to exterminate them at the majority's will?

          Some of you populists are sickening.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Dog-Cow (21281)

            You are confusing two definitions of the word right. And you're probably too stupid to understand.

      • Re:Actual crime (Score:4, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @05:07PM (#31850016)
        But he is correct even if you don't like his logic. Free Speech? Sure, as long as you don't talk about x, y, or z. Oh, and we may add a, b, and c to the restricted list later. And you have to identify yourself - the founders never meant it could be anonymous. The governments (of various countries) chip away at these "inalienable rights" you speak of daily. They'll continue until it comes to "you have the right to speak well of your government". The other rights are just as much in jeopardy.
        • by Dilaudid (574715)
          Balls. Governments want to "protect" people - i.e. cover their own asses in case anything goes wrong. They haven't got any power anyway. This becomes apparent when you see American politicians talking about the internet as a system of tubes, 5 years after we all got online (shit - is it too late to regulate it?). Never assume a politician has an evil plan - he hasn't got a plan at all. If he had the ability to make plans, he would work in the private sector.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Arccot (1115809)

        By your logic you could criminalize or decriminalize anything just via a government's say-so.

        Yes, by definition. From Wikipedia: "Crime is the breach of rules or laws for which some governing authority (via mechanisms such as legal systems) can ultimately prescribe a conviction." A government can many anything it wants illegal. Even flying pigs.

        Political thinking dismissed that sort of justification three hundred years ago (you know, "unalienable rights"?).

        Political thinking doesn't stop guns, knives, or the government from forcefully taking you into custody. Your rights are only "unalienable" when you and your allies protect them from your enemies.

        "Elbereth" is the only magic word of protection I know, and th

      • The taxation of property was deemed untenable and dubiously aristocratic by the revolutionaries around 225 years ago (dunno where 300 came from?)

        But clearly, our government has changed its mind and the people have basically gone along with it.

        But at the time, the government decided that certain colors of skin were perfectly fine to own as property and to execute without trial.

        But then like 100 years ago, we decided that one gender should be able to have equal voting rights to the other gender. I'm sure tha

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      "If the people don't like it, revolt/"

      They are working on it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

      by migla (1099771)

      I'm not saying I like it, but I'll respect Thailand's right to govern itself. If the people don't like it, revolt/leave/commit suicide. A leader without followers is just a person.

      So your saying you respect the juntas right to govern the majority? ps. They *are* revolting. That's why the military coupers are cracking down on the internet.

      • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

        You have to understand that certain people make special exceptions for internet censorship when it's Thailand. I'm not quite sure why yet, but whenever Thailand comes up on slashdot you always get a few apologists out of the woodwork defending Thailand's latest crackdown on insulting the king or other speech censorship. I have no idea what makes Thailand so special, but certain slashdotters will defend Thai censorship to their dying breath.

        Oh, and in any case, OP is insinuating the governments own their c

        • by Sarten-X (1102295)

          Hardly. I don't like censorship, and I wish the best of luck to those trying to change it. I just object to the implication that "actual crime" is defined by whatever the USA/Britain/EU/Australia/whoever culture claims is wrong, and that the cultural values of others don't matter.

          All (to my knowledge) governments recognize Thailand's government. Likewise, my opinion is that it should be considered sovereign, and crime there is entirely what they want to define it as. Breathing's illegal? Okay. Breathing's n

        • by ultranova (717540)

          I have no idea what makes Thailand so special, but certain slashdotters will defend Thai censorship to their dying breath.

          Nothing makes Thailand special in this sense. It's simply, that for any proposition X, as the size of the population approaches infinity, the probability that at least one member of that population believes that X is true approaches 1. This is true regardless of how ludicrous X is.

          In other words, the larger the group, the stupider it's stupidest person will be. And Slashdot has a large

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by stonewallred (1465497)
      Hmm, leave and go where? And using what form of currency to make that move? Nice abstract idea, but the practical aspect is that 99% of the world population lacks the means to just "leave" and go elsewhere. I live in the USA, the richest or one of the richest countries in the world. I have a successful business, very, very little debt, and between bank accounts, investments and credit cards, I could probably raise close to 250k cash, give or take a few thousand. More if I had time to sell real property such
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        I could probably raise close to 250k cash, give or take a few thousand. More if I had time to sell real property such as vehicles, home, land, etc. And I don't have enough to just leave, unless I want to be a illegal and soon penniless beggar in some other country.

        With 250k and skill, you wouldn't be a "penniless beggar" for sure. You would, of course, lose many things that you have achieved in USA, but not to the point of poverty or need.

      • Just gonna go ahead an point this out, 250k, invested reasonably well is plenty to live quite nicely on down here in Honduras, I myself manage to live reasonably well on around 800-1k/month, and incidentally, I live in one of the more expensive parts of Honduras.

        If you take the time to sell off your real property, and if that just covers the cost of buying a house (around here, that'll cost somewhere between 15k and 1M [told you this was an expensive area]), you'll be doing even better.

        Oh, and you can
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by glwtta (532858)
      Whether it's morally right or wrong is dependent on your society.

      Yeah, no, whether it's considered morally right or wrong in your society is dependent on your society, not whether it actually is.

      I'm not saying I like it, but I'll respect Thailand's right to govern itself.

      Their right to govern themselves doesn't actually impact on us having opinions on how they go about doing it.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Alright, so what is morally correct, then, rather than what is merely considered morally correct? Whatever you think is so, I suppose? And what is the real basis for that? Is there a magic book somewhere I can find on what is the absolute standard for morality? And if so, who wrote it?

        As far as I know it, morality is basically something that is considered by its very nature, by individual minds. Energy waves and empty space have no morality.
        • don't rape

          don't steal

          etc.

          that's morality, and its universal. there are edge conditions: "women shouldn't behave immodestly" for example, that has all sorts of interpretations according to local customs from the netherlands to saudi arabia

          however, i would assert to you that the only morally and defensible point of view for frsming ANY opinion or morality is a global one. not that enough people do nowadays, unfortunately

          yes, most people only talk about their morality from a point of view of ethnic or national

          • So if everyone in the world agreed that murder was wrong, and could decide on a definition of murder, then that would make it so absolutely? That wouldn't just be a consensus of considerations, but would instead simply be? And what would make that so?

            If it really does work that way, then what about aliens who visit us one day? Would this apply to them too? What if they start eating human beings, and we tell them it's absolutely immoral, but they reply that everyone on their planet agrees that it's fine to
            • why does this for some reason make it suspect or inadequate?

              mankind makes all sorts of things that don't exist in the natural world: houses, clothes, guns, rocket ships, etc. the rules defining how he treats other humans is one of those things he simply makes up, and it simply works, and it simply improves his life, as much as that house, clothes, etc

              of course morality is imperfect. who cares? its still better than no morality or ethnically/ nationalistically/ religiously based forms of chauvinistic moralit

      • by patiwat (126496)

        > I'm not saying I like it, but I'll respect Thailand's right to govern itself.

        Respecting the Thai peoples' right to govern and the Thai government's right to govern are two very different things. The Thai government's refusal to call for elections shows that it doesn't think the Thai people will agree with it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by formfeed (703859)

      Whether it's morally right or wrong is dependent on your society.

      Ok, so you are a cultural relativist.

      I'll respect Thailand's right to govern itself

      At the same time you believe in universal rights.
      First problem.

      But then, these rights are not individual universal rights, you connect them to the (assumed) concept of absolute sovereignty for a government/nation.

      Hmm.

      • by Sarten-X (1102295)
        It is my opinion that no rights are unalienable, and sovereignty can be lost just as easily as any personal freedom. Everything is defined by what a given society says is right. The governments of the world generally recognize each other's sovereignty, and I will as well. I'll recognize it only until Thailand is invaded by someone else, or overthrown in revolt. Then the current government will lose its right to govern, and we'll move on to someone else.
  • by penguinchris (1020961) <penguinchris@@@gmail...com> on Wednesday April 14, 2010 @07:05PM (#31851390) Homepage

    I've been following this closely as I have a personal connection to Thailand and was last there a couple of months ago, and checking out all the stuff that's been posted online (mainly photos and videos since my Thai is rather poor).

    There's an obvious reason why they're cracking down - there really is rampant misinformation being spread. The stuff that gets published almost always includes commentary by whoever posted it which blames one side or the other based on what they say is concrete evidence that their photos or video provide... yet if you look at the stuff, it's obvious it's just wild speculation at best and purposeful stretching of the truth (misinformation) at worst. It's really, really bad. Foreigners are especially bad because they mostly don't fully understand the situation and accept "evidence" at face value.

    The main thing that's being contended right now is whether or not the Thai army troops fired live rounds (rather than rubber ones) into the red-shirt protesters (who are unarmed), thus being the cause of the deaths. Most of the videos claim to prove that they are, but there is absolutely no evidence in *any* of the videos that this is the case.

    The interesting thing is that there *is* evidence of a third group (labeled as terrorists by the government) who are the ones inciting violence... sniping people from both sides from up on buildings, and so on. There's even a video that shows someone's head getting shot off a few feet away - literally, the brain is lying on the sidewalk and the top half of the head is missing. It's clear they weren't shot by the army, because their assault rifles wouldn't have done that.

    Crazy stuff! It will be really interesting to see what follows. Based on how the Thai government operates, this "ban" shouldn't actually stop the flow of information coming out of Thailand, especially since a lot of it is coming from foreigners.

    • There's even a video that shows someone's head getting shot off a few feet away - literally, the brain is lying on the sidewalk and the top half of the head is missing. It's clear they weren't shot by the army, because their assault rifles wouldn't have done that.

      Actually, a bullet from an assault rifle to the head can do just that to a person, especially if it's 7.62 or higher caliber. Here [peacehall.com] is a sequence of (very graphic! NSFW!) pictures of a Chinese execution which was done precisely that way, and you can clearly see the upper half of the head blown off, and brain splattered all over the wall behind the executed person.

      • by aaarrrgggh (9205)

        Pretty sure the Thai military uses M16s. There is clearly a "third hand" involved, but it is pretty hard to know who they are affiliated with.

        Sad thing is that the red shirts and yellow shirts are pretty much fighting over who gets to use Taksin's money for their own (political) gain.

        • by patiwat (126496)

          The Royal Thai Army uses a dozen different and incompatible types of assault rifles, and do use large-caliber (>5.56mm) rifles.

          No doubt, the economies of scope from earning arms procurement commissions by the generals involved drove those procurement decisions.

          I doubt we'll ever know for sure who was behind the shootings. Except that with the government's censorship decrees, we'll only be hearing that the protesters are to blame for the deaths.

    • It's called "Agitprop [wikipedia.org]" and was frequently used successfully by socialists of the 20th century to achieve their goals. The short version is, you make up some shit that is infuriating and then rile up the people to respond.
    • by patiwat (126496)

      > There's an obvious reason why they're cracking down - there really is rampant misinformation being spread. The stuff that gets published almost always includes commentary by whoever posted it which blames one side or the other based on what they say is concrete evidence that their photos or video provide.

      Except that with the censorship decree, the only misinformation getting out to the public is the government's misinformation blaming the protesters for shooting their own people. There's a reason that

    • by liloldme (593606)

      The main thing that's being contended right now is whether or not the Thai army troops fired live rounds (rather than rubber ones) into the red-shirt protesters (who are unarmed), thus being the cause of the deaths. Most of the videos claim to prove that they are, but there is absolutely no evidence in *any* of the videos that this is the case.

      There's no contention on this point anymore. While the government initially attempted to deny this fact, the several eye witness reports and reports from internati

    • by liloldme (593606)

      It's clear they weren't shot by the army, because their assault rifles wouldn't have done that.

      However, their M107 [wikipedia.org] sniper rifles certainly will.

      The shots can be seen in the night from this video on the YouTube [youtube.com]. They are coming from the top of the building where the army had set up their operational headquarters.

      It is probably not far fetched to conclude that the military would not have allowed access to the protesters, or anyone else, to operate on top of their heads or let third party snipers operat

    • Foreigners are especially bad because they mostly don't fully understand the situation and accept "evidence" at face value.

      But this can't happen! Schools teach critical thinking! >:(

  • by kuei12 (1555897)
    This seems to be an awfully biased post. Too bad the author is not aware of the current problems in Thailand. Red shirts are spreading hate and fear to further their destructive cause to uneducated people in an attempt to create havoc, and overthrow the government. But hey, who cares what happens as long as people have their precious Facebook, right?
    • Red shirts are spreading hate and fear to further their destructive cause to uneducated people in an attempt to create havoc, and overthrow the government.

      Well, yes, I'd imagine that's what the government tells you.

      Problem is, if they shut up any channels of information other than those they control, how do you actually know who does or says what?

      • by stub667 (1603191)

        Thankfully they appear to just be trying to shut down the propaganda machines that are driving this. Nobody is censoring the foreign press, except the red camp who booted them out of protest sites for 'biased reporting'.

        The issues that stop people knowing the full picture here are the defamation and lese majesty laws, which are used as political weapons. Reporters still have to be circumspect to avoid retribution, or make sure they are out of the country before they go to press.

  • >Thailand has draconian anti-lèse majesté laws which are routinely abused in order to settle political scores
    Like religions in the passed....these laws are made so the enforcers can more easily manipulate situations to be controllable
    and get a desired outcome.....how many times have we heard the old speech, in order to control someone by using their
    beliefs against them in order to maintain their awareness that they could be doing something wrong and have consequences.

    Remember, don't turn on a r

  • For airing a 'Foreign Correspondent' piece that is considered critical of the Thai monarchy.

    Thailand has protested to the Australian government over the airing of a documentary critical of the Thai royal family and warned that the broadcast could affect ties between the nations.
    ...
    "We consider this an issue matter of national security... because the royal family, the monarchy, in our constitution is above politics."
    ...
    A spokesman for Australia's Department for Foreign Affairs and Trade confirmed tha

Are we running light with overbyte?

Working...