Poll finds most Muslims agree with Al-Qaeda's goals
The Nation, 24 April, 07
Washington - Most Muslims want US military forces out of the Middle East and Islamic countries and many agree with Al-Qaeda's goals, if not its tactics, suggested a public opinion poll conducted in Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan and Indonesia.
"Most respondents have mixed feelings about Al-Qaeda," said a statement of the study's findings, conducted by the Washington-based nonprofit group WorldPublicOpinion.org and the University of Maryland.
"Large majorities agree with many of its goals, but believe that terrorist attacks on civilians are contrary to Islam."
An average of 74 per cent of all those polled agreed with the goal of "push(ing) the US to remove its bases and military forces from all Islamic countries," said the poll.
A full 91 per cent of Egyptians and 69 per cent of Moroccans said they approved of attacks against US soldiers in Iraq, while 61 per cent of Indonesians disapproved. Pakistanis appeared divided on the matter, with 31 per cent for such attacks and 33 per cent against.
The survey found similar responses with regard to US forces in Afghanistan and the Gulf.
At least 70 per cent or more in all countries supported the goals of "stand(ing) up to Americans and affirm(ing) the dignity of the Islamic people," and "pressur(ing) the United States not to favor Israel," it said.
Those polled were asked whether they thought certain ideas were the goals of Al-Qaeda or groups inspired by the Osama bin Laden-led militant network, and then were asked to what extent they agreed or disagreed, somewhat or strongly, with those goals.
Most agreed that Al-Qaeda goals included requiring a strict application of Islamic, or sharia, law in every Islamic country, pushing US military forces out of all Islamic countries, and keeping Western values out of Islamic countries -- and most were supportive of those aims.
Asked about Al-Qaeda's attitudes and tactics in general, 25 per cent of Egyptians and 15 per cent of Indonesians said they "support Al-Qaeda's attacks on Americans and share its attitudes toward the US," along with nine per cent of Moroccans and 10 per cent of Pakistanis.
Nearly one third of those polled in Egypt and Morocco said they agreed with "many of" Al-Qaeda's attitudes toward the United States but "oppose Al-Qaeda's attacks on Americans." Twenty-four per cent in Indonesia and six per cent in Pakistan took this view.
Less than one third said they disagreed with both Al-Qaeda's attitudes and its attacks on Americans, with 31 per cent of Egyptians, 29 per cent of Indonesians and 26 per cent of Moroccans and 16 per cent in Pakistan.
A large number of Pakistanis chose not to answer the question, with 68 per cent saying they refuse/don't know. Significant sections of the other groups also declined to answer, including 35 per cent of Moroccans, 32 per cent of Indonesians and 14 per cent of Egyptians.
A wider range of opinions was found regarding the question of suicide bombers and whether their actions could be justified often, sometimes, rarely or never.
Forty-one per cent of Egyptians said "an attack in which a Muslim blows himself up while attacking an enemy" is often justified, while 19 per cent said "sometimes" and 28 per cent said "never."
However, 68 per cent of Indonesians and 60 per cent of Pakistanis were strongly opposed to suicide tactics.
Most Egyptians, Indonesians and Moroccans said establishing a Palestinian state was not a US goal, and sweeping majorities in all countries -- including 89 per cent in Egypt and 63 per cent in Morocco -- responded that the United States was controlling most or nearly all of what happens in the world today.
The poll was conducted from December to February through in-home interviews by native Arabic, Indonesian and Urdu language speakers with around 1,000 people in each country. The margin of error was between three and four per cent.
Agence France Presse
Washington - Most Muslims want US military forces out of the Middle East and Islamic countries and many agree with Al-Qaeda's goals, if not its tactics, suggested a public opinion poll conducted in Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan and Indonesia.
"Most respondents have mixed feelings about Al-Qaeda," said a statement of the study's findings, conducted by the Washington-based nonprofit group WorldPublicOpinion.org and the University of Maryland.
"Large majorities agree with many of its goals, but believe that terrorist attacks on civilians are contrary to Islam."
An average of 74 per cent of all those polled agreed with the goal of "push(ing) the US to remove its bases and military forces from all Islamic countries," said the poll.
A full 91 per cent of Egyptians and 69 per cent of Moroccans said they approved of attacks against US soldiers in Iraq, while 61 per cent of Indonesians disapproved. Pakistanis appeared divided on the matter, with 31 per cent for such attacks and 33 per cent against.
The survey found similar responses with regard to US forces in Afghanistan and the Gulf.
At least 70 per cent or more in all countries supported the goals of "stand(ing) up to Americans and affirm(ing) the dignity of the Islamic people," and "pressur(ing) the United States not to favor Israel," it said.
Those polled were asked whether they thought certain ideas were the goals of Al-Qaeda or groups inspired by the Osama bin Laden-led militant network, and then were asked to what extent they agreed or disagreed, somewhat or strongly, with those goals.
Most agreed that Al-Qaeda goals included requiring a strict application of Islamic, or sharia, law in every Islamic country, pushing US military forces out of all Islamic countries, and keeping Western values out of Islamic countries -- and most were supportive of those aims.
Asked about Al-Qaeda's attitudes and tactics in general, 25 per cent of Egyptians and 15 per cent of Indonesians said they "support Al-Qaeda's attacks on Americans and share its attitudes toward the US," along with nine per cent of Moroccans and 10 per cent of Pakistanis.
Nearly one third of those polled in Egypt and Morocco said they agreed with "many of" Al-Qaeda's attitudes toward the United States but "oppose Al-Qaeda's attacks on Americans." Twenty-four per cent in Indonesia and six per cent in Pakistan took this view.
Less than one third said they disagreed with both Al-Qaeda's attitudes and its attacks on Americans, with 31 per cent of Egyptians, 29 per cent of Indonesians and 26 per cent of Moroccans and 16 per cent in Pakistan.
A large number of Pakistanis chose not to answer the question, with 68 per cent saying they refuse/don't know. Significant sections of the other groups also declined to answer, including 35 per cent of Moroccans, 32 per cent of Indonesians and 14 per cent of Egyptians.
A wider range of opinions was found regarding the question of suicide bombers and whether their actions could be justified often, sometimes, rarely or never.
Forty-one per cent of Egyptians said "an attack in which a Muslim blows himself up while attacking an enemy" is often justified, while 19 per cent said "sometimes" and 28 per cent said "never."
However, 68 per cent of Indonesians and 60 per cent of Pakistanis were strongly opposed to suicide tactics.
Most Egyptians, Indonesians and Moroccans said establishing a Palestinian state was not a US goal, and sweeping majorities in all countries -- including 89 per cent in Egypt and 63 per cent in Morocco -- responded that the United States was controlling most or nearly all of what happens in the world today.
The poll was conducted from December to February through in-home interviews by native Arabic, Indonesian and Urdu language speakers with around 1,000 people in each country. The margin of error was between three and four per cent.
Agence France Presse
When will Islam damn the chlorine bombers?
At least nine of the large-scale attacks in Iraq since the beginning of the year have involved the use of chlorine.
These bombs strike a particular fear because if people are not killed by the blast, they may easily die an agonising death when the chlorine is dispersed and inhaled.
Chlorine reacts with the water in moist human tissue, such as the eyes, nose, throat and lungs, and forms an acid which then burns the tissue. It was first used as a weapon during the First World War in April 1915 by a German chemist named Fritz Haber who synchronised the release from 6,000 cylinders along a four-mile stretch of the frontline. The attack caused the death of about 5,000 allied troops, with another 10,000 suffering from inhalation, skin burns and blinding.
The gas bombs have a special significance with Iraqis because of the use of chemical weapons by Saddam Hussein in Halabja 19 years ago. In most cases the gas is consumed by the explosion, but when a truck bomb exploded in Ramadi in Anbar province on April 6, scores of people suffered from the effects of chlorine.
It is now established that this tactic has been one of al-Qaeda's gifts to Iraq. Large quantities of chlorine, commonly used in water-treatment plants in the Middle East, were stolen in Anbar, where al-Qaeda has a strong presence. A dozen truck bombs loaded with gas cylinders are said by intelligence sources to have been prepared by the group which is seeking, among other things, to dominate Sunni resistance in Iraq and is showing signs of the Khmer Rouge's bloodlust.
The pathologies of Iraq are hard to pin down and most people in the West have long given up trying. One bomb follows another; British and American troops are killed at an increasing rate; suicide bombers are able to penetrate the Green Zone in Baghdad and there are signs that the Shi'ite death squads are returning. Even when the bombers struck the capital last week with five separate attacks, the largest of which killed 140 people, the Western media devoted the majority of their attention to the killings at Virginia Tech.
We turn away, taking a perhaps rather odd refuge in the certainty that this is all the fault of the neoconservatives, of the arrogance of Bush and Blair and what is strangely called a policy of "liberal intervention". A majority were against the war in 2003 and almost everyone is now.
But this carries you just so far. It is certainly true that none of this would be happening if, in the first place, the invasion had not gone ahead and if, in the second, the Pentagon had not decommissioned the agencies, police force and military units of Saddam's state. But let us just remember a few points before switching channel.
If the number of attacks diminished, the Americans and British troops would leave Iraq far faster than seems likely at the present. The situation, therefore, can no longer be taken for a classic resistance of an occupying force. Nor can it be entirely seen as the opposite, that is to say a guerrilla war that is maintained by Islamist, Shi'ite and Baathist groups for the sole purpose of engaging the American and British military.
The proof of this lies in the fact that the great majority of casualties are caused by Arabs killing Arabs, Muslims slaughtering Muslims.
This brings us back to the chlorine bombs being built by al-Qaeda to terrorise and kill their Muslim brothers, who, we must remember, were so recently oppressed by the atheistic regime of Saddam Hussein. The Sunni extremists of al-Qaeda are killing and torturing more Sunnis than Shi'ites, let alone US soldiers.
The thought process is psychopathic: it has the same logic we heard in the ravings of the gunman at Virginia Tech. There is a similarity of exhibitionism, too, a need for attention that must escalate the horror to maintain some kind of foothold in the Western news bulletins.
So we are talking about civil war and the convergence in Iraq of a number of opportunistic death cults, the most crazed and narcissistic of which is probably al-Qaeda, though the Shi'ite death/torture squads fielded by Muqtada al-Sadr run a pretty close second. Is this Bush and Blair's fault? Ultimately, yes because they opened the fissure that released the superheated gases of Islamist fanaticism.
But we cannot leave it at that. Somewhere in Iraq, for example, there is an individual who allowed two young children to travel into Baghdad as passengers in the back seat of car that was loaded with explosives. Naturally enough, the children's presence lowered suspicion at the checkpoints. The car entered the city, the adults hopped out and detonated the bomb with the children still inside.
That is badness of a high order and you would expect it to have offended every loving parent across Islam. You would certainly expect to hear some stern religious voices in the Middle East calling for the cessation of such barbarity in the name of one or other sect or tribe or, indeed, Allah. There are murmurs of disquiet, even horror, but in a way, the Americans and British have become everyone's alibi or at least plea of mitigation.
Our catastrophic blunder has removed the need for any moral calibration in Islam of what Muslims are doing to Muslims in Iraq. In the West, there are many who, because they were passionately against the war, fail to see that they ought to refine their judgement on the men who thrill to the idea of perfecting a chlorine bomb that will maim, blow apart or asphyxiate the workman who has just got off shift, the housewife loaded down with groceries, the student waiting to meet a friend. The chlorine bombers are not freedom fighters.
There is nowhere for us to go on Iraq. There is darkness but no hint of dawn. The surge of troops that has put such a strain on the US military has reached the halfway mark with about 15,000 deployed. In the same period, the civilian death toll has risen by 15 per cent. More troops mean more deaths, but fewer troops may mean even more deaths: a sprawling civil war that could last five to 10 years and change the course of world history on a very grand scale indeed.
There may be just a few opportunities to save the region. The first comes in early May when the US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, meets the foreign ministers of Iraq's neighbours in Egypt. The era of what has been called Bush's "moralising foreign policy" is over and Rice is said to be on a mission to listen.
It is hoped that bilateral talks with Syria and Iran will take place afterwards, but America and Britain need to show much more penitence for the ungodly mess we have created. Among the Middle Eastern powers, there has to be recognition that many of the demons let loose in Iraq are the product of religious fanaticism.
The Muslim world has to find its own way of speaking up for humanity and civilisation and, for a start, to condemn the chlorine bombs.
Henry Porter
The Observer
These bombs strike a particular fear because if people are not killed by the blast, they may easily die an agonising death when the chlorine is dispersed and inhaled.
Chlorine reacts with the water in moist human tissue, such as the eyes, nose, throat and lungs, and forms an acid which then burns the tissue. It was first used as a weapon during the First World War in April 1915 by a German chemist named Fritz Haber who synchronised the release from 6,000 cylinders along a four-mile stretch of the frontline. The attack caused the death of about 5,000 allied troops, with another 10,000 suffering from inhalation, skin burns and blinding.
The gas bombs have a special significance with Iraqis because of the use of chemical weapons by Saddam Hussein in Halabja 19 years ago. In most cases the gas is consumed by the explosion, but when a truck bomb exploded in Ramadi in Anbar province on April 6, scores of people suffered from the effects of chlorine.
It is now established that this tactic has been one of al-Qaeda's gifts to Iraq. Large quantities of chlorine, commonly used in water-treatment plants in the Middle East, were stolen in Anbar, where al-Qaeda has a strong presence. A dozen truck bombs loaded with gas cylinders are said by intelligence sources to have been prepared by the group which is seeking, among other things, to dominate Sunni resistance in Iraq and is showing signs of the Khmer Rouge's bloodlust.
The pathologies of Iraq are hard to pin down and most people in the West have long given up trying. One bomb follows another; British and American troops are killed at an increasing rate; suicide bombers are able to penetrate the Green Zone in Baghdad and there are signs that the Shi'ite death squads are returning. Even when the bombers struck the capital last week with five separate attacks, the largest of which killed 140 people, the Western media devoted the majority of their attention to the killings at Virginia Tech.
We turn away, taking a perhaps rather odd refuge in the certainty that this is all the fault of the neoconservatives, of the arrogance of Bush and Blair and what is strangely called a policy of "liberal intervention". A majority were against the war in 2003 and almost everyone is now.
But this carries you just so far. It is certainly true that none of this would be happening if, in the first place, the invasion had not gone ahead and if, in the second, the Pentagon had not decommissioned the agencies, police force and military units of Saddam's state. But let us just remember a few points before switching channel.
If the number of attacks diminished, the Americans and British troops would leave Iraq far faster than seems likely at the present. The situation, therefore, can no longer be taken for a classic resistance of an occupying force. Nor can it be entirely seen as the opposite, that is to say a guerrilla war that is maintained by Islamist, Shi'ite and Baathist groups for the sole purpose of engaging the American and British military.
The proof of this lies in the fact that the great majority of casualties are caused by Arabs killing Arabs, Muslims slaughtering Muslims.
This brings us back to the chlorine bombs being built by al-Qaeda to terrorise and kill their Muslim brothers, who, we must remember, were so recently oppressed by the atheistic regime of Saddam Hussein. The Sunni extremists of al-Qaeda are killing and torturing more Sunnis than Shi'ites, let alone US soldiers.
The thought process is psychopathic: it has the same logic we heard in the ravings of the gunman at Virginia Tech. There is a similarity of exhibitionism, too, a need for attention that must escalate the horror to maintain some kind of foothold in the Western news bulletins.
So we are talking about civil war and the convergence in Iraq of a number of opportunistic death cults, the most crazed and narcissistic of which is probably al-Qaeda, though the Shi'ite death/torture squads fielded by Muqtada al-Sadr run a pretty close second. Is this Bush and Blair's fault? Ultimately, yes because they opened the fissure that released the superheated gases of Islamist fanaticism.
But we cannot leave it at that. Somewhere in Iraq, for example, there is an individual who allowed two young children to travel into Baghdad as passengers in the back seat of car that was loaded with explosives. Naturally enough, the children's presence lowered suspicion at the checkpoints. The car entered the city, the adults hopped out and detonated the bomb with the children still inside.
That is badness of a high order and you would expect it to have offended every loving parent across Islam. You would certainly expect to hear some stern religious voices in the Middle East calling for the cessation of such barbarity in the name of one or other sect or tribe or, indeed, Allah. There are murmurs of disquiet, even horror, but in a way, the Americans and British have become everyone's alibi or at least plea of mitigation.
Our catastrophic blunder has removed the need for any moral calibration in Islam of what Muslims are doing to Muslims in Iraq. In the West, there are many who, because they were passionately against the war, fail to see that they ought to refine their judgement on the men who thrill to the idea of perfecting a chlorine bomb that will maim, blow apart or asphyxiate the workman who has just got off shift, the housewife loaded down with groceries, the student waiting to meet a friend. The chlorine bombers are not freedom fighters.
There is nowhere for us to go on Iraq. There is darkness but no hint of dawn. The surge of troops that has put such a strain on the US military has reached the halfway mark with about 15,000 deployed. In the same period, the civilian death toll has risen by 15 per cent. More troops mean more deaths, but fewer troops may mean even more deaths: a sprawling civil war that could last five to 10 years and change the course of world history on a very grand scale indeed.
There may be just a few opportunities to save the region. The first comes in early May when the US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, meets the foreign ministers of Iraq's neighbours in Egypt. The era of what has been called Bush's "moralising foreign policy" is over and Rice is said to be on a mission to listen.
It is hoped that bilateral talks with Syria and Iran will take place afterwards, but America and Britain need to show much more penitence for the ungodly mess we have created. Among the Middle Eastern powers, there has to be recognition that many of the demons let loose in Iraq are the product of religious fanaticism.
The Muslim world has to find its own way of speaking up for humanity and civilisation and, for a start, to condemn the chlorine bombs.
Henry Porter
The Observer
Documents show Japan directed sex slavery: historian
The Nation - April 17, 2007
Tokyo - A historian said Monday he has uncovered documents from post-World War II trials of Japanese war criminals that prove the military directly forced Asian women into sexual slavery.
The findings will likely cause a stir as conservative Prime Minister Shinzo Abe sparked controversy last month when he said there was no proof the imperial army directly coerced so-called "comfort women."
Hirofumi Hayashi, a professor of history at Kanto Gakuin University, said he found seven items while combing through the massive storehouse of documents submitted during the 1946-1948 "Tokyo Trials" of war criminals.
One document, written by Dutch prosecutors and dated March 13, 1946, quoted a Japanese civilian employee of the Japanese army who said an officer made local women in occupied Borneo stand naked and slapped them in the face.
"We detained them under orders of the chief security officer to find excuses to put them into brothels," the Japanese employee was quoted as saying, according to Hayashi.
Another document also includes testimony by a Japanese lieutenant, who said the army forced women into sexual slavery on Indonesia's Moa island, he said.
"The document shows that he testified that the army forced local girls into brothels," the historian told AFP.
"It says that it was in retaliation for local villagers who attacked the Japanese force," he said. "The army killed 40 villagers and put six of their daughters into brothels."
"It says one of the six agreed to the demands that she work at a brothel while five others refused" but were forced, he said.
Historians believe up to 200,000 women served in brothels for Japanese troops across Asia by the end of the war.
Abe caused a stir last month when he said that no documents showed Japan "directly" enslaved women, such as by kidnapping them.
However, Abe has repeatedly said that Japan was responsible in a broader sense and that he stands behind a landmark 1993 apology to former comfort women.
Hayashi plans to present his documents to the public Tuesday.
Agence France Presse
Tokyo - A historian said Monday he has uncovered documents from post-World War II trials of Japanese war criminals that prove the military directly forced Asian women into sexual slavery.
The findings will likely cause a stir as conservative Prime Minister Shinzo Abe sparked controversy last month when he said there was no proof the imperial army directly coerced so-called "comfort women."
Hirofumi Hayashi, a professor of history at Kanto Gakuin University, said he found seven items while combing through the massive storehouse of documents submitted during the 1946-1948 "Tokyo Trials" of war criminals.
One document, written by Dutch prosecutors and dated March 13, 1946, quoted a Japanese civilian employee of the Japanese army who said an officer made local women in occupied Borneo stand naked and slapped them in the face.
"We detained them under orders of the chief security officer to find excuses to put them into brothels," the Japanese employee was quoted as saying, according to Hayashi.
Another document also includes testimony by a Japanese lieutenant, who said the army forced women into sexual slavery on Indonesia's Moa island, he said.
"The document shows that he testified that the army forced local girls into brothels," the historian told AFP.
"It says that it was in retaliation for local villagers who attacked the Japanese force," he said. "The army killed 40 villagers and put six of their daughters into brothels."
"It says one of the six agreed to the demands that she work at a brothel while five others refused" but were forced, he said.
Historians believe up to 200,000 women served in brothels for Japanese troops across Asia by the end of the war.
Abe caused a stir last month when he said that no documents showed Japan "directly" enslaved women, such as by kidnapping them.
However, Abe has repeatedly said that Japan was responsible in a broader sense and that he stands behind a landmark 1993 apology to former comfort women.
Hayashi plans to present his documents to the public Tuesday.
Agence France Presse
Vietnam cyber-dissident expected to face court
The Nation -
April 17, 2007
HANOI - A detained Vietnamese cyber-dissident is expected to face trial soon, possibly as early as this week, for "abusing democratic freedoms," say relatives and overseas-based pro-democracy activists.
The mother of 25-year-old Truong Quoc Huy said her family had received a summons to attend his trial Monday afternoon in Ho Chi Minh City, but a court official who refused to give his name said the hearing had been postponed.
Vietnam's communist government has in recent weeks arrested several politicaldissidents and late last month sentenced one prominent activist, Catholic priest Nguyen Van Ly, to eight years' jail.
Huy, a mobile telephone technician, was first arrested in an Internet cafe in Ho Chi Minh City in October 2005 after joining online discussions on democracy on the website Paltalk.com.
Detained with him were his brother Truong Quoc Tuan and Tuan's fiance Pham Ngoc Anh Dao, a US citizen also known as Lisa Pham.
The three spent nine months in detention without charge.
Six weeks after they were freed in July last year, Huy was again arrested at an Internet cafe, and his family has not heard from him since.
Huy's mother Chau Thi Hoang told AFP that her family had received papers last Friday summonsing them to the trial on Monday afternoon.
"They accused Huy of something like abusing democracy and saying bad things about the government," she said. "My son is innocent."
She said she did not known whether the trial would be postponed, adding that the court had scrapped an earlier hearing scheduled for March.
Hoang also said police had questioned her other son Tuan, that her telephone line had been disconnected and that "life is difficult for us because we are always being disturbed by the police."
Huy and a co-defendant identified as Huynh Tan Phat are accused of communicating with overseas-based activists and other offences, according to a newspaper published by the police and dissident websites.
Vietnam says it does not punish dissidents, only people who break its laws.
In Huy's case the charge, article 258 of the criminal code, is "abusing democratic freedoms to infringe upon the interests of the state, the legitimate rights and interests of organisations and/or citizens."
Huy is charged with committing this offence "in serious circumstances," which carries a jail term of two to seven years.
Agence France-Presse
April 17, 2007
HANOI - A detained Vietnamese cyber-dissident is expected to face trial soon, possibly as early as this week, for "abusing democratic freedoms," say relatives and overseas-based pro-democracy activists.
The mother of 25-year-old Truong Quoc Huy said her family had received a summons to attend his trial Monday afternoon in Ho Chi Minh City, but a court official who refused to give his name said the hearing had been postponed.
Vietnam's communist government has in recent weeks arrested several politicaldissidents and late last month sentenced one prominent activist, Catholic priest Nguyen Van Ly, to eight years' jail.
Huy, a mobile telephone technician, was first arrested in an Internet cafe in Ho Chi Minh City in October 2005 after joining online discussions on democracy on the website Paltalk.com.
Detained with him were his brother Truong Quoc Tuan and Tuan's fiance Pham Ngoc Anh Dao, a US citizen also known as Lisa Pham.
The three spent nine months in detention without charge.
Six weeks after they were freed in July last year, Huy was again arrested at an Internet cafe, and his family has not heard from him since.
Huy's mother Chau Thi Hoang told AFP that her family had received papers last Friday summonsing them to the trial on Monday afternoon.
"They accused Huy of something like abusing democracy and saying bad things about the government," she said. "My son is innocent."
She said she did not known whether the trial would be postponed, adding that the court had scrapped an earlier hearing scheduled for March.
Hoang also said police had questioned her other son Tuan, that her telephone line had been disconnected and that "life is difficult for us because we are always being disturbed by the police."
Huy and a co-defendant identified as Huynh Tan Phat are accused of communicating with overseas-based activists and other offences, according to a newspaper published by the police and dissident websites.
Vietnam says it does not punish dissidents, only people who break its laws.
In Huy's case the charge, article 258 of the criminal code, is "abusing democratic freedoms to infringe upon the interests of the state, the legitimate rights and interests of organisations and/or citizens."
Huy is charged with committing this offence "in serious circumstances," which carries a jail term of two to seven years.
Agence France-Presse
Bloggers rail against imposing civility online
San Francisco - Outrage abounded in the "blogosphere" on Tuesday as a pair of Internet luminaries lobbied for rules of behavior in the lawless world of online commentary.
Internet publisher Tim O'Reilly, credited with coining the phrase "Web 2.0," and Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales triggered torrents of vitriol by proposing a "Blogging Code of Conduct" to impose civility on the Internet.
The idea came in the wake of anonymous death threats posted on the blog of author and speaker Kathy Sierra, O'Reilly's friend.
"A culture is a set of shared agreements that allows us to live together," O'Reilly wrote in a blog posting calling for a code of conduct.
"Let's make sure that the culture we create with our blogs is one that we are proud of."
The release this week of a first draft of rules of behavior for online commentary is riling bloggers who accuse its authors of acting like new-age media overlords disregarding precious rights of free speech.
"It's simply unbelievable what's going on here," a blogger writing under the name "Marcus" said in a comment forum at O'Reilly's website.
"So-called 'community standards' are merely the latest example of the agents of normalcy and entrenchment subconsciously attempting to organise, dictate, tame and pacify."
The proposed code calls for blog content to be deleted if it is abusive, threatening, libelous, false or violates promises of confidentiality or rights of privacy.
"We take responsibility for our own words and for comments we allow on our blog," the draft code states.
"We won't say anything online that we wouldn't say in person."
One of the half-dozen rules bans anonymous comments and another calls for ignoring "trolls," posters of nasty remarks.
"We believe that feeding the trolls only encourages them," the draft code says, going on to quote an adage "Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty, but the pig likes it."
O'Reilly suggests that bloggers adopting a finished version of the code adorn their websites with an icon of a sheriff's badge bearing the words "civility enforced."
Bloggers averse to behavior rules can mark their websites with an icon of a stick of dynamite with a lit fuse and the words "Anything goes," the proposal offers.
"I like civility but prefer the "anything goes" badge, so how about "civility enforced with dy-no-mite?'," blogger Joe Hunkins said in a message to O'Reilly.
"Censorship is a slippery slope when you are dealing with bright people who want to take legitimate but mean-spirited shots at others. I hope these efforts, which are needed, do not dumb down the debates."
Bloggers complained that barring anonymity would gag online comments from countries with governments intolerant of free speech.
"In the authoritarian and cruel regimes, if one wants to get himself hanged, only then he would in person criticise the regime," a blogger named "Pakistan Spectator" said on the O'Reilly comment board.
"Blogging is the great and unique way of protest for the oppressed people against such regimes."
Bloggers are always free to remove what they see as inappropriate contributions to forums on their websites, said Technorati founder David Sifry. Technorati specializes in tracking and indexing blogs.
People interested in spewing caustic comments can feature them on their own websites and then leave links on those of other bloggers, Sifry said.
"One of the core principles that the Internet is built on is the principle of free speech," Sifry told AFP. "If you really are a jerk, I don't have to read what you say."
Ethical issues in the "blogosphere" mirror those raised by the relentless trend of users providing raw content to websites ranging from video-sharing superstar YouTube to news gathering organisation NowPublic.
"I'm not sure a code of conduct is the answer," NowPublic co-founder Mike Tippett told AFP. "It makes about as much sense as me wearing a badge to have a conversation. It won't make a difference."
People don't need to sign pacts of civility to use telephones or send letters, Tippett noted.
"I think the wisdom of the crowds, societal mores, and the expectations of civility will generally solve the problem," Tippett said. "The Internet is just an extension of our everyday lives."
"Presumably, we are all bound by the social norms of our communities. Violate them and you are locked up."
Bangkok Post 11 April 2007
Agence France Presse
Two more offensive videos put on site
Two more videos mocking His Majesty the King appeared on the YouTube website yesterday, despite its being blocked in Thailand.
The military-installed government has been criticised by international media over the censorship.
The Ministry of Information and Communications Technology said it was in talks with site-owner Google over the case, but negotiations are thought unlikely to yield any result.
Tech-savvy Thai surfers have been able to access the videos through the use of proxy servers, computers outside the country that relay YouTube content back to the original viewer.
"The website will remain blocked until all the video clips are removed," said Sitthichai Pookaiyaudom, the minister of information and communications technology.
Those who posted the videos "want to create trouble. They have bad intentions towards Thailand," he said.
The ministry blocked access to the whole YouTube site on Wednesday after Google refused to remove a video deemed insulting to His Majesty.
Newspapers cannot provide a narrative of the video clips because of lese-majesty laws.
Last week a Swiss man was imprisoned for 10 years for vandalising portraits of the King.
The junta used lese-majesty as an excuse to stage the military coup that toppled Thaksin Shinawatra's government. State prosecutors are considering putting Thaksin on trial over the charge.
The decision to block YouTube has drawn sharp criticism from media-freedom groups, who said it highlighted a growing trend for the military government to censor political expression on the Internet.
"It's another example of how silly and ineffective censorship really is," said CJ Hinke, coordinator of the group Freedom Against Censorship Thailand.
His group, which lobbies for an end to online censorship, says the government has blocked 45,000 websites.
Global media watchdog Reporters Without Borders said yesterday it was concerned by the decision. It questioned the legal basis for censorship "initiated by the government and implemented with diligence by the police" without justice procedure.
"The closure or blockage of an online publication is a serious decision that should require a court order," it said in a statement.
Bangkok Post 7 April 2007
YouTube ban to remain in effect for now
Blockage of popular video website won't end until still image is removed: minister
The blockage im-posed on the YouTube website in Thailand will continue until a particular still image from a contentious video clip regarded as lese-majeste is also removed from the website, Information and Com-munications Technology (ICT) Minister Sitthichai Pookaiyaudom said yesterday.
He said the earlier removal of the 44-second film clip containing the content from the US-based website was not enough.
"We also want that picture removed before we unblock YouTube," he added.
The ministry earlier said it would impose the blockade indefinitely until other measures were adopted or YouTube decided to remove the lese-majeste video clip without conditions.
Next Monday, police and the ministry will work out issues to deal with such a case in the future.
Sitthichai said he was "dismayed" and complained bitterly when Google Inc, which owns YouTube, refused to remove the content, citing that it still kept material mocking US President George W Bush far more harshly than what was deemed inappropriate against His Majesty the King.
Sitthichai added that YouTube insisted it would still keep the clip.
"YouTube said it thought there was not enough reason to remove the clip after viewing the video and making its judgement on the content," he added.
He described the posting as "unacceptable" to all Thais.
"Thailand is a small country and has no negotiating power to get the content removed from YouTube. What we can do now is block the YouTube service locally, until the clip is removed," he added.
During the ICT Ministry-ordered blockade, any Internet service provider in Thailand found to be hosting websites containing content that insults His Majesty or the Royal Family or still leaves access to YouTube open to local users will have its operating licences revoked immediately.
The clip was later removed, not long after the blockade of YouTube began in Thailand on Tuesday night.
A message on the YouTube page where the clip was used said the 44-second video clip in Flash format was removed by the user - self-described as a US-based, 30-year old with the user name "Paddidda".
After posting the clip not long after March 25, when he or she registered to use the service, the user never logged into the page until yesterday evening, when the clip was removed, said a note posted yesterday on the YouTube page in question.
Associated Press explained how the content in the video clip violated lese-majeste law. The number of visitors accessing the YouTube page reached 66,553, before the clip was pulled.
In an e-mail statement on Wednesday night, YouTube spokeswoman Julie Supan said the company was "disappointed" its site had been blocked.
The Nation, Associated Press, 6 April 2007
Internet publisher Tim O'Reilly, credited with coining the phrase "Web 2.0," and Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales triggered torrents of vitriol by proposing a "Blogging Code of Conduct" to impose civility on the Internet.
The idea came in the wake of anonymous death threats posted on the blog of author and speaker Kathy Sierra, O'Reilly's friend.
"A culture is a set of shared agreements that allows us to live together," O'Reilly wrote in a blog posting calling for a code of conduct.
"Let's make sure that the culture we create with our blogs is one that we are proud of."
The release this week of a first draft of rules of behavior for online commentary is riling bloggers who accuse its authors of acting like new-age media overlords disregarding precious rights of free speech.
"It's simply unbelievable what's going on here," a blogger writing under the name "Marcus" said in a comment forum at O'Reilly's website.
"So-called 'community standards' are merely the latest example of the agents of normalcy and entrenchment subconsciously attempting to organise, dictate, tame and pacify."
The proposed code calls for blog content to be deleted if it is abusive, threatening, libelous, false or violates promises of confidentiality or rights of privacy.
"We take responsibility for our own words and for comments we allow on our blog," the draft code states.
"We won't say anything online that we wouldn't say in person."
One of the half-dozen rules bans anonymous comments and another calls for ignoring "trolls," posters of nasty remarks.
"We believe that feeding the trolls only encourages them," the draft code says, going on to quote an adage "Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty, but the pig likes it."
O'Reilly suggests that bloggers adopting a finished version of the code adorn their websites with an icon of a sheriff's badge bearing the words "civility enforced."
Bloggers averse to behavior rules can mark their websites with an icon of a stick of dynamite with a lit fuse and the words "Anything goes," the proposal offers.
"I like civility but prefer the "anything goes" badge, so how about "civility enforced with dy-no-mite?'," blogger Joe Hunkins said in a message to O'Reilly.
"Censorship is a slippery slope when you are dealing with bright people who want to take legitimate but mean-spirited shots at others. I hope these efforts, which are needed, do not dumb down the debates."
Bloggers complained that barring anonymity would gag online comments from countries with governments intolerant of free speech.
"In the authoritarian and cruel regimes, if one wants to get himself hanged, only then he would in person criticise the regime," a blogger named "Pakistan Spectator" said on the O'Reilly comment board.
"Blogging is the great and unique way of protest for the oppressed people against such regimes."
Bloggers are always free to remove what they see as inappropriate contributions to forums on their websites, said Technorati founder David Sifry. Technorati specializes in tracking and indexing blogs.
People interested in spewing caustic comments can feature them on their own websites and then leave links on those of other bloggers, Sifry said.
"One of the core principles that the Internet is built on is the principle of free speech," Sifry told AFP. "If you really are a jerk, I don't have to read what you say."
Ethical issues in the "blogosphere" mirror those raised by the relentless trend of users providing raw content to websites ranging from video-sharing superstar YouTube to news gathering organisation NowPublic.
"I'm not sure a code of conduct is the answer," NowPublic co-founder Mike Tippett told AFP. "It makes about as much sense as me wearing a badge to have a conversation. It won't make a difference."
People don't need to sign pacts of civility to use telephones or send letters, Tippett noted.
"I think the wisdom of the crowds, societal mores, and the expectations of civility will generally solve the problem," Tippett said. "The Internet is just an extension of our everyday lives."
"Presumably, we are all bound by the social norms of our communities. Violate them and you are locked up."
Bangkok Post 11 April 2007
Agence France Presse
Two more offensive videos put on site
Two more videos mocking His Majesty the King appeared on the YouTube website yesterday, despite its being blocked in Thailand.
The military-installed government has been criticised by international media over the censorship.
The Ministry of Information and Communications Technology said it was in talks with site-owner Google over the case, but negotiations are thought unlikely to yield any result.
Tech-savvy Thai surfers have been able to access the videos through the use of proxy servers, computers outside the country that relay YouTube content back to the original viewer.
"The website will remain blocked until all the video clips are removed," said Sitthichai Pookaiyaudom, the minister of information and communications technology.
Those who posted the videos "want to create trouble. They have bad intentions towards Thailand," he said.
The ministry blocked access to the whole YouTube site on Wednesday after Google refused to remove a video deemed insulting to His Majesty.
Newspapers cannot provide a narrative of the video clips because of lese-majesty laws.
Last week a Swiss man was imprisoned for 10 years for vandalising portraits of the King.
The junta used lese-majesty as an excuse to stage the military coup that toppled Thaksin Shinawatra's government. State prosecutors are considering putting Thaksin on trial over the charge.
The decision to block YouTube has drawn sharp criticism from media-freedom groups, who said it highlighted a growing trend for the military government to censor political expression on the Internet.
"It's another example of how silly and ineffective censorship really is," said CJ Hinke, coordinator of the group Freedom Against Censorship Thailand.
His group, which lobbies for an end to online censorship, says the government has blocked 45,000 websites.
Global media watchdog Reporters Without Borders said yesterday it was concerned by the decision. It questioned the legal basis for censorship "initiated by the government and implemented with diligence by the police" without justice procedure.
"The closure or blockage of an online publication is a serious decision that should require a court order," it said in a statement.
Bangkok Post 7 April 2007
YouTube ban to remain in effect for now
Blockage of popular video website won't end until still image is removed: minister
The blockage im-posed on the YouTube website in Thailand will continue until a particular still image from a contentious video clip regarded as lese-majeste is also removed from the website, Information and Com-munications Technology (ICT) Minister Sitthichai Pookaiyaudom said yesterday.
He said the earlier removal of the 44-second film clip containing the content from the US-based website was not enough.
"We also want that picture removed before we unblock YouTube," he added.
The ministry earlier said it would impose the blockade indefinitely until other measures were adopted or YouTube decided to remove the lese-majeste video clip without conditions.
Next Monday, police and the ministry will work out issues to deal with such a case in the future.
Sitthichai said he was "dismayed" and complained bitterly when Google Inc, which owns YouTube, refused to remove the content, citing that it still kept material mocking US President George W Bush far more harshly than what was deemed inappropriate against His Majesty the King.
Sitthichai added that YouTube insisted it would still keep the clip.
"YouTube said it thought there was not enough reason to remove the clip after viewing the video and making its judgement on the content," he added.
He described the posting as "unacceptable" to all Thais.
"Thailand is a small country and has no negotiating power to get the content removed from YouTube. What we can do now is block the YouTube service locally, until the clip is removed," he added.
During the ICT Ministry-ordered blockade, any Internet service provider in Thailand found to be hosting websites containing content that insults His Majesty or the Royal Family or still leaves access to YouTube open to local users will have its operating licences revoked immediately.
The clip was later removed, not long after the blockade of YouTube began in Thailand on Tuesday night.
A message on the YouTube page where the clip was used said the 44-second video clip in Flash format was removed by the user - self-described as a US-based, 30-year old with the user name "Paddidda".
After posting the clip not long after March 25, when he or she registered to use the service, the user never logged into the page until yesterday evening, when the clip was removed, said a note posted yesterday on the YouTube page in question.
Associated Press explained how the content in the video clip violated lese-majeste law. The number of visitors accessing the YouTube page reached 66,553, before the clip was pulled.
In an e-mail statement on Wednesday night, YouTube spokeswoman Julie Supan said the company was "disappointed" its site had been blocked.
The Nation, Associated Press, 6 April 2007
Internet freedom in Thailand
Number of blocked websites soars 500%
This year is becoming Thailand's 21st century version of George Orwell's "1984" - as the number of blocked websites has risen 500 per cent since the coup, according to the campaign group Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT).
The "blocklist" numbered 13,435 websites as of January 11, compared to 2,475 on October 13 last year.
The huge jump showed "a frightening increase in thought control and abrogation of civil liberties and human rights in Thailand," FACT said in a statement.
"2007 may well be the 21st century's '1984' in Thailand," it said.
Some anti-coup websites such as 19sep.org have been blocked six times since the coup took place last September.
"In the wake of September 19, many Thai Web discussion boards were blocked or ordered to self-censor, stifling freedom of expression and freedom of association," FACT said.
It said the identity of blocked websites had not been disclosed to the public, and government agencies had not revealed what criteria they used in regard to blocking sites.
The group said that the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT), which does much of the censorship, had a budget of Bt5 billion.
"It would appear Internet censorship is the only function of the Ministry of 'Information' yet MICT discloses no information to the Thai taxpayers."
The group is currently running a campaign against Internet censorship and has urged the public to participate by joining them at http://facthai.wordpress.com.
Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation, February 1, 2007
YouTube blocked because of clip 'offensive to monarchy'
Internet users in Thailand have been denied access to one of the world's most popular websites following claims it contained material offensive to the monarchy.
Local Web surfers can no longer access the YouTube site. The Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Ministry said it had blocked the site because it contained a film clip deemed offensive to the monarchy.
The ministry was forced to block access to the entire site after failing to restrict just the alleged item.
YouTube lets users across the world post their own videos or films. It has become one of the Web's most popular sites.
ICT Minister Sitthichai Pookaiyaudom said the government had approached the site owner, Google. However, the company said it had no policy about content deemed offensive in this country.
Sitthichai said Thailand considered the matter important and felt compelled to bar the site.
Access will be resumed when the allegedly offensive item is withdrawn.
He said jurisdictional and other legal complexities hindered legal action against the site and the content provider.
CAT Telecom executive Kitisak Sriprasert said it responded immediately after the ministry asked it to block access to YouTube.
The move was a short-term solution, he said.
The Nation, Aapril 5, 2007
YouTube says it is ready for compromise
Thai YouTube ban worries watchdog
Global media watchdog Reporters Without Borders said Friday it was concerned by Thailand's decision to block the video-sharing website YouTube over clips mocking the nation's king.
The popular website has been blocked in Thailand since Wednesday after the government failed to suppress a video deemed insulting to King Bhumibol Adulyadej, regarded by many Thais as semi-divine.
Since then more videos have cropped up on the site mocking the king but also taking aim at Thailand's strict lese majeste law, which authorities rigorously enforce against anyone deemed to have insulted the monarch.
"The Thai government claims that it censors only pornographic websites or those that 'insult' the monarchy, but in fact it also blocks online publications that criticise last September's coup and websites linked to southern Thailand's separatist groups," Reporters Without Borders (RSF) said.
"We wonder about the legal basis for this censorship, initiated by the government and implemented with diligence by the police," it said.
"The closure or blockage of an online publication is a serious decision that should require a court order."
The watchdog also praised YouTube and its parent company Google for refusing to comply with the government's requests to remove the video.
But the group also accused Google of double standards because of its Chinese-language site, which is censored according to the wishes of China's propaganda chiefs.
"We support their refusal to censor themselves in Thailand but we ask them to harmonise their international policy on censorship," the group said.
"Is it logical to censor pro-democracy websites in China because it is a vital market, and at the same time to oppose the removal of a few videos making fun of the king?"
Major Internet companies including Google announced in January that they were teaming up with rights groups like RSF to develop ways of protecting civil liberties online.
Agence France-Presse
The Nation, Aapril 9, 2007
Political chat site shut 'for security'
Govt pulls plug on online board; fuels YouTube censorship row
The government has shut down a popular online political chat room, citing national security as the reason.
The Information and Commu-nications Technology Ministry pulled the plug on the Rajdam-noen Room chat site hosted by the pantip.com website, according to minister Sitthichai Pookaiyaudom yesterday.
He said it had been temporarily closed after the ministry decided several topics, or threads, undermined national security.
The order was effective yesterday.
The chat room hosts political discussions with a leaning towards remnants of the previous regime.
The ministry is embroiled in another freedom-of-speech row over its decision to bar access to the video-sharing website YouTube after it declined to remove a clip deemed insulting to His Majesty the King.
Sitthichai said the ministry would permit the pantip.com chat room to open again "after the political situation improves". He would not say when this would be but hinted it could be soon.
He added the ministry was sensitive towards messages or discussions on websites that bordered on insulting His Majesty the King and Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda.
He said the ministry asked prachatai.com and mthai.com to monitor its political web boards, which allegedly carried several threads discussing the monarchy.
Sitthichai will consult with acting national police chief General Seripisut Temiyavej about legal action against those submitting content deemed harmful to the country.
Pantip.com yesterday posted a notice stating the Rajdamnoen Room was closed for national security reasons at the request of the ministry.
"The web page is suspended as requested. We would like to ask members not to post [political messages] in other rooms, otherwise the entire site will be closed. Sorry for any inconvenience," the notice said.
Pantip.com is the most popular chat site in Thailand and its political pages often feature feisty debate about democracy, the junta and the legitimacy of the coup.
The website is considered to be pro-Thaksin Shinawatra and anti manager.co.th, the website of the Manager Group controlled by Sondhi Limthongkul.
The Rajdamnoen page was shut for two weeks shortly after the September coup that ousted Thaksin.
Pantip.com founder Wanchat Padungrat yesterday said he could not understand why the chat room had been closed. He added he monitored the content of Rajdamnoen Room and found no aggressive messages insulting the monarchy.
"The ministry does not specify which topics [endanger national security]. It may become sensitive for the junta. However, I am wondering why pantip.com is the only website being censored, while other political sites are untouched," said Wanchat.
Prachatai.com editor Chuwat Rerksirisuk said he and staff ensured the site carried no offensive material. It is prepared to cooperate with the ministry.
"We try to impose self-censorship to prevent libel actions by third persons," Chuwat said.
He disagreed with ministry censorship, saying it did nothing to help the situation.
He was unaware of content deemed offensive to the monarchy, although he noted the ministry informed the site of two threads considered insulting. "We moved quickly to delete them," he said.
He added that 99 per cent of political threads on Prachatai did not discuss the monarchy. The others are trying to use the monarchy and the Privy Council president as tools to shut the site down, he said.
Prachatai.com is a political website which opposes the coup. It attacked the Thaksin government, too.
Media lecturer Darunee Hiranrak said the ministry could shut websites considered insulting to the monarchy and a danger to national security. "Even some details on the web board are not truthful. It could arouse political turmoil," she said.
Last month, the computer-related crimes bill passed its first reading in the National Legislative Assembly and entered the committee stage ahead of its second reading.
The proposed legislation is considered draconian by free-speech advocates because it provides for the punishment of online users and Internet service providers.
The legislation allows for the closing of websites carrying content considered a threat to national security. Critics say the draft gives the government excessive control over the Internet.
Sucheera Pinijparakarn
The Nation, Aapril 9, 2007
This year is becoming Thailand's 21st century version of George Orwell's "1984" - as the number of blocked websites has risen 500 per cent since the coup, according to the campaign group Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT).
The "blocklist" numbered 13,435 websites as of January 11, compared to 2,475 on October 13 last year.
The huge jump showed "a frightening increase in thought control and abrogation of civil liberties and human rights in Thailand," FACT said in a statement.
"2007 may well be the 21st century's '1984' in Thailand," it said.
Some anti-coup websites such as 19sep.org have been blocked six times since the coup took place last September.
"In the wake of September 19, many Thai Web discussion boards were blocked or ordered to self-censor, stifling freedom of expression and freedom of association," FACT said.
It said the identity of blocked websites had not been disclosed to the public, and government agencies had not revealed what criteria they used in regard to blocking sites.
The group said that the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT), which does much of the censorship, had a budget of Bt5 billion.
"It would appear Internet censorship is the only function of the Ministry of 'Information' yet MICT discloses no information to the Thai taxpayers."
The group is currently running a campaign against Internet censorship and has urged the public to participate by joining them at http://facthai.wordpress.com.
Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation, February 1, 2007
YouTube blocked because of clip 'offensive to monarchy'
Internet users in Thailand have been denied access to one of the world's most popular websites following claims it contained material offensive to the monarchy.
Local Web surfers can no longer access the YouTube site. The Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Ministry said it had blocked the site because it contained a film clip deemed offensive to the monarchy.
The ministry was forced to block access to the entire site after failing to restrict just the alleged item.
YouTube lets users across the world post their own videos or films. It has become one of the Web's most popular sites.
ICT Minister Sitthichai Pookaiyaudom said the government had approached the site owner, Google. However, the company said it had no policy about content deemed offensive in this country.
Sitthichai said Thailand considered the matter important and felt compelled to bar the site.
Access will be resumed when the allegedly offensive item is withdrawn.
He said jurisdictional and other legal complexities hindered legal action against the site and the content provider.
CAT Telecom executive Kitisak Sriprasert said it responded immediately after the ministry asked it to block access to YouTube.
The move was a short-term solution, he said.
The Nation, Aapril 5, 2007
YouTube says it is ready for compromise
Thai YouTube ban worries watchdog
Global media watchdog Reporters Without Borders said Friday it was concerned by Thailand's decision to block the video-sharing website YouTube over clips mocking the nation's king.
The popular website has been blocked in Thailand since Wednesday after the government failed to suppress a video deemed insulting to King Bhumibol Adulyadej, regarded by many Thais as semi-divine.
Since then more videos have cropped up on the site mocking the king but also taking aim at Thailand's strict lese majeste law, which authorities rigorously enforce against anyone deemed to have insulted the monarch.
"The Thai government claims that it censors only pornographic websites or those that 'insult' the monarchy, but in fact it also blocks online publications that criticise last September's coup and websites linked to southern Thailand's separatist groups," Reporters Without Borders (RSF) said.
"We wonder about the legal basis for this censorship, initiated by the government and implemented with diligence by the police," it said.
"The closure or blockage of an online publication is a serious decision that should require a court order."
The watchdog also praised YouTube and its parent company Google for refusing to comply with the government's requests to remove the video.
But the group also accused Google of double standards because of its Chinese-language site, which is censored according to the wishes of China's propaganda chiefs.
"We support their refusal to censor themselves in Thailand but we ask them to harmonise their international policy on censorship," the group said.
"Is it logical to censor pro-democracy websites in China because it is a vital market, and at the same time to oppose the removal of a few videos making fun of the king?"
Major Internet companies including Google announced in January that they were teaming up with rights groups like RSF to develop ways of protecting civil liberties online.
Agence France-Presse
The Nation, Aapril 9, 2007
Political chat site shut 'for security'
Govt pulls plug on online board; fuels YouTube censorship row
The government has shut down a popular online political chat room, citing national security as the reason.
The Information and Commu-nications Technology Ministry pulled the plug on the Rajdam-noen Room chat site hosted by the pantip.com website, according to minister Sitthichai Pookaiyaudom yesterday.
He said it had been temporarily closed after the ministry decided several topics, or threads, undermined national security.
The order was effective yesterday.
The chat room hosts political discussions with a leaning towards remnants of the previous regime.
The ministry is embroiled in another freedom-of-speech row over its decision to bar access to the video-sharing website YouTube after it declined to remove a clip deemed insulting to His Majesty the King.
Sitthichai said the ministry would permit the pantip.com chat room to open again "after the political situation improves". He would not say when this would be but hinted it could be soon.
He added the ministry was sensitive towards messages or discussions on websites that bordered on insulting His Majesty the King and Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda.
He said the ministry asked prachatai.com and mthai.com to monitor its political web boards, which allegedly carried several threads discussing the monarchy.
Sitthichai will consult with acting national police chief General Seripisut Temiyavej about legal action against those submitting content deemed harmful to the country.
Pantip.com yesterday posted a notice stating the Rajdamnoen Room was closed for national security reasons at the request of the ministry.
"The web page is suspended as requested. We would like to ask members not to post [political messages] in other rooms, otherwise the entire site will be closed. Sorry for any inconvenience," the notice said.
Pantip.com is the most popular chat site in Thailand and its political pages often feature feisty debate about democracy, the junta and the legitimacy of the coup.
The website is considered to be pro-Thaksin Shinawatra and anti manager.co.th, the website of the Manager Group controlled by Sondhi Limthongkul.
The Rajdamnoen page was shut for two weeks shortly after the September coup that ousted Thaksin.
Pantip.com founder Wanchat Padungrat yesterday said he could not understand why the chat room had been closed. He added he monitored the content of Rajdamnoen Room and found no aggressive messages insulting the monarchy.
"The ministry does not specify which topics [endanger national security]. It may become sensitive for the junta. However, I am wondering why pantip.com is the only website being censored, while other political sites are untouched," said Wanchat.
Prachatai.com editor Chuwat Rerksirisuk said he and staff ensured the site carried no offensive material. It is prepared to cooperate with the ministry.
"We try to impose self-censorship to prevent libel actions by third persons," Chuwat said.
He disagreed with ministry censorship, saying it did nothing to help the situation.
He was unaware of content deemed offensive to the monarchy, although he noted the ministry informed the site of two threads considered insulting. "We moved quickly to delete them," he said.
He added that 99 per cent of political threads on Prachatai did not discuss the monarchy. The others are trying to use the monarchy and the Privy Council president as tools to shut the site down, he said.
Prachatai.com is a political website which opposes the coup. It attacked the Thaksin government, too.
Media lecturer Darunee Hiranrak said the ministry could shut websites considered insulting to the monarchy and a danger to national security. "Even some details on the web board are not truthful. It could arouse political turmoil," she said.
Last month, the computer-related crimes bill passed its first reading in the National Legislative Assembly and entered the committee stage ahead of its second reading.
The proposed legislation is considered draconian by free-speech advocates because it provides for the punishment of online users and Internet service providers.
The legislation allows for the closing of websites carrying content considered a threat to national security. Critics say the draft gives the government excessive control over the Internet.
Sucheera Pinijparakarn
The Nation, Aapril 9, 2007
