Let’s just hope hypocrites don’t get sick

While partisan Thai journalists have few, if any, ethics, doctors are supposed to.

Yet back in 2008, Thai doctors forgot their Hippocratic oath and refused to treat patients:

Reuters on October 8 2008:

Doctors at Bangkok's main state hospitals said they would not treat police or politicians involved in Tuesday's clashes.

"No treatment for police and wicked politicians in this room," said a sign posted outside an exam room at Chulalongkorn Hospital, although hospital officials said they did not endorse the boycott. 

Of course, such a disgraceful episode is conveniently forgotten in the acerbic hypocrisy of the partisan Thai press as the Bangkok Post's hate-filled opinion piece demonstrates: 

Let's just hope the reds don't ever fall sick

I felt a sting in my eyes and a peppery taste of tears welling up in my throat the minute I saw the photo of an elderly woman being wheeled out of Chulalongkorn Hospital to be put in a taxi so that she could go and receive medical treatment at a ``safer'' hospital.

Chulalongkorn Hospital had no choice but to shut its doors to new out-patients except emergency cases, and evacuate its in-patients to other hospitals after red shirt leader Payap Panket led a number of guards and protesters in storming the hospital on Thursday night, citing their fear - later proven unfounded - that the hospital was housing soldiers.

Let's just hope that ethics, one day in the future, return to the Thai press. 

Thaksin on state media - Update

*All PHOTOS COPYRIGHT*

Jom, reporting from Maigan district of Pattani in August 2009.

The following is the English language statement from Jom Petpradab who conducted the controversial interview with former Prime Minister Thaksin on his radio program on Sunday. I am trying to find a link to the audio file now.

For back ground, see my previous post on this topic.

*Full disclosure: I helped Jom write this English language statement.

Statement
From: Jom Petpradab
Regarding: Thai media, freedom of speech, and freedom to information are under threat in Thailand by a government that is robbing the people of their rights and freedoms.

My name is Jom Petpradab and I have been a working journalist in Thailand for more than 20 years in newspaper, radio, and television media. On Sunday morning, September 6th, 2009 while I was hosting my radio program, “Exclusive with Jom Petpradab”, I received a live call from former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra who was in Dubai. He was interested in giving me an interview because the month previous I had contacted his personal lawyer requesting an interview. Before the interview started, I informed my audience that Thaksin was on the phone, that I was conducting the interview as an unbiased journalist. I reminded the audience that I am not a supporter of the former Prime Minister, was not interested in being used as an outlet for propaganda, and simply wanted my audience to be able to hear his opinion on the many accusations revolving around him. Ultimately, my motivation is to help my audience and the Thai nation better understand the political crisis that our country is embroiled in. Essentially, I was doing my job as a journalist.

My interview with Thaksin lasted for 40 minutes and I conducted it ethically, without favoritism or prejudice, and exercised proper journalistic integrity. For example, I asked him why he does not resign from politics to help ease the political crisis, whether he is loyal or wants to harm the monarchy, why he doesn’t come back to Thailand to accept the criminal convictions against him, whether he smuggled funds from the country, and how he was funding his business and political interests while abroad. The interview, in Thai, can be found at the Prachatai website here .

A key question asked, and indeed a fundamental question for our country, is how we can negotiate our current political crisis and reconcile the conflict. While I am a journalist and have conducted my interview with proper journalistic ethics, I am still a citizen and hope that we can find a solution to political conflict without bloodshed. Thaksin, love him or hate him, is at the center of this crisis. He is not only a legitimate news maker but he is a central figure to the crisis and therefore his opinion on how to negotiate this conflict is essential. To this end, I asked Thaksin “The whole country, even red and yellow, wants peace, why don’t you call the Prime Minister or talk to the government to find a way to reconcile this conflict?”

While I was conducting my interview with Thaksin, Sathit Wongnongpoey a Minister attached to the Prime Minister’s Office, called the president of MCOT radio to demand to know why he would allow Thaksin on a government radio station. He claimed Thaksin should not be allowed on government radio because his is a fugitive, has tried to attack the Privy Council, and has challenged the authority of the judicial system. He ordered the MCOT president to report to him within 24 hours to explain why MCOT was not following government policy for media not to incite political unrest. Reporters at MCOT are now in fear of doing their jobs and feel that they must present favorable, unquestioning coverage of the government or face punishment.

While press freedom, including government controlled media, is protected by Article 46 of the Thai constitution it is clear that the Thai media is unable to exercise its constitutionally guaranteed rights. In short, Thai media is not free and is subject to considerable governmental control. This is not simply a problem under the Premiership of Abhisit, but is part of a long history of restrictions on media freedom in Thailand. While Thaksin was Prime Minister he tried to intimidate the press though costly lawsuits or through direct ownership of media outlets. I had trouble with him while trying to interview his political opponents at the time. After the 2006 coup, the junta first threatened to have me fired for airing an interview with a taxi driver who was protesting the loss of democracy and I was finally fired after trying to air an interview with Thaksin immediately after the 2007 election. My difficulties trying exercise free and fair reporting are not unique but are representative of the whole profession which has suffered from a lack of freedom and persistent government interference.

What has happened to me is simply an illustration of the lack of media freedom and trouble with government controlled media. Thai media, freedom of speech, and freedom to information are under threat in Thailand. The government is robbing the Thai people of their rights and freedoms and are prosecuting journalist who are trying to do their jobs.

Since my interview, I have had to resign from my position at MCOT because the government has placed substantial pressure on my coworkers and I do not want them to continue to work in fear of government reprisal.

Sincerely,
Jom Petpradab

Contact Information:

Jom Petpradab

nospicy@hotmail.com

Thaksin on state media

Portraits of the evil one for sale outside Government House 2009.

From the Bangkok Post titled: Broadcaster broadsided for airing Thaksin interview

"State-run media company MCOT Plc is coming under fire after its radio station broadcast an interview with ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra in which he said he was ready to negotiate with all sides of politics.

Thaksin gave the interview yesterday on the radio programme Exclusive by Chom (sic )Phetpradab which airs on MCOT's FM 100.5, upsetting Deputy Prime Minister Sathit Wongnongtoey, who is in charge of state media.

Mr Sathit questioned how Thaksin's interview was allowed to go to air on a state radio station".

While Mr Sathit is questioning how Thaksin's interview was on a state radio news program, I think the real question is; why has Thaksin NOT been on the state media?

I know the government and yellows like to make Thaksin out as the true evil one who seeks to destroy Thailand but that is, of course, political rhetoric.

What is a fact is that he is a legitimate news maker and it is a disgrace that the state media has barred him from the airwaves.

This is not a red or yellow issue, not a pro or anti-Thaksin issue, this is a press freedom issue.

Thaksin is the former Prime Minister, remains a political force, and is therefor a legitimate news maker.

I personally think Thaksin is a dirty lying scumbag, but if all dirty lying scumbags were barred from the news there would be almost no news from Government House and Parliament.

In the interview, the host asked Thaksin questions over his feelings towards the monarchy, over corruption, his unusual wealth, and whether he was concerned with harming the country by persisting in politics.

Considering these allegations are persistently leveled at Thaksin, this is legitimate news.

The radio host, Jom ("Chom" should really be spelled "Jom" as his name is จอม) Phetpradab, is not in the pro-Thaksin camp either. In fact, in next week's show - if not fired by then - he will be interviewing coup-maker Sonthi Boonyaratgalin.

Back in 2007, while working for TITV, Jom tried to air an interview with Thaksin for the same reasons. It was just after the elections and Thaksin's opinion on the PPP victory was legitimate news.

In 2007, Jom was fired for his efforts and it is likely to happen again.

And this highlights the sad reality of state controlled media, its not free or fair and only reports one side of the very complex political problems facing the country.

Silencing the Red Shirts

*All Photos Copyright*
A Red Shirt's hand-drawn flag emblazoned with Democracy Monument at Government House 24 Feb 2009.

From Reporters Without Borders titled 'State of emergency used to censor pro-opposition media':

Reporters Without Borders deplores the censorship, closure and banning of many media linked to the opposition United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) since the UDD’s violent “red-shirt” demonstrations in Bangkok on 13 April.

The authorities have raided community radio stations in the north and east of the country under a state of emergency. And Internet Service Providers have been ordered to censor at least 67 websites linked to the UDD, which supports former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

Not only is cutting off 'Red Shirt' media trespassing upon the fundamentally democratic terrain of freedom of speech but will prove to further radicalize the Red-Yellow divide and increase the likelihood of violence.

The majority of mainstream Thai media is either owned, controlled, or subservient to the Government and the interests of the wealthy, largely Bangkok based, establishment.

And their dominant theme lately has been the vilification of the Red Shirts.

Such one-sided reporting only serves to perpetuate an inaccurate and bigoted view that the Red Shirts are just an uneducated simpleminded mob of Thaksin stooges looking for a quick cash hand out.

While this view of the Red Shirts will bolster certain sectors self-justification for their own positions of power and privilege it also has the potential to move towards inciting hatred.

Instead of reporting on the grievances that the Red Shirts have with economic inequalities, democratic disenfranchisement, elite bigotry, Bangkok centrism, or even reporting on the wider demographics of what is actually a diverse movement the media perpetuates the simple view of Red Shirts as Thaksin following uneducated thugs.

This is a dangerous path that not only polarizes the opposing side by failing to empathize and understand the opposition but it is a slippery slope towards vilifying and dehumanizing.

Similar to the crescendo of right-wing nationalist hatred that fueled the massacre of students at Thammasat University in 1976, there is the potential for the one-sided media to cultivate a climate of dangerous intolerance.

Eventually, the genuine problems that have fueled this national Red vs. Yellow issue need to be debated in the media/public and diversity of opinion needs to be freed so that solutions and compromises can be found.

But if the Thai media keeps voicing the same old self-serving beliefs that provides the foundation for inequality and intolerance then they will not only increase the divide that is paralyzing the country but they will foster a climate of hatred, fear, and ultimately of violence.

Red Guars anyone?

More from Giles

Giles is back and has some interesting quotes.

First, from the Guardian, titled "Thailand's battle for democracy":

"Five years ago, Thailand had a thriving and developing democracy with freedom of expression, a relatively free press and an active civil society, where social movements campaigned to protect the interests of the poor. Today, the country is creeping towards totalitarianism.

Since his (Thaksin's) overthrow and as a result of the prolonged crisis, a grassroots "red shirt" democracy movement has developed. They are moving beyond Thaksin. What is also amazing is that this is becoming a republican movement because of the actions of the military and the PAD in dragging the monarchy into politics."

Not sure how the rest of the Red Shirt movement is going to appreciate being labeled as republican. But in a country where there is simply no honest discussion of the monarchy, it is hard to say whether there is actually support for a republic. If the Red Shirts quietly adopt this, fracture into different groups, or distance themselves from republicanism will be the only way to really see if Giles is correct about it becoming a republican movement.

Regardless though, royalists will be boiling with violent rage over this and the likelihood of clashes between Yellow Shirts and Red Shirts seem certain.

And over that the New Mandala, there is part one of an interview with Giles. Some of the more interesting quotes:

"But I was not going to leave the country with my tail between my legs, I was not going to run away. Once, I left the country, I decided to fight back without any restriction. I wrote the notes of the Manifesto on the airplane I flew from Bangkok to London.

I felt that really it was necessary for someone to say those things because it was in the mind of thousands of people in Thailand but nobody has said it.

What is interesting is that this Manifesto, in a Western European context, is not very progressive. It is normal. In a Thai context, however, it is explosive. I think that indicates the difference between the amount of democracy in Thailand and the amount of democracy in Britain or Western Europe.

I think the whole situation in Thailand has reached what I would describe as a civil war. It might not be a violent civil war, but it is a civil war of ideas between two sections of society. And the Red Shirts section is rapidly becoming republican. So, really, people want to move beyond just fighting Lese Majeste, and talk about political reform. I think people are ready for that.

I think that the monarchy must be feeling insecure. Even more important, I think that the military and those that have in the past enjoyed undemocratic power but claimed legitimacy from the monarchy are really very, very scared that when this King dies, their legitimacy will evaporate because they are not going to be able to claim the same legitimacy from the Crown Prince."

I am not necessarily in agreement with Giles but I certainly appreciate his decision to fight back and to force discussion on the monarchy.

He is certainly right about his manifesto not being progressive in Europe, but it is nothing short to seditious in Thailand.

New, easy, legal tools for circumventing Internet censorship

With lese majesty laws reaching a fever pitch in Thailand, there is some helpful advice from Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT):

Thailand's Ministry of Information and Communication Technology, the Official Censor of the Military Coup, has blocked at least 17,775 websites which, along with blocking by the Royal Thai Police, resulted in more than 50,000 websites blocked in Thailand. Public webboard discussions, circumvention tools, voices from Thailand's Muslim South and critical commentary of Thailand's monarchy were particularly targetted for censorship.


Thailand's military government also passed a Computer-Related Crimes Act with draconian penalties and onerous data retention provisions abnegating privacy and anonymity and chilling public discussion of vital issues among Thais. The result of this cybercrime law was to criminalise circumvention with one notable exception, the Virtual Private Networks (VPN) relied on by business to create a secure, private, encrypted channel.


Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT) is pleased to provide links to two new, easy tools for private citizens to legally ignore Thailand's Internet censorship. Virtual Private Networks have been complicated to set up and difficult to maintain. However, with these two free, public tools, VPN is available to everyone.


Your own private network is located overseas beyond the reach of Thai censors using an encrypted tunnel so that governments and ISPs won't even be able to see where you're surfing. Unlike anonymous Internet proxies, criminal under the cybercrime law, using VPN makes streaming video and audio freely available.


Two simple, free VPN applications are HotSpot Shield (Mac and Windows) <http://www.hotspotshield.com/

, AlwaysVPN (Mac, Windows, Linux) <http://alwaysvpn.com/index.html> and Social VPN (Windows, Linux) http://socialvpn.wordpress.com/. Run the installer and they just work with one click every time you get to a blocked website.


The United States has plans to create a national broadband network which will censor all "pornography" and Australia is planning on spending $189 million on a firewall to ensure pornography cannot be accessed there.


Both Sweden and England have announced plans to capture every electronic communication passing their borders.


The Thai government has announced plans to set up a national firewall to block l?se majest? content along with "pornographic, obscene and terrorist websites" with a budget of 100 to 500 million Thai baht or $2.9 to $14.6 million. Current law requires government to obtain a court order to block websites. This is most often accomplished by rubber-stamp orders. The new censorship plan would illegally block websites without court order.


Can any country afford such measures to censor free expression?


Would this money not be better spent on amazing Thailand's amazing social crises, such as peace, justice and reconciliation in the South, or even Internet education?


Thailand's prime minister deposed by fiat had plans to block 800,000 websites here. His legacy in the current government claims to block "only 2,300" sites, emphasising censorship of sites critical of Thailand's monarchy with plans to block a further 400. A video insulting the Thai King resulted in a seven-month ban on YouTube by the coup government. This ban resulted in dozens of copycat videos.


Google cooperated with the Thai government's requests in secret, creating geolocational blocking; when users attempt to access a blocked video, a message states, "This video is not available in your country," and occurs along with government redirection by transparent proxy. Much of the Internet censorship is directed at the dozens of videos satirising, criticising, insulting, demeaning, defaming or merely commenting on Thailand's monarchy, particularly the prolific and irreverent StopLeseMajeste YouTube channel.


There are now wholesale accusations of l?se majest? in Thailand with each faction claiming to act for the protection of the monarchy. Two webboard forum posters were arrested under the cybercrime law for their comments about the monarchy after being tracked by their IP address. At the time of King Bhumibol's 60th anniversary celebrations, there were more than 60 persons under charges of l?se majest?. Currently there are at least 34 charged but this figure is misleading as accusations of l?se majest? have resulted in numerous bans of critical media, including books, film, television, radio and websites.


The King himself has invited criticism but Thai people love their King but never listen to his words. L?se majest? charges always result from petty bureaucrats and policemen.


Governments believe they can censor free speech with impunity. VPN proves they cannot.



HotSpot Shield (Mac and Windows) <http://www.hotspotshield.com/>

AlwaysVPN (Mac, Windows, Linux) <http://alwaysvpn.com/index.html>

Social VPN (Windows, Linux) <http://socialvpn.wordpress.com/>

More lese majeste charges

* all photos copyright*

Royal propaganda posted by the PAD mob during their siege of Government House November 23rd, 2008.

More lese majeste charges are being launched against the foreign media.

Such archaic laws keep Thailand proudly in league with beacons of freedom like Egypt, Kazakhstan, Zimbabwe, and Belarus.

From the CPJ:

The Committee to Protect Journalists condemns the ongoing legal harassment of BBC correspondent Jonathan Head. Police Lt. Col. Wattanasak Mungkandee filed a third criminal complaint this year against Head on December 23, alleging he had insulted the Thai monarchy in his reporting.

And an email from the Foreign Correspondents Club Thailand:

Suspension of DVD sales of Dec 9 event

The FCCT regrets to announce that since the Dec 9, 2008 event ''The State of Politics and the Way Forward for Thailand '' is apparently the subject of a police inquiry, the Executive Committee deems it appropriate to suspend the further distribution of the DVD recording of the event with immediate effect.

We would like to take this opportunity to inform members that DVD recordings of Club events have been misused by certain individuals with their own agendas, in a way that compromises the free speech values the media community and the FCCT stand for. Members are advised to be cautious in and if possible refrain from, sharing or lending DVDs of Club events.

And an example of a BBC article that inspired lese majeste:

"The PAD has justified its actions as being in defence of the monarchy, and the king's portrait has been displayed prominently during all its protests.

Senior figures close to the palace have openly supported the movement.

When the queen offered to preside over the funeral last month of a PAD protestor killed during clashes with the police, it appeared to be a tacit blessing for the movement.

Some in the government even believe the revered king may be backing the movement, although at the age of almost 81 this seems unlikely.

Hard evidence is difficult to come by. But people's actions in Thailand are now being driven as much by what they believe as what they know to be true.

The government and its rural followers believe there is a palace-army-elite conspiracy to rob them of their electoral mandate."

And some comments from the Bangkok Pundit on these recent charges:

"The thing with lese majeste complaints is that someone makes a complaint against you, no matter how flimsly the charges, any prudent person has to hire a lawyer (when the offence carries a jail sentence of 3-15 years do you really want to dismiss it?). You'll have to go to the police station, be interviewed etc. If you are unlucky enough you might not even get bail pending trial. These are all risks. What about the complaint? It costs them nothing. They are free to go on their merry way to think up more ways to lay charges.

Curiously, the BBC doesnt report this story. Do their editors think that one of their correspondents being charged with a law that contradicts freedom of speech is not a story?