Slashdot Mirror
More Websites Offending Thai Monarchy Blocked
An anonymous reader writes "Thailand is ramping up their media wide censorship of anything that remotely offends Thai royalty. In the last three weeks, another 2,300 websites have been blocked. Another ~4,000 are soon expected.
And not just websites, but books as well as the Economist have been blocked. And anyone caught publishing such material, including foreigners, will get 3 to 15 years in a Thai prison. You don't want to be in a Thai prison!"
Finally, we'll get the answer to that burning question: how many pages are there on the Internet?
The King of Thailand will be honored for finding out before anyone else.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Joey, have you ever been to a Turkish prison?
If Slashdot isn't already banned, it will be soon...
CNN has censored itself on reporting on Thailand so as to not offend the government: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/01/19/thai.jail/index.html . This is the real problem with censorship in the internet age: It is very easy to say that the internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it. But in practice in many cases the ease of access leads to more censorship rather than less. This means that it is all the more important that we resist censorship in all its forms.
If a country wants to enact oppressive laws that censor citizens and foreigners alike that's their perogative. Just another reason to boycott travel to such a country. It's not the only country I'd choose to forgo unless I had to travel.
Meanwhile their Royal Family becomes less and less atuned to the sentiment of their populace. In other places and at other times similar action has usually led to poor leadership, the Royal Family becoming less relevant, and eventually the deposition of that family, often in a bloody revolution. It's the Royal Family that should be asking for this crackdown to end, if they know their history.
I've been very careful but does the above paragraph mean it's no longer safe for me to travel to Thailand?
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Who is going to be the first person here to insult the Thai Monarchy?
King Bhumibol, I fart in your general direction! Your mother was a binturong and your father smelt of durians!
Circumcision is child abuse.
So what is it called when an entire country can no longer access Slashdot?
They don't like their pictures defaced? Let's sub their pictures and show them what defacement is!
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
I dunno know abut that. Get enough rambunctious independent thinking foreigners in there and it might just be the place to be.
Infuriate left and right
http://diy.despair.com/motivator.php
Let the bannings begin.
[End Of Line]
The current government is in a precarious position and are attempting to use the Thai peoples reverence of the king to increase their own popularity. The current government will not be re-elected if general elections are called as they are favoured by the Thai upper and middle classes and disliked by the lower classes which make up the majority of the Thai people.
Despite outward appearances to us Farang tourists (Farang: Thai-white skinned foreigner) Thai people are quiet conservative but their religion (Bhuddism) teaches them to be open and accepting of others even when they do something rude.
As I said before, its not the Thai monarch, they have no real power, the king is king in name only (a rich land owner that holds no real political power much like the queen of England). It's Thailand unstable democracy that keeps producing these laws, not its monarch, they chose to pick emotional subject like the king to rally around to gain popularity. The king is very popular amongst Thai's, he was responsible for implementing education amongst even the poorest Thais and is respected for this. The Thai royal family holds as much political power these days as the house of Windsor (England's royal family).
It's pretty hard to be convicted of Leste Majesty in Thailand and that law is only ever used for political gain. The Thai king himself has tried to get the law struck down on several occasions but he is a constitutional monarch and failed. The King has pardoned almost everyone charged with leste majesty in recent years (since Thailand returned to democratic elections in the 80's).
Do my posts critical of the Bush administration make it dangerous for me to travel to the US? Thailand is a great holiday destination and is not dangerous to go to so long as you have half a brain. Insulting the king is like insulting the founding fathers, everyone knows whilst you're in the US you just don't do it. The most dangerous things in Thailand are the wild life, corrupt cops and falling in love with a Thai girl and for the first two, you can just avoid them.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Cue the million and one Slashdot analysts who believe they, yes, they! alone understand Thai domestic politics, and hence they know that this is a simple instance of unreasoning tyrannical government censorship rather than, say, a careful political gambit being played by pro-monarchy upper-class forces amidst a political battle that has lasted the past two years.
Yeesh. This isn't some minor county library board going thinkofthechildren!!1! yet again. The point isn't to actually control speech - this is a power play.
You haven't been paying attention to CNN's self-censorship during Obama's campaign, have you?
Is Thai Prison as bad as Philippina prison? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMnk7lh9M3o
OMG Ponies!!! with Glitter!!!! I miss Pink
You don't want to be in a Thai prison!
Have you ever seen a grown man naked?
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everybody agrees that it is old enough to know better." - Unknown
They love me up here at work......
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
I think I have another use for that,
they love me up here at work. /doh, hit the wrong reply earlier //no deletes on /. - you're stuck with the humiliation forever
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Fark is on the job!
User Comments
And of course the photoshop contest. Lots of criminals now.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
There should be some way to bump your post to the entry at the top. It puts everything in the proper context.
Hate to say this, but noone here really cares if you insult America's Founding Fathers. It's not like we don't do it ourselves a fair amount.
Hell, we insult sitting Presidents, so why shouldn't we insult dead ones?
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
A friend of mine who lives in Thai just told me he cannot visit my website! It just says 404 cannot find! I am worry that Thai gov may even records my name and going to put me into jail if I visit Thai in future, scary!
Something tells me that if I marched into LAX with my Australian passport and shouted "George Washington was a Fag" someone would object. Not that I'd do that, I have common sense enough to be polite to the nation of which I am a guest. I have the good decency to only slag off other nations when I'm at home.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Something tells me that if I marched into LAX with my Australian passport and shouted "George Washington was a Fag" someone would object.
Somebody would certainly object, but they wouldn't be able to do much more than call you an idiot for making that kind of declaration. Saying you have a bomb strapped to your chest on the other hand, now that'll get you a real objection..
Isn't that a bit presumptuous?
Look, you have your hobbies and lifestyle, and I have mine.
Yelling 'free hugs' in an airport would probably get you in trouble. On the other hand you can- and in fact someone has- publish a book suggesting that Lincoln was secretly gay without getting in any meaningful trouble. Do the same thing in Thailand with a member of the royal family, and you're in a lot of trouble.
More importantly, despite the official legal story about the Thai king being 'powerless' according to the law, there have been suggestions that the monarchy exerts a great deal of influence over Thai politics through indirect channels. At least one author has suggested that this interference is one reason why democratic governments tend to be so fragile in Thailand, and why there have been so many coups and revisions to the constitution. This kind of discussion about the interests and actors who influence government affairs is vitally necessary to the functioning of a democracy, but the lese majesty laws guarantee that this won't happen in an open and honest way in Thailand.
Interestingly, everyone always talks about how the king is 'universally beloved'. The Economist was almost certainly banned for an article published recently where they pointed out that the recent government crisis has started to put some dents in this image. They interviewed rural Thais (anonymously, of course) who felt betrayed that the monarchy was quietly supporting a political movement that seems intent on disenfranchising rural and ethnic minority Thais. The monarchy has been able to preserve its prestige by depicting itself as the protector of all Thais- as rescuing the country when things go badly out of kilter. During the most recent crisis, their support for a vocal minority over a very popular elected government who has catered to people outside of the Bangkok elite has damaged that perception.
It was originally just an example of how to be an arsehole, as I said, I'd never actually do it.
With Thailand, unless you did it in front of a cop, making a disparaging remark about the king wouldn't even get a reaction (getting angry is a major loss of face in Thai/Buddhist society). A local cop would just throw you into the local lock-up for a few hours and then until you coughed up a few thousand baht (B1000 is roughly AU$45).
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
read it here: http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12724800&source=hptextfeature
Quote:
Bhumibol's tale, even if stripped of the mythology his courtiers have spent decades constructing around him, is exceptional. The American-born son of a half-Chinese commoner accidentally inherits a throne close to extinction and revives it, creating one of the world's most powerful and wealthy monarchies, and surely the only one of any significance to have gained in political power in modern times. The king's charisma, intelligence, talents (from playing the saxophone to rain-making, a science in which he holds a European patent) and deep concern for his people's welfare make him adored at home and admired around the world. His image perhaps reaches its zenith in 1992, after the army shoots dozens of pro-democracy protesters in Bangkok, when television shows both the army leader (and prime minister) Suchinda Kraprayoon and the protest leader, Chamlong Srimuang (now a PAD stalwart), kneeling in an audience with him. Shortly afterwards General Suchinda resigns, and the king is given credit for the restoration of democracy.
I can see how this might piss of the Powers That Be..
The law is a weapon of the government, not a protection for the likes of you. Surely you understand that.
In the recent troubles, the royal consort (Queen) was seen at the funeral of a PAD (Peoples Alliance for Democracy, the anti-elected government faction). The Rural Thais would not act against the king. The Economist was attempting to draw conclusions without a sufficient understanding of the people (Thai culture is far more complex then western culture). The king was attempting not to take sides this was exacerbated by his health issues.
The king has a great deal of influence with the people but he cant dictate policy directly or indirectly and stays out of politics for the most part. The King is the only part of political stability the nation has and I'd hate to think what will happen when he dies. Thailand has had as many coups as the US has had democratic elections since 1932 (when the monarch gave up absolute power) 20 to be exact, make no mistake, this act was in no way ordered by the king as unlike the semi-elected government has no need to silence critics.
The king has pardoned almost anyone convicted of Leste Majesty in recent years, Thai and Farang alike. With how tolerant the Thai people are you have to deliberately insult the king to get them to act on it. Being rude is easy, for example pointing at a picture of the king with your forefinger is rude (you are meant to use your palm) but if you do it the vast majority of Thais will say nothing.
It's bash censorship week on slashdot, same as every week but Thailand is not the worst censor and censorship is not the act we should chastise Thailand about, their treatment of Burmese refugee's is appalling, but this is done by the military, a political force in their own right (19 coups and not all of them bloodless).
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
but is the royal family censoring news stories that publicize their role in censoring stories about them?
I really don't think that insulting the founding fathers would provoke a stronger reaction than insulting any other famous people. Clearly if you're shouting obscenities in an airport like a crazy person it doesn't matter who you're insulting; it'll be a problem no matter what.
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
Sigh. These guys obviously have never heard of the Streisand effect..
What's happening now is that anyone who wants to annoy the Royals sets up a site outside Thailand and puts crap on it. It's turned into a (very questionable) sport, leaving the Thais to commit a Denial of Service on themselves.
If they had simply ignored this rubbish as being well below them (as most other Royal houses do) the "fun" would have gone off it in a week. Actually, I don't think you can even assume a Royal will sit there telling his cohorts "I don't like this" - it could be the familiar effect of overzealous staff who suffer from a God complex..
Some will never learn.
Insert
Someone would object, but I'd probably think you were funny--especially with an Australian accent.
It'd not be too bad, consider some of them put males and females in one single large cell!
They flip side is that you'd possibly be treated as female nevertheless.
In the recent troubles, the royal consort (Queen) was seen at the funeral of a PAD (Peoples Alliance for Democracy, the anti-elected government faction). The Rural Thais would not act against the king. The Economist was attempting to draw conclusions without a sufficient understanding of the people (Thai culture is far more complex then western culture). The king was attempting not to take sides this was exacerbated by his health issues.
The notion that Tha culture is 'more complex' and therefore somehow incomprehensible to Westerners is just an old orientalist canard. Rural Thais might not act against the king directly, but if they continue to feel that their interests are being denigrated in favor of the interests of the Bangkok elite, it will have significant consequences for future governments, and for whoever takes the throne after the current king.
The king has a great deal of influence with the people but he cant dictate policy directly or indirectly and stays out of politics for the most part. The King is the only part of political stability the nation has and I'd hate to think what will happen when he dies.
The idea that the king 'stays out of politics' is a common aphorism, but it's hard to say how true it really is. It's very hard for writers in Thailand to say anything about the role of the king in politics. The Economist and other Western journalists have written about how the king has likely taken an active hand in several of the coups- essentially overturning the democratic system when it's felt by members of the aristocracy that a democratic movement has gotten out of hand and needs to be reigned in. Publishing these kind of works basically guarantees that they will lose the ability to report from inside Thailand.
It's true that respect for the king has been a stabilizing factor in many cases, but the thesis put forward by some of the critics is that overall his interventions in politics have prevented the development of a more robust and stable democracy in Thailand- rather than coping with short-term crises through democratic means, royal and military intervention have been used. It means that after the king passes away, Thailand will be in much worse shape than it would be if they had been force to deal with these sorts of issues directly. Of course, these sorts of counter-factuals are easy for historians to make, but hard to prove.
With how tolerant the Thai people are you have to deliberately insult the king to get them to act on it.
To me, the insults or criticism is less significant than the fact that it's not possible to write honestly about politics in Thailand. Looking critically at the role the monarchy plays is simply not possible from inside Thailand, or in the Thai press. This also prevents criticism of other political groups that have ties to the monarchy. It's certainly true that the king isn't responsible for the lese majesty laws, and that he has pardoned those who have run afoul of them; on the other hand, there was talk at one point that Thaksin would be charged with lese majesty (before the coup and the trial in absentia). I have little faith that he would have been pardoned if it had happened.
Insulting the king is like insulting the founding fathers, everyone knows whilst you're in the US you just don't do it.
People pick on the Founding Father's all the time, most notably Jefferson's jungle fever with his slave women.
I wonder if that would include an unflattering review of something by composer and SF author S. P. Somtow? It's not mentioned in his Wikipedia article, but I've met him a few times, and he's related to their king.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
Uh, no. Thailand is ramping up their media wide censorship of anything that remotely offends the kind of obnoxious people who think censorship is a great idea, are looking for something to get offended about, and don't mind using the king's good name as an excuse.
There's a difference.
The actual king says that people should be permitted to criticize him, and I believe he has not expressed that he's in any way offended by any of the stuff people are being jailed for.
Hell, we insult sitting Presidents, so why shouldn't we insult dead ones?
Because it's just not nearly as much fun. Try it yourself and see -- "Grover Cleveland was a fucking pussy." "Andrew Jackson was a racist prick."
Hey, I think I was wrong; this actually does have its appeal. Millard Fillmore was so fat....
censorship is not the act we should chastise Thailand about
Why not? It's bad in China, it's bad in the US, it's bad in Europe, and it's bad in Thailand.
Have you ever traveled to Thailand? I dare you to walk down the main street of Pattaya Beach at night. You'll see wilder shit than you've ever imagined in the craziest college town you've ever visited in the U.S. It will blow your mind.
All the stereotypes about Thailand are true.
I'm fresh out of mod points, but as a frequent extended visitor working in Thailand I'd just like to say that this is easily the most informative and insightful post on the page.
"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
See, not every country became democratic and fully 'modern' in one swoop like the USA did (well.. not that the USA actually lived up to its ideals initally, but I disgress). Other countries like Sweden and England evolved that way through gradual reform.
In the early 19th century, Sweden had become a democracy, albeit with a monarch. There was freedom of the press insofar that anyone could start a newspaper. But one of the rights the king had retained was the ability to revoke their right to publish. Well, in 1830 the newly created newspaper Aftonbladet ("The evening paper") criticized the king, who then revoked their right to publish.
So, very quickly they resumed publication under the name "Det andra Aftonbladet" ("The second Aftonbladet"), which was also banned fairly soon. So they started the third Aftonbladet, the fourth Aftonbladet, etc. By the time they'd changed their name 26 times, the monarchy gave up. The right to free press has never been seriously contested in Sweden since. (and the privileges of the monarchy were gradually reduced to today's figure-head status - with less rights, I believe, than the Queen of England)
Actually the current Karl XVI Gustav, made a deal with the Government back in the 1970's to never, ever, interfere or even comment on political matters. If he did, the monarchy would risk being abolished completely. -The Social Democrats have ruled Sweden for all but 3 terms in the last century, and their party platform has always included abolishing the monarchy. The monarchy's existence is entirely due to their popularity.
Pattaya is hardly typical Thailand. It's like going to Las Vegas and drawing conclusions about the USA.
Thailand is a conservative country, but their idea of conservative is different to yours. Furthermore, it's not a rich country, so the prospect of extracting a lot of money from foreign douchebags is able, in some places, to supplant traditionally (and universally) conservative values like keeping the exploitation of women behind closed doors. Hence Pattaya, Patong, Patpong, Nana, etc.
Recently a Thai friend of mine was supposed to go to Patpong Road (in Bangkok) in the evening to make some observations, as an assignment for her postgraduate degree studies. She didn't feel comfortable going on her own, and couldn't find anyone else who was willing to go with her. Most Thais find that stuff as objectionable as anyone else would if it were in their country. They're just good at smiling and pretending it's okay.
"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
If so many writers of such diverse media are going to start to be locked in Thai prisons, perhaps it will become a nice place to stay. Think about it, if the government of Thailand start to get all Internet website owners in their prisons, Thailand's jails __will become the new Internet!__
It's like that joke, that Hell can be a better place to be, because of the company.
Nicolau Werneck - NIC1138
"The secret of genius is to carry the spirit of childhood into maturity" -- Thomas Huxley
I didn't know Barbara Streisand was the King of Thailand.
Hell, we insult sitting Presidents,
Nah, it's no fun now that Bush is gone...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
On the other hand you can- and in fact someone has- publish a book suggesting that Lincoln was secretly gay without getting in any meaningful trouble.
As a gay man, I've got to say I find it saddening that you equate the notion that someone was gay with an insult.
I don't know whether Lincoln was gay or not, and honestly, I don't even care, but OF COURSE saying "Lincoln may have been gay" or even "Lincoln was gay" is NOT the same as insulting Lincoln (or Lincoln's memory or whatever). His sexuality, whatever it was, is a historic fact, and him having been gay wouldn't make him any better or worse of a person than him having been hetero would.
So, could you please think of a different example next time?
censorship is not the act we should chastise Thailand about
Why not? It's bad in China, it's bad in the US, it's bad in Europe, and it's bad in Thailand.
Saying so is like saying
MS Windows is the only operating system for most computer users, so it should be the only operating system for all computer users.
If they put me in with the girls...
http://www.phuket-info.com/forums/news-articles/7232-underwear-shortage-strikes-thai-prison.html
The king has pardoned almost anyone convicted of Leste Majesty in recent years, Thai and Farang alike.
He better pardon the poor bastard from Australia that wrote one sentence in a book that sold 7 copies that got sentenced to 3 years jail. The sentence in question referred to a non-existent, fictional junior prince.
"lese majesty" is a bullshit offence. The King of Thailand earned respect, he doesn't need a law.
Almost as stupid as blasphemy.
The most dangerous things in Thailand are the wild life, corrupt cops and falling in love with a Thai girl and for the first two, you can just avoid them.
But the last one, on the other hand, is pretty much unavoidable, especially if you happen to like asian girls...If you still manage to avoid it, then it means that becoming a monk may be something to consider
As I said before, its not the Thai monarch, they have no real power, the king is king in name only (a rich land owner that holds no real political power much like the queen of England). It's Thailand unstable democracy that keeps producing these laws, not its monarch...
Many reputable sources, including 'The Economist', (which is probably why it's been banned too), would beg to differ. See:
http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12724800&source=hptextfeature
An extract: 'Many Thais will squirm at what follows, and will prefer the fairy-tale version of the king's story. But the king's past actions are root causes of a conflict dividing the country, and need to be examined.'
The Thai monarchy sucks donkey balls. Try to find me and put me in prison, good luck.
The pope, Jesse Jackson, and the king of Thailand walk into a bar...
The soft porn film Emmanuel was filmed in Thailand. The director said that they had some problems filming some scenes but that a member of the Royal Family offered them the use of his estate to complete filming as the police would not dare to investigate there.
Like most of the remaining royal families they rely on the fairy tale aura which hangs over them, making them appear to be something other than the vain useless leaches which they are.
It's not surprising that they want to censor the internet. The truth does them no favours.
since thai tourism will be getting a nose dive, others can benefit. serves them right for being jackasses about freedom of speech.
Read radical news here
It can simultaneously be tyrannical government censorship and a careful political gambit. In fact, much modern censorship *is* a disgusting mating between these two political themes.
No need for that though. We can form conclusions about the USA well enough from all the Hollywood movies.
As others have mentioned, yelling it in an airport would invoke alarm, but if you stood on some random street corner holding a sign or whatnot, then people would only care if you got in their way on on their nerves. I know of no one who really gives a damn about George Washington one way or another.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
For more information, please see www.thekingofthailandispants.com
My nick name "Thaidog" used to be number one on google and it went to my personal page. Since I'm neither Thai nor Thaidog I wonder how that comes across there.
||| I still can't believe Parkay's not butter.
or another way to write your post..
"haha I'm a fag taking away slashdot for thailand because I can"
Yul Brunner was not available for comment
Something tells me that if I marched into LAX with my Australian passport and shouted "George Washington was a Fag" someone would object.
You might get convicted of hatethink for using the F-bomb, but no one would really care that it was directed at Washington.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Just because I shouldn't doesn't mean I didn't.
The young Thia King was a kindly man full of humor and mirth who was always making self depricating jokes about himself. So of course he had himself put to death.
---
Lately I heard lots of things about not wanting to be in an American prision. Thai might be even worse, but do you really know for sure?
The Economist was attempting to draw conclusions without a sufficient understanding of the people (Thai culture is far more complex then western culture).
I think "inscrutable" is the word you're circling around.
I am not a crackpot.
Unlikely. They might look at you the way they look at the Moonies in the airport, but it's unlikely in the extreme that anyone would be so rude as to say word one about your comment.
Though, come to think of it, someone who was sleeping nearby might tell you off for yelling. Or at least glare at you.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
...will be websites that insult Barry.
All Hail Barry!
LAX? They wouldn't know who GW was.
Let's see. We insulted Bush the younger, Clinton, Bush the elder, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, Truman, FDR, Hoover...
Why do you think that Obama will get a pass?
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
The King is a Wonderful Great guy! He's quite a Prince of a Fellow! Yowsa yowsa yowsa - you've been really great. I'll be here all week.
And in the USA, making a disparaging remark about the Founding Fathers (or even the sitting President) in front of a cop would cause nothing to happen whatsoever.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Can we simply make it a goal to get every useful site onto Thai/Chinese/Russian blocklists?
Seriously - I want to just take it all the way and make blocking the internet do them verifiably more harm than good. I want there to be no useful science, technology, nothing of use they can get off the internet anymore, unless they give up and allow for free transfer of information.
(Slashdot of course should be allowed through - I said useful sites - {G})
Pug
An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
Thai Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn is a prick. The King seems like a pretty decent guy and has said he thinks the law needs to be repealed, but instead of repealing it, he's letting people go to jail, so what does that tell you? The Prince, on the other hand, is truly convinced that his fecal waste has the olfactory qualities of a fragrant flower.
This is the reason we fought a war to get rid of a king, George Bush's ambitions not withstanding.
*** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
As if Thailand wasn't in enough trouble already (mistreating Burma refugees, underground slave trade, and lets not forget the big sit in protest at the airport), this comes along and sets things completely backwards.
Let me know when the King of Siam wants to send President Obama some male elephants to fight the War on Terror.
The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.
Child prostitution is still cool there though, right?
Skin color. It's hard to come up with an insult that doesn't give the impression of being racially insensitive.
Thailand is a shithole country, where beautiful women are forced to work as sex slaves to send money back to their parents, and the monarchy does nothing but sit on its ass and let it happen. What's it like to be a pimp, your excellency? Stand up and be a leader, stop oppressing your people and stop allowing them to oppressed, or are you just letting it happen because you secretly love the cock of some 12 year old Filipino boy in your ass, and the balls of a donkey on your chin? The monarchy can suck a fart out of my butt...wait a minute, you'd like that, because you're the type of people that would get off on that shit, and then have Australians pay 50 baht to see it. You suck, your country sucks, and you all felch M&M's from the asses of well trained shaven gerbils
Oh darn, now I can never go to Thailand....I hope I never have any connecting flights through Thailand, I may wind up in a prison where the King's mom works as a fluffer for prison porn.
(too much?)
There are 2 groups of people you can make fun of on the Internet without fear of attack. The illiterate, and the Amish.
So now /. will get the censor's swipe in Thailand, since these days just mentioning the King seems to set off the self-appointed royal honor watchdogs. Calling all tourists: take your cash to Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam. Tourist capital flight is possibly the only thing that will get their attention.
I think that was unnecessary. Is that imagery something young people need to read? Poor judgement dude. Or you have a great career in Hollywood ahead of you.
The King ought to be offended by the politicians using his position as a tool to rally the populace's emotions around.
Problem solved
Warning: Sig Fault. Dumping warp core.