To Hla Oo.
You are defaming Burmese Leader. You must have proof otherwise the reaction from the folks who love Gen Aung San will be very great and will come to you soon.
Take care and watch what you say and write.
Moe Brown
I cannot provide any example of defamation because doing so, I would violate the lese majeste myself, and I’m not prepared to do that.
You cannot deny the fact that the Thai King makes autonomous, uncensored speeches without the government(s)’ approval, which sometimes (and to some, always), have influences in politics. Somsak Jiamtherasakul (pardon my Romanization) illustrated this on the seminar on 10th December 2010.
Even more, you were defending lese majeste under the excuse of protecting the ‘head of state’. Most lese majeste charges are applied ppl criticizing his role as a monarch, not as the mundane, powerless Mr Bhumibol. Sumet, Prem, the whole privy council, and whatever officer that directly serve him, is part of the institution itself. Sumet’s recent spin on the ownership of the CPB, therefore, should count as the Monarchy’s own defense to criticism.
Why would I bother doing anything so ungraceful that would bring me even more criticism myself if I can have my servants do it for me? How else do you maintain the image of being kind, benevolent, and undisturbed by your subjects’ ‘childish, naughty, and uninformed lash outs’ while in fact, you possibly are not?
I challenge you to demand the King to respond to defamation himself instead of having lese majeste law arresting people for it. Many people and I will be much happier that way.
To all,
Do not believe all what this man wrote was 100% true.
he intentionally or unintentional give some wrong information.
We need carefully analyze what he posted.
Moe Brown
There IS a problem in the Thai case – in that the Head of State, unlike an ordinary individual – has no right of reply to defamation.
The article 112 is there to make all the criticism impossible, which mean anyone can go and defense the king, willingly or not, that is totally out of bound of “rule of law” (the plaintiff didn’t file the charge). Furthermore, I don’t see any other country’s head of state (except N.Korea and maybe Burma) having issue with being criticize or defamed. Its that weird for “democratic” country like Thailand to be living in atmosphere similar to N.Korea (although not as extreme.)
Paul #23 :
This is unfair.
I challenge you to cite ONE example where HMK has been able to respond DIRECTLY to what has clearly been direct defamation of
Him ?
@22
“There IS a problem in the Thai case – in that the Head of State, unlike an ordinary individual – has no right of reply to defamation.
Surely you as a lawyer – BKK Lawyer – can see the injustice in this.”
^^^
You mean the King cannot respond to his critics?
First of all that is not true. People around him (Prem, Sumet, etc) constantly defends him in public. Plus the King himself makes regular speeches at several occasions, criticizing the government and such. While this actually violates the constitution, it is still assumed in the country that the King has the right to say anything.
Second, even if the King really cannot say anything, why is that specifically a problem in the Thai case?
Pardon me but as I see it Thai monarchy has way more privileges than any other royals.
What can you say? The beautiful game has always been run by ugly people. The more commercialised the game the worse they behave, and that’s just the players.
Yes, the Burmese are mad about football. Contrast that with cricket. What?! The kind we fry with garlic?
A Libyan colleague of mine once said to me Gaddafi would not permit TV presenters to say the names of the players, apparently not wanting foreign names to become household words in his country. Perhaps our generals have some redeeming features after all.
BKK Lawyer # 20 :
I don’t think my different comments are inconsistent, nor incompatible.
1) in this case :
“Tantawut’s defence clearly proved he was not the webmaster for the NorPhorChorUSA website–he had no administrator or password access to the site. Tantawut was only hired as the website’s designer and provided no content to the site”.
2) Personally I think Thailand would do well to copy Indonesia – where the maximum penalty for “insults” to the Head of State is 3 years jail. Rarely applied.
Realistically – unless there is a revolution – I think a reform going some way towards the Indonesian model, is the best that can be hoped for.
Perhaps some sort of hybrid will be the eventual outcome – i.e. rich Thais who “insult” the Head of State would pay Singapore-style huge defamation costs, but poor Thais unable to pay, end up with 3 years jail. That would be a massive improvement on the thoroughly unjust sentences currently handed out.
There IS a problem in the Thai case – in that the Head of State, unlike an ordinary individual – has no right of reply to defamation.
Surely you as a lawyer – BKK Lawyer – can see the injustice in this.
Corruption and government are two hand that wash each other. But we do not have corruption in the West, The Wall St bailout was to save the economy, not the fraudulent wealth of bankers. NSW in Australia isn’t corrupt, it is just mates helping out.
There are only two types of government and thereby two types pf corruption, the obvious and the subtle. Living in the land of the subtle does not make it less so.
Some do labor under the delusion that there ever has been the ideal of democracy in Thailand, an ideal that invariably falters everywhere, regardless the abstract notion is attractive even if not unattainable. Human greed and corruption makes it a pipe dream.
Thailand is ruled by the military, democracy is the facade they sell the populace as any “elected” government that wants to survive keeps up army budgets.
By eschewing their cynical allegiance the PTB demonstrate publicly their loyalty, as such the lives of innocent serfs are destroyed to propagate the careers of the power brokers. Best to shut up and keep saluting.
The Reds tried rebellion, they were gunned down like dogs, just like every previous time. Change may come but it will be bloody and in all likelihood would be usurped by a face lift of the same old guard.
Chris Beale @17 said, “One more – outrageous LM charge – will likely be the trigger.” Chris Beale on 12 March commentend (on the post “Tej Bunnag shows the way”) that “defamation of the Head of State needs to be avoided, and penalised.”
Same Chris Beale? Are you saying a LM charge is okay as long as it’s not “outrageous”. Where do you draw the line? Whom do you appoint to draw the line?
There is no need for a conspiracy, only like-minded people and a convergence in interests.
Zarni is an effective polemicist and Burmese activist, not a semi-detached ivory tower academic. He pulls no punches and the truth definitely hurts.
He has tried engagement with the junta and found it wanting from first hand experience. The man would himself be found wanting as an irredeemable appeaser if he had persisted along the same lines regardless. That’s the normal line of approach for states and their diplomats until all hell breaks loose once again when they’d resume wringing their collective hands and making appropriate condemnations for the umpteenth time.
Having lived and studied in the neo-liberal West doesn’t necessarily lead to a belief in the pervasive neo-liberal tenets, and it’s a credit to him that he doesn’t, but instead he’s managed to do more than scratch the shiny surface. Receiving some kind of institutional support is simply a means to an end. What matters is to what end he uses this support. His heart is true to his country, no axe to grind, no personal gain from business deals in the offing.
Dear Charles, I think there is a difference in Obama’s evolving policy and Maung Zarni’s changing stance; Obama is the decision-maker trying to get a solution with maximum benefits to the people of Burma while Maung Zarni is changing his positions to get favor from his benefactors, be they the West or the SPDC!
You can really feel the bitterness seeping out of your computer screen, it’s quite incredible. I can only assume it’s because Dr Zarni’s own attempt at engagement back in 2004 or whenever it was failed. There’s no shame in trying and failing but I think he does himself a disservice by writing with such bile, as it only detracts (and distracts) from whatever it is he’s trying to say. I look forward to seeing something a little more constructive from Dr Zarni in the future, once he gets over deconstructing the ICG report.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Burma in Limbo, Part 1
To Hla Oo.
You are defaming Burmese Leader. You must have proof otherwise the reaction from the folks who love Gen Aung San will be very great and will come to you soon.
Take care and watch what you say and write.
Moe Brown
Burma in Limbo, Part 3
To All,
I do not know this ‘Hla Oo’ who discredit Gen Aung San and Burmese Freedom Fighters. What is his objective?
We must find out.
Moe Brown
Thanthawut Taweewarodomkul gets 13 years
@Chris
No, you are unfair.
I cannot provide any example of defamation because doing so, I would violate the lese majeste myself, and I’m not prepared to do that.
You cannot deny the fact that the Thai King makes autonomous, uncensored speeches without the government(s)’ approval, which sometimes (and to some, always), have influences in politics. Somsak Jiamtherasakul (pardon my Romanization) illustrated this on the seminar on 10th December 2010.
Even more, you were defending lese majeste under the excuse of protecting the ‘head of state’. Most lese majeste charges are applied ppl criticizing his role as a monarch, not as the mundane, powerless Mr Bhumibol. Sumet, Prem, the whole privy council, and whatever officer that directly serve him, is part of the institution itself. Sumet’s recent spin on the ownership of the CPB, therefore, should count as the Monarchy’s own defense to criticism.
Why would I bother doing anything so ungraceful that would bring me even more criticism myself if I can have my servants do it for me? How else do you maintain the image of being kind, benevolent, and undisturbed by your subjects’ ‘childish, naughty, and uninformed lash outs’ while in fact, you possibly are not?
I challenge you to demand the King to respond to defamation himself instead of having lese majeste law arresting people for it. Many people and I will be much happier that way.
Burma in Limbo, Part 3
To all,
Do not believe all what this man wrote was 100% true.
he intentionally or unintentional give some wrong information.
We need carefully analyze what he posted.
Moe Brown
Thanthawut Taweewarodomkul gets 13 years
chris beale – 22
There IS a problem in the Thai case – in that the Head of State, unlike an ordinary individual – has no right of reply to defamation.
The article 112 is there to make all the criticism impossible, which mean anyone can go and defense the king, willingly or not, that is totally out of bound of “rule of law” (the plaintiff didn’t file the charge). Furthermore, I don’t see any other country’s head of state (except N.Korea and maybe Burma) having issue with being criticize or defamed. Its that weird for “democratic” country like Thailand to be living in atmosphere similar to N.Korea (although not as extreme.)
Thanthawut Taweewarodomkul gets 13 years
Paul #23 :
This is unfair.
I challenge you to cite ONE example where HMK has been able to respond DIRECTLY to what has clearly been direct defamation of
Him ?
Mahathir, watch out – Haris Ibrahim is out to get you!
Malaysia needs more men and women like Encik Haris – rather than frogs waiting for an offer from BN.
Pakatan Rakyat better get its act together before the next GE – weed out those frogs !
Thanthawut Taweewarodomkul gets 13 years
@22
“There IS a problem in the Thai case – in that the Head of State, unlike an ordinary individual – has no right of reply to defamation.
Surely you as a lawyer – BKK Lawyer – can see the injustice in this.”
^^^
You mean the King cannot respond to his critics?
First of all that is not true. People around him (Prem, Sumet, etc) constantly defends him in public. Plus the King himself makes regular speeches at several occasions, criticizing the government and such. While this actually violates the constitution, it is still assumed in the country that the King has the right to say anything.
Second, even if the King really cannot say anything, why is that specifically a problem in the Thai case?
Pardon me but as I see it Thai monarchy has way more privileges than any other royals.
On FIFA’s Burma diplomacy
What can you say? The beautiful game has always been run by ugly people. The more commercialised the game the worse they behave, and that’s just the players.
Yes, the Burmese are mad about football. Contrast that with cricket. What?! The kind we fry with garlic?
A Libyan colleague of mine once said to me Gaddafi would not permit TV presenters to say the names of the players, apparently not wanting foreign names to become household words in his country. Perhaps our generals have some redeeming features after all.
A busy day in court in Bangkok
Article 112. Thailand’s Shame.
Thanthawut Taweewarodomkul gets 13 years
BKK Lawyer # 20 :
I don’t think my different comments are inconsistent, nor incompatible.
1) in this case :
“Tantawut’s defence clearly proved he was not the webmaster for the NorPhorChorUSA website–he had no administrator or password access to the site. Tantawut was only hired as the website’s designer and provided no content to the site”.
2) Personally I think Thailand would do well to copy Indonesia – where the maximum penalty for “insults” to the Head of State is 3 years jail. Rarely applied.
Realistically – unless there is a revolution – I think a reform going some way towards the Indonesian model, is the best that can be hoped for.
Perhaps some sort of hybrid will be the eventual outcome – i.e. rich Thais who “insult” the Head of State would pay Singapore-style huge defamation costs, but poor Thais unable to pay, end up with 3 years jail. That would be a massive improvement on the thoroughly unjust sentences currently handed out.
There IS a problem in the Thai case – in that the Head of State, unlike an ordinary individual – has no right of reply to defamation.
Surely you as a lawyer – BKK Lawyer – can see the injustice in this.
Expats share their views on corruption in Malaysia
Corruption and government are two hand that wash each other. But we do not have corruption in the West, The Wall St bailout was to save the economy, not the fraudulent wealth of bankers. NSW in Australia isn’t corrupt, it is just mates helping out.
There are only two types of government and thereby two types pf corruption, the obvious and the subtle. Living in the land of the subtle does not make it less so.
Thanthawut Taweewarodomkul gets 13 years
Some do labor under the delusion that there ever has been the ideal of democracy in Thailand, an ideal that invariably falters everywhere, regardless the abstract notion is attractive even if not unattainable. Human greed and corruption makes it a pipe dream.
Thailand is ruled by the military, democracy is the facade they sell the populace as any “elected” government that wants to survive keeps up army budgets.
By eschewing their cynical allegiance the PTB demonstrate publicly their loyalty, as such the lives of innocent serfs are destroyed to propagate the careers of the power brokers. Best to shut up and keep saluting.
The Reds tried rebellion, they were gunned down like dogs, just like every previous time. Change may come but it will be bloody and in all likelihood would be usurped by a face lift of the same old guard.
Thanthawut Taweewarodomkul gets 13 years
Chris Beale @17 said, “One more – outrageous LM charge – will likely be the trigger.” Chris Beale on 12 March commentend (on the post “Tej Bunnag shows the way”) that “defamation of the Head of State needs to be avoided, and penalised.”
Same Chris Beale? Are you saying a LM charge is okay as long as it’s not “outrageous”. Where do you draw the line? Whom do you appoint to draw the line?
Najib to receive honorary degree from Monash
No need to wonder..the honorary degree is for his ability to conjure billions of ringgit into his own pocket and that of his cronies.
Bachelor of MONEY – majoring in “plundering” (of a country’s resources)
WOW! This man has got real SKILLS!! 🙂
How do I sign up for this course? Please show me the money!!!
Note: Another famous graduate of this course if Taib Mahmud, Chief Minister of Sarawak state
Thanthawut Taweewarodomkul gets 13 years
The law is made to hide the elephant in the room. The fact that something stinks fiercely in the land of lies, says much about the elephant, no?
Zarni comes out firing at Burma experts, again
There is no need for a conspiracy, only like-minded people and a convergence in interests.
Zarni is an effective polemicist and Burmese activist, not a semi-detached ivory tower academic. He pulls no punches and the truth definitely hurts.
He has tried engagement with the junta and found it wanting from first hand experience. The man would himself be found wanting as an irredeemable appeaser if he had persisted along the same lines regardless. That’s the normal line of approach for states and their diplomats until all hell breaks loose once again when they’d resume wringing their collective hands and making appropriate condemnations for the umpteenth time.
Having lived and studied in the neo-liberal West doesn’t necessarily lead to a belief in the pervasive neo-liberal tenets, and it’s a credit to him that he doesn’t, but instead he’s managed to do more than scratch the shiny surface. Receiving some kind of institutional support is simply a means to an end. What matters is to what end he uses this support. His heart is true to his country, no axe to grind, no personal gain from business deals in the offing.
Well done, Zarni.
Malaysia’s future tense: From democracy to police state?
I went to school with her, but lost touch. She’s such a nice person. Glad to see she’s been so successful!
Zarni comes out firing at Burma experts, again
Dear Charles, I think there is a difference in Obama’s evolving policy and Maung Zarni’s changing stance; Obama is the decision-maker trying to get a solution with maximum benefits to the people of Burma while Maung Zarni is changing his positions to get favor from his benefactors, be they the West or the SPDC!
Zarni comes out firing at Burma experts, again
You can really feel the bitterness seeping out of your computer screen, it’s quite incredible. I can only assume it’s because Dr Zarni’s own attempt at engagement back in 2004 or whenever it was failed. There’s no shame in trying and failing but I think he does himself a disservice by writing with such bile, as it only detracts (and distracts) from whatever it is he’s trying to say. I look forward to seeing something a little more constructive from Dr Zarni in the future, once he gets over deconstructing the ICG report.