This sounds like an excerpt from a Neal Stephenson novel
Unfortunately, it ain't.
I can't imagine it will be long before "our" duhmucratic "leaders" decide to take a page or two from that particular book..
A Thai man faces up to 37 years in jail for publishing a "sarcastic" Facebook post about the king's dog. Thanakorn Siripaiboon, 27, has been charged under the country's lèse-majesté laws, which seem to have been expanded to cover not just Thailand's royal family but its pets too. Thanakorn's crime was to "like" and share a …
Beautiful… there's a new addition to the vocabulary.
Of course, if the Thai monarchy thinks the criticism they get from their people is bad, I suggest they don't take up office here in Australia and go read the political sections of the newspapers.
We all get the government that we deserve. If Thais enroll in the military, serve without question and simply follow others, then it is their brothers who impose these things on them. The Western democracies are no better: look at America's current clown comedy of presidential nominees, and the people backing them, to learn a painful lesson.
Humans have not improved during these past centuries. Sadly.
This post has been deleted by its author
If Thais enroll in the military, serve without question and simply follow others, then it is their brothers who impose these things on them
Extreme poverty is a very useful tool to keep people in line. Which may explain the decline of democracy and economy closer to home, by the way. Worried people have less mental bandwidth.
>I can't imagine it will be long before "our" duhmucratic "leaders" decide to take a page or two from that particular book..
Too late. 10 years ago in the UK a student was charged for calling a police horse 'gay' - granted the cops were only hoping for a few days in prison (non-payment of fine) rather than years.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/4606022.stm
Speaking of having the shits, doesn't every dog in the world roll in every shit it finds on the ground? That's all I could think of when 'er vagisty was describing this mangy cur's pompous behaviour, royal or no. Still, this is no different than the new Terrorist™ laws that our cuntries [sic] are bandying about; "he spelled it 'crisis' so he must mean ISIS, that's Terry™ Talk© so lock up him up extra long until we get confessions and such, and also dump our NSA database, then delete the evidence you found and just give the Terrorist™ Flavoured summary. Job well done! Secret funding all around!"
You might say the royals over there are barking mad…Don't post this sort of stuff under your own name if you plan to go to Thailand. Yes, seriously, it can be that bad.
I've been in Australia for nearly 32 years now, having been born there. Never had a passport in that time, and don't see me getting one anytime soon. Overseas travel is too much of a minefield, so I'll stay put thanks.
Forty years since the Sex Pistols appropriated the image of our own dear monarch for their album sleeve.
Don't think we can blame any demise of British society on that single act.
I'd suggest the Thai royalty lighten up, but as article is clear - the laws serve to aid repression not to preserve respect.
"Forty years since the Sex Pistols appropriated the image of our own dear monarch for their album sleeve."
It wasn't the album that featured her, it was the "God Save the Queen" single.
Anyway, given that they used his canine's back-story to bolster the Thai monarchy, I guess you could say that *this* was a case of "Dog Save the King".
Why can't you show us the satirical photo?
If the re-touched really is so truly horrible it is not fit to publish even in the UK, USA and Australia then I think that is a relevant fact that should be in all articles on the story because then the story isn't about lèse–majesté laws but about common variety obscenity.
So which is it? A valid story about lèse–majesté laws, or a BS tale about lèse–majesté laws surrounding true obscenity?
Does the Register editorial team think the re-touched photo really is so terrible that it would offend the sensibility of UK, US and Australian readers?
I notice The Guardian wimped out too, and they also operate in those same 3 countries, each of which has strong freedom of speech laws. Those actions by 2 reputable papers lead me to think the photo really is obscene and would run afoul of our own laws.
(If you operated in Canada, I could understand it. A check in Wikipedia or a call to Canadian lawyers will reveal Canada has both extremely broad 'hate laws' and the broadest libel laws in the Commonwealth. That is why our press is so tame, boring and yellow.)
37 years for obscenity not involving sex acts with anything living is reasonable huh? Yes Western prudish behavior is bullshit but this about Thailand making an asshat of itself. My first rule of any country is do people commonly starve to death there not out of choice or mental illness? If the answer is yes the country needs to accept its a shithole, fix itself and STFU until it does so. Thailand is one of these countries.
The Thai authorities don't show the "offensive" material (even in evidence?) because that would also be insulting.
Hardly any point in supressing something and then letting papers print it.
Sounds also that when faced with threat of a decade or more in jail, the perpetrator 'confesses' to get a reduced sentence. So no awkward appeals - how tidy.
Tongdaeng is a respectful dog with proper manners; she is humble and knows protocol. She would always sit lower than the King; even when he pulls her up to embrace her, Tongdaeng would lower herself down on the floor, her ears in a respectful drooping position, as if she would say, "I don't dare."
I had to read this part twice before I realized that it was not in fact part of the satire in question. How would one even begin to satirize something like this? It has pretty much got the job done of itself.
and Canada was recently the most "free" country in the world. If this is true then the world is in a worse situation than I thought or hoped. All signs, in Canada, lean toward increased Corporatization with TPP, Bill C51, FIPAs and too many others to remember, but here's an article that suggests Canada's pretend greatness http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/canada-under-conservatives-was-the-freest-and-most-tolerant-in-the-world-study-finds
Scientific enquiry...what sort of penis size would be required for that level of insecurity?
I found the quote from the "etiquette" book a little disquieting...the dog behaves like that because it's a fucking dog. A pack animal. So is he expecting people to behave like that too? Also he'd be fucked if it was a Great Dane with the height thing.
"In this context, a multi-decade jail sentence for being sarcastic to a dog starts to make sense."
No, it doesn't. Not for a second. It'll never make sense to a reasonable person.
" In reality, he adopted the dog..."
So, he's a liar.
"Tongdaeng would lower herself down on the floor, her ears in a respectful drooping position, as if she would say, 'I don't dare.'"
And that's a dog that has been beaten.
I know who I'd like to see take a long stretch in prison; This so-called royal PoS, but I guess I'll have to settle for finding the original images and ensuring they are used to highlight this bullshit. I guess this "king" has never heard of the Streisand Effect.
"In this context, a multi-decade jail sentence for being sarcastic to a dog starts to make sense."
No, it doesn't. Not for a second. It'll never make sense to a reasonable person.
------------------------------------------------------
Well, no, of course it doesn't. However, despite your selective quoting to criticise the author, they do rather cunningly say "in this context" after having described a bat shit crazy and psychopathic regime.
He did NOT say "hey when you explain it like that, any normal person says 'now I get it, rock on' ".
Looking at the insanity that is Thai Military junta, I am REALLY glad Spitting Image isn't still around, they'd have had a field day, and probably got themselves into very deep crap.
I once went to a upscale taqueria in Mexico City with some co-workers whilst working there. The meat was grey, but tasty and with a few beers, seemed ok.
They asked me on the way back to the office how I liked DOG Tacos? Perhaps a nice Dog Pud Thai would be more to the King's liking?
Even that sounds extreme! I'd protest that crap and get the dialogue going to get the law fixed, or at least updated for fair use and comedy purposes. I'm glad to live in a country where we can use at least some of our so-called free speech to entertaining effect. Hell, even that awful skeleton-criminal Rupert Murdoch has a whole "news" cable TV show running 24 hours to do nothing but tell us how bad those mean old democratic-anything are and how it's ruining our "culture" of guns and secret funding and not so secret bribery. It's a very funny show, if you get a chance to see it, it's called Fox News and even though the content originates in Australia, it's painted so red/white/blue that you'd think every day was the US Independence Day! Plus every single female on the show is a super-hot, sexy idiot! What's NOT to love!?
Meanwhile, here in the civilised West (Germany), insulting a politician can land you in jail for up to 5 years ( Section 188 of the German Criminal Code)
Thankfully there isn't much left to say about politicians that can still function as a genuine insult instead of a simple statement of fact.
as these obedient and loyal animals (dogs) can exhibit far more in the way of dependable friendship and defensive capacity than so many two legged 'friends'. I say the King, Queen and their obedient prince deserve a pledge of honor from the great PETA organizations on the planet. Long live the underdogs!