2012 in review
January 1, 2013
The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for this blog.
Here’s an excerpt:
19,000 people fit into the new Barclays Center to see Jay-Z perform. This blog was viewed about 160,000 times in 2012. If it were a concert at the Barclays Center, it would take about 8 sold-out performances for that many people to see it.
Lèse majesté solidarity-PPT
July 3, 2012
Political Prisoners in Thailand: July 2, 2012
http://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/2012/07/02/lese-majeste-solidarity/
PPT has received information regarding several solidarity activities for the victims of the lese majeste law.
The first involves the Launch of the Network of Family Members and People Affected by Article 112.
The official launch involves two events on 5 and 7 July 2012. The 5 July event is the issue of a press release to the international media at 10:30 AM at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Thailand.
The event for the local audience will involve a press release following a seminar at the 14th October Memorial, Ratchadamnern Avenue. The seminar begins at 1 PM and is titled “Open the prison doors for our 112 friends.” The event should conclude about 3.00 PM.
A second event is the launch of a new book about Somyos Prueksakasemsuk that came out on 16 June. The book is in Thai and contains stories about Somyos and his work by his friends and colleagues across the world.
Third, Somyos and his lawyers are about to make his 10th bail application. PPT urges continued support for him by signing the online letter calling for the his release of Somyot and right to bail. Sign on for the campaign here.
[CJ Hinke of FACT comments: Tolerance and the liberation of all beings are the hallmarks of the Buddha. However, this sort of thuggish cult activity (similar to Dhammagaya) bears no resemblance to the teachings of the Buddha. These misguided fanatics would be far more benefitted by devoting this time to meditation. Buddhist walks for peace and pilgrimage are done in silence as walking meditation. Therefore, this militant ‘march’ will certainly be ‘unique’. Ladda would love this one!]
Buddhists March in Bangkok to Speak Out to the World to Stop Disrespecting Buddha
The KnowingBuddha Foundation is preparing a major march in Bangkok on 30 June, to show their respect for Buddha and to show how so many are disrespecting Buddha.
PRWeb: June 26, 2012
http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2012/6/prweb9635673.htm
‘Prepare for our upcoming rally in Bangkok, to tell the world to stop disrespecting Buddha.’
“It will be truly unique and loud.”
The KnowingBuddha Foundation is preparing a Buddhist March – the first time in history – on 30 June, in one of the Bangkok’s most famous streets, Khao San Road, to speak out against the improper usage of Buddha’s image in the modern world.
After being quiet for a long time on how the world uses Buddha’s images and name in a disrespectful way, reportedly, Buddhists will be no be longer be queit. The Knowing Buddha organization is gathering a large group of Buddhists who don’t want to be quiet any longer, and there message to the world is “Stop Disrespecting Buddha.”
The March will contain signs to show that Buddha is their father religion, and they will show how the world should treats Buddha with a variety of signs. The high light of the March will be the enormous size signs depicting “Enough” on the Buddha Bar picture also the sign “No!” on the Disney movie “Snow Buddies” which use Buddha’s name as a Dog.
Reportedly, there are many others business who using Buddha’ images in commerce, and this will be reflected in the march. The KnowingBudda organization’s purpose of the march is to improve awareness in the world, about how not to treat Buddha’s images and name improperly. The KnowinBudda organization is non-profit charity, based in Thailand.
Mrs Acaharavadee Wongsakon, the foundation president, indicates that Buddha is the prophet of their religion and that it’s fairly common that people should give respect to Buddha like other religious leaders – but if not, there should be no disrespect.
Mrs. Acharavadee Wongsakon, the Meditation master who is the founder and the President of Knowing Buddha organization said, “As a Buddhist, to love peace and tranquility dosen’t mean you should not do what’s right. We’ve been too quiet on these matters until the world misunderstood or forgot who Buddha is. The Buddha image is not meant for tattoo, furniture, any kind of logo, or to be used as merchandise. Once Buddhists see Buddha’s image or sculptures they will immediately be reminded of his teachings and compassion; not how much money they can make or how much joy they can receive.”
The organization notes that the Buddha Bar is the worst example that they have come across of shameless disrespect that encourages the world to follow their path. They urge them to stop using his name and symbol in their business.At the same time, the organization asks Disney to ask o stop using Buddha as a dog’s name in their movie.
The KnowingBuddha foundation, indicates that the world have gone too far on these matters, but they have just started their work, and we will persist until the world is no longer using Buddha’s image improperly.
The march is called ‘Dharma Gratitude’ and it will start at 5pm on Saturday at June 30th, at Khao San Road in Bangkok Thailand. The multi-nation tourists and the world will witness the Buddhist march in a way they have never seen. It will be truly unique and loud. [Woof woof to that!]
Info: Dr. Chulanee Ketusorn,
Secretary of the Oraganization
E:ketusorn (at) yahoo (dot) com ,
Mobie: (+66) 081 613 7903
Ms.Pornapa Horsaenchai
E:nuisita (at) gmail (dot) com
Mobie: (+66) 083 769 1363
http://www.knowingbuddha.org
f: Do and Don’t on Buddha
8pm, Tuesday, June 19, 2012
(Please see pricing and reservation procedure below)
Speaking to the FCCT via Skype 2009, Professor Thongchai Winichakul and Professor Andrew Walker announced a petition – signed by dozens of leading global figures in human rights, civil liberties and academia, to then-Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, citing Thailand’s Article 112 and urging the government to consider the following:
Please stop seeking more suppressive measures against individuals, web sites, and the peaceful expressions of ideas.
Please consider suggestions to reform the lese majeste law to prevent further abuses and to prevent the possibility of further damage to the international reputation of Thailand and the monarch.
Please consider taking action to withdraw the current lese majeste charges, and working to secure the release of those already convicted under the lese majeste law. They are charged for expressing their ideas. This should not be a crime.
The letter argued that “frequent abuse of the lese majeste law against political opponents undermines democratic processes” and generates “heightened criticism of the monarchy and Thailand itself, both inside and outside the country.”
Three years later, the law remains the same, but debate over 112 has only deepened and widened. The number of cases has shot up. There seems to be no appetite for amendment of the law despite several petitions and much criticism both within and outside Thailand. Yet the law is increasingly an emotional and politically explosive fault line.
Three years on, Andrew Walker and Thongchai Winichakul will speak at the FCCT again via video conference, to review what has transpired since, and assess what may lie in store in the future.
Responding from the FCCT itself and joining the discussion, will be
Dr Chaichana Inkawat, professor of the Faculty of Political Science at Ramkhamhaeng University. A graduate of Thammasat University and a Fulbright Scholar to Cornell University, Dr Chaichana has been faculty at Ramkamheng University for almost four decades. He is also a regular political contributor to independent and state-owned current affairs programmes in Thailand.
Chiranuch Premchaiporn, director, Prachatai.com, found guilty with a suspended sentence recently, under the Computer Crimes Act for not removing allegedly lese majeste comments from the website quickly enough. Ms Chiranuch is the winner of the International Women’s Media foundation’s 2011 Courage in Journalism award.
Pricing Details:
Members: No cover charge, buffet dinner is 350 baht
Non-members: 300 baht cover charge without buffet dinner or 650 baht for buffet dinner including cover charge
Reservations: To ensure sufficient food for the buffet, we would greatly appreciate your making a buffet reservation at least one day before the program if you plan to join us for the dinner. (No penalty for cancellation if last minute conflicts arise.) Please also note that tables/seats will be reserved only for those with advance buffet bookings. To reserve, please call 02-652-0580-1 or click here to send an e-mail to info@fccthai.com .
Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Thailand
Penthouse, Maneeya Center Building
518/5 Ploenchit Road (connected to the BTS Skytrain Chitlom station)
Patumwan, Bangkok 10330
Tel.: 02-652-0580
E-mail: info@fccthai.com
Web Site: http://www.fccthai.com
Hours of Operation –
All departments are open Monday-Friday and closed Saturday, Sunday, and Holidays
Clubhouse
(including Photo Gallery)
10:00 am – 11:00 pm
Restaurant
12:00 noon – 2:30pm
6:00 pm – 9:00pm
Bar
12:00 noon – 11:00 pm
Office
9:30 am – 6:00 pm
Panel discussion on lèse majesté with Sulak, Pravit, Anderson and Marshall
Saksith Saiyasombut
Siam Voices: June 6, 2012
A highly anticipated and interesting panel discussion on Thailand’s draconian lèse majesté law will take place on Thursday with a very illustrious panel hosted by Siam Voices contributor Lisa Gardner, featuring academic Benedict Anderson, Thai columnist Pravit Rojanaphruk, social critic Sulak Sivaraksa and former Reuters correspondent Andrew MacGregor Marshall, who became (in)famous for his articles about the WikiLeaks cables on the Thai monarchy and will therefore only be there via Skype.
The timing of this event is particularly interesting, since it takes place in the light of several cases that involve the lèse majesté law and have severe implications on Thailand’s constantly declining freedom of speech, such as the death of “Uncle SMS”, the lèse majesté complaint filed against Pravit (would be interesting to hear from him about this), the blatant misuse against the National Human Rights Comission and the sentence against Prachatai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn held responsible for not deleting insulting web comments quickly enough.
I will be taking question from Twitter for the panelists, so tweet me tomorrow directly @Saksith or with the hashtag #LMRD.
Full blurb with directions to location can be read on their Facebook event page and here:
“Rhetoric and Dissent: Where to next for Thailand’s lèse majesté law?”
Date: Thursday, June 6, 2012 – 19.00h at
Location: 666 Jaroennakorn Rd. Banglumphoo Lang, Klongsarn Bangkok THAILAND 10600 (map)
A panel discussion featuring:
PROF. BENEDICT ANDERSON
Best known for his celebrated book Imagined Communities and scholarship which has been translated into over 20 different languages in some 400 publications globally, Prof. Anderson is widely regarded as an senior authority on the questions of nationalism, authority and society. Prof. Anderson serves most recently as Emeritus professor of International Studies, Government and Asian Studies at Cornell University.
PRAVIT ROJANAPHRUK
One of Thailand’s most esteemed journalists and as senior writer for The Nation, Mr. Pravit Rojanaphruk has proved, over the course of his long-standing career, both meticulous and prolific in his coverage of political affairs. Mr. Rojanaphruk has often withstood great political pressure in order to document human rights abuses across the country, no less the plight of political prisoners and prisoners of conscience. His work continues to set new standards in ethical and independent Thai media coverage.
ANDREW MACGREGOR MARSHALL
Andrew MacGregor Marshall is a freelance journalist based in Asia who work speaks to politics, human rights, political risk and media ethics. In his long-standing career at Reuters Mr. Marshall covered political conflicts from over thirty-six countries, in places as diverse as Iraq, Afghanistan and the Palestinian Territories, to Cambodia, Thailand and East Timor.
In June 2011 Mr. Marshall resigned from Reuters in order to publish what he considered one of Thailand’s most important and necessary stories. This has since become the epic ‘Thai Story: A Secret History of Modern Thailand’, an online publication since banned from publication in the Kingdom. The material draws upon an extensive collection of diplomatic cables (‘Cablegate’) released to Wikileaks in 2010, and an impressive array of historical and contemporary sources to produce one of the country’s most illuminating – and, in some cases, condemning – assessments of contemporary Thai political affairs.
As a result of Thailand’s harsh lèse-majesté, defamation and computer crimes laws, which criminalize the pursuit of truth regarding some of the country’s most powerful figures, Mr. Marshall will be unable to join us in person for this discussion. Instead, he joins us via Skype from Singapore, where he is now based.
AJARN SULAK SIVARAKSA
Sulak Sivaraksa is a prominent and outspoken Thai intellectual and social critic. He is a teacher, a scholar, a publisher, an activist, the founder of many organisations, and the author of more than a hundred books and monographs in both Thai and English.
LISA GARDNER (MODERATOR)
Lisa Gardner is an Australian freelance journalist based in Bangkok. Her extensive reports speak to key political events in light of a new and innovative era for online media, particularly in the pursuit of free expression and human rights. Her well-regarded reports are published widely on Asian Correspondent, Prachatai, World Pulse, Global Voices Online and elsewhere.
Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Hamburg, Germany. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and on Facebook here.
เสวนา “เปิดใจพลเมืองเน็ตในภาวะ (พ.ร.ก.) ฉุกเฉิน และความอึดอัดในโลกออนไลน์”
ร่วมรำลึก 18 ปี พฤษภาประชาธรรม เครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต (Thai Netizen Network) ขอเชิญทุกท่านร่วมเวที
“เปิดใจพลเมืองเน็ตในภาวะ (พ.ร.ก.) ฉุกเฉิน และความอึดอัดในโลกออนไลน์”
ร่วมกันถอดเสื้อเปิดใจ ด้วยการ “บ่น” เสียงดังๆจากความคิด ความรู้สึก ทั้งอึดอัด คับข้องจิต คิดไม่ตก
อกหักเพราะการเมืองและความคิดของผู้คนหรืออะไรก็ตามต่อสิ่งที่เป็นไปในโลกไซเบอร์
ภายใต้การประกาศ พ.ร.ก.ฉุกเฉินฯ และความขัดแย้งทางการเมือง ที่กระจายความหงุดหงิด บ่มเพาะความเกลียดชัง
อินเทอร์เน็ตเป็นทั้งสื่อ เป็นทั้งโลกอีกใบของเรา หลากความคิด หลายความเห็น เกิดขึ้นมากมาย
สุดท้ายเราจะอยู่ร่วมกันอย่างไร เพื่อทำให้เป็นอินเทอร์เน็ตเป็นสื่อที่ส่งความเข้าใจ
เป็นโลกอีกใบที่เราจะเปิดรับความจริงรอบด้าน ไม่ทำสงครามประหัตประหารกัน
เสรีภาพกับความมั่นคง การเปิดกว้างและการปิดกั้น ความแตกต่างหรือความแตกแยก
ใช้เน็ตเพื่อเรียนรู้ ลดช่องว่าง สร้างความเข้าใจ ท้าทาย ระบาย สร้างสรรค์ หรือทำลายล้าง
ดุลยภาพทั้งหมดอยู่ที่ใด?
คำตอบไม่ได้ล่องลอยในสายลม แต่อยู่ที่ปลายนิ้ว (มิใช่ปลายปืน) ของเราทุกคน
พบกันวันพฤหัสบดีที่ 13 พฤษภาคม 2553
บ่ายโมง ถึง ห้าโมงเย็น (13.00 – 17.00 น.)
ห้องประชุม GM Hall อาคารศศนิเวศ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย (แผนที่)
ลงทะเบียนเข้าร่วมภายในวันที่ 12 พ.ค. 2553 ได้ที่นี่
http://thainetizen.org/node/2185
สนใจสอบถามรายละเอียดได้ที่ 0891232296
Seminar on “Emergency” Censorship of Thailand’s Online World
Thai Netizen Network
Take off your shirt and join with open mind TNN’s seminar to discuss govt’s recent Web censorship.
Thai Netizen Network wishes to affirm our Internet as a medium of understanding not conflict.
Neutrality for all!
The answer is not drifting in the wind. But at the end of inches. (Not end gun) of us all.
Thursday, May 13, 2553, noon to five pm (13:00 to 17:00 pm).
GM Hall Meeting, Chulalongkorn University
http://thainetizen.org/node/2185.
For additional information, please contact 089-123-2296.
Cybercrime law ‘a threat to freedom’-Bangkok Post
April 1, 2009
Cybercrime law ‘a threat to freedom’
Activist: Police wield too much censorship power
Sirikul Bunnag
Bangkok Post: March 28, 2009
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/14107/cybercrime-law-a-threat-to-freedom
The Computer Crime Act is a threat to people’s freedom rather than protecting their rights, a seminar has been told.
Supinya Klangnarong, coordinator of the Thai Netizen Network, said the group has closely followed the enforcement of the 2007 bill over the past two years and found the legislation was mainly used to threaten people’s freedom rather than to protect their rights of expression.
The legislation, passed by the military-appointed National Legislative Assembly, gave police too broad censorship powers to take action against computer and internet users and charge them with posing a threat to national security, said the media-reform campaigner.
Since the legislation came into force, police have arrested five internet users and internet service providers on charges of violating national security by posting remarks deemed to be lese majeste. Most of them were detained for weeks and some for months and had their computers confiscated, she said.
In the case of Cheeranuch Premchaiphorn, webmaster of Prachatai’s political website, the suspect was granted bail shortly after being arrested and her office computers were not seized by police.
The activist was speaking at a seminar on the Computer Crime Act organised by the Thai Journalists Association and the Isara Institute.
“This legislation opens a channel for police to interpret and accuse others of violating national security without giving a definition of what actions constitute a threat to national security. This allows them to arrest suspects and let them fight charges in court later. The legislation creates a climate of fear among people,” said Ms Supinya.
Pirongrong Ramasoota, head of Chulalongkorn University’s journalism department, said the contents of the Computer Crime Act were similar to the Council of Europe’s Convention on Cybercrime, but the difference was the enforcement of the convention took into account law that protected personal information and freedom.
Thailand’s cybercrime law, however, failed to consider such matters, the academic said.
Pol Col Pisit Pao-in, deputy chief of the Royal Thai Police’s Hi-Tech Crime Centre, defended the law, saying it protected good people and was never used to persecute anyone.
The law provided a check and balance of power, he said. Police were required to present evidence and sound reasons if they wanted to seek a court order to take action against people suspected of committing cybercrime, he said.
He said there was clear evidence the five suspects mentioned by the Thai Netizen Network had violated the cybercrime law.
They made remarks deemed offensive to the monarchy and police would take drastic action against them.
Obama speech censored in China-BBC
January 26, 2009
Obama speech censored in China
Michael Bristow
BBC News: January 21, 2009
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolpda/ifs_news/hi/newsid_7841000/7841580.stm?ifs=1
China has censored parts of the new US president’s inauguration speech that have appeared on a number of websites.
Live footage of the event on state television also cut away from Barack Obama when communism was mentioned.
China’s leaders appear to have been upset by references to facing down communism and silencing dissent.
English-language versions of the speech have been allowed on the internet, but many of the Chinese translations have omitted sensitive sections.
Selective editing
China keeps a firm grip on the country’s media outlets and censors their news reports as a matter of routine.
Like the rest of the world, it has been keenly following developments in the United States; President Obama’s inauguration was front page news.
But the authorities seem not to want ordinary Chinese people to read the full, unexpurgated version of the president’s speech.
In his inauguration address, President Obama said: “Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions.”
That entire passage was retained for an English-language version of the speech that appeared on the website of state-run Xinhua news agency.
But in the Chinese-language version, the word “communism” was taken out.
President Obama’s comments addressed to world leaders who “blame their society’s ills on the West” also fell foul of the censor’s red pen.
“To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history,” the president said.
Once again, Xinhua included the passage in full in its English version, but the sentence was taken out of the Chinese translation.
Similar changes were made to versions of the speech that appeared on other websites based in China.
And websites were not the only media organisations that struggled to report some of the comments made by President Obama.
China Central Television, the country’s main broadcaster, aired the speech live with a simultaneous Chinese translation.
But when the translator got to the part where President Obama talked about facing down communism, her voice suddenly faded away.
The programme suddenly cut back to the studio, where an off-guard presenter had to quickly ask a guest a question.
Censoring sensitive news reports is nothing new in China, where officials go to great lengths to cut critical material.
These officials appear a little nervous about the arrival of a new US President, who might not be as friendly to China as President George W. Bush.
As an editorial in the state-run China Daily put it: “Given the popular American eagerness for a break from the Bush years, many wonder, or worry to be precise, whether the new president would ignore the hard-earned progress in bilateral ties.”
The censored story of Wikileaks-Jonathan Stray
January 17, 2009
[FACT comments: FACT was the first group to leak documents to Wikileaks in the form of ICT blocklists for censorship. FACT coordinator CJ Hinke sits on Wikileaks’ advisory board.]
The Censored Story of Wikileaks
Jonathan Stray: January 1, 2009
http://jonathanstray.com/the-censored-story-of-wikileaks
Wikileaks is often in the news, but for the wrong reasons. The web site provides a highly public outlet for “classified, censored, or otherwise restricted material of political, diplomatic, or ethical significance.” It is designed to be a journalistic tool for whistle-blowers and citizens of oppressive government and corporate regimes, a place of first and last resort for sensitive information from sources who need protection. It is a great irony, then, that an organization which specializes in censored information only makes the news when somebody violently objects.
I first stumbled upon Wikileaks about a year ago and have been watching it closely ever since. Despite its mission of openness, the site has a certain mystery about it: nowhere on the site are the principals publicly named. I was delighted, then, to attend a talk by two of the Wikileaks founders at the 25th Annual Chaos Communication Congress in Berlin. The 50-minute presentation was titled Wikileaks vs. The World, or “a talk about some conclusions observing Wikileaks.”
You may have heard about some of the things we’ve done in the media, but what you hear about tends to be what is frequently of greatest salacious interest to the Western media and to people in general. That doesn’t tend to be our everyday work.
A look at the front page of Wikileaks today shows all sorts of topics: The un-redacted report of Abu Grhiab whistleblower Samuel Provence. The German Foreign Secret Service report on Kosovo, 2005. Alperin vs. Vatican Bank, 2008 concerning Nazi assets allegedly laundered in 1946. A Scientology Department of Special Affairs lecture. Documentation showing that Swiss Bank Julius Baer put USD $300 million through the Cayman Islands in 1999. “The secret internet censorship list of Thailand’s Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT).”
Wikileaks posts anything submitted to it complete and unaltered; that is the point. In this policy they represent the purest possible interpretation of the ideals of transparency and freedom of speech. Usually, the documents they post are applauded or at least ignored, but sometimes they draw the ire of those who feel that there is a case for certain secrets. A few weeks ago Wikileaks posted a list of Danish web-sites ostensibly censored for child-pornography; this summer they released a document describing the technical details of the Warlock signal jammers used by American forces in Iraq. They defend both choices, and indeed all of their leaks, with the same argument:
Who’s to judge the relevance, the political relevance? if it’s us who is to judge the relevance, then are we robust enough to judge this for all of society? … This is something for the public to do, and the political groups in the public, and not us.
Fighting censorship is what they’re all about. They believe deeply in the “fourth estate,” the role of the press and public cognizance as a check against tyranny. Like Wikipedia, they place great trust in the intelligence and enthusiasm of the public at large, who are asked to vet, analyze, and publicize the anonymously submitted documents. This ultimately represents a different model of society, an almost ridiculously open and transparent society. I did not hear the Wikileaks speakers ever concede that secrecy sometimes has its purposes, that there are legitimate reasons for knowledge to be hidden; instead, they repeatedly articulated the dangers of censorship.
The question is not what we need to be told. The question is what we need not to be told and who decides. Secret censorship systems are unaccountable and dangerous.
But again we are distracted. The possible mistakes and harm of Wikileaks cannot be judged in a vacuum, but only against the overall activities of the project. And sadly, sometimes it is the successes that draw the least attention.
There are a lot of things we do routinely that are very serious, but still get little attention. For example we have exposed many, many political assassinations. We released only three months ago a very important report on Kenya documenting 500 extra-judicial assassinations that had occurred in the past 18 months. There was some pickup in the Kenyan press, but the rest of the world, nothing. So getting leaked documents out is extremely important, but it’s not the only thing. Sometimes there is no interest group to care to spread the information.
The speakers urged the audience to get involved: to read, to analyze, to disclose. Our collective reality is only information, they said. “Everyone here is what he knows.”
Every decision we make about what to say to someone else or what to write on our blogs defines the future world we live in, and defines what actually happened. It is not an absolute world; it is malleable. And, they claim, it is being changed in all sorts of ways with or without our knowledge or consent. Contrary to popular belief, “no medium is easier to censor than the internet.”
There is a complete eradication of certain parts of history going on. This is much easier than anyone in this crowd here most likely will think. We can see that censorship is being implemented systematically and globally. … George Orwell said that ‘he who controls the present controls the past, and he who controls the past controls the future,’ and this is never more true than with electronic archives. We have seen many, many examples of major newspapers pull material from the archives permanently … For example, this year there were seven stories removed from The Guardian, The Telegraph, and the New Statesman, in response to fear over legal costs.
If you go to the URLs for those stories, you won’t see that this story has been removed by legal action, you will see ‘not found’, and if you search the index you will see ‘not found’. Those stories not only have ceased to exist, they have ceased to have ever existed. So the centralization that is occurring in archive repositories means that censorship is very easy.
Speaking to an audience of hundreds of hackers, researchers, anarchists and artists at the CCC in Berlin, they reminded everyone that Wikileaks is real. At the CCC I learned about the flaws in proposed cryptographic technologies for electronic voting; I even learned that SSL itself has been compromised. But technology is not people. And this, perhaps, is the key point of the entire lecture, and the entire project:
All these documents are real. It is hard fact that is documented. And all these documents reflect some facets of something that is happening at some point somewhere in the world. This is reality. … These documents pertain to violence that is caused by truth being told, by documents surfacing to the society. So It is important to understand that is not a hypothetical construct, some project that is dealing with something very obscure. We are actually dealing with information that reflects a very important facet of lives all over the world, and that has an influence on the quality, the freedom, and all other aspects of lives, living beings that we all need to have compassion for, and care for. This is very important in the mission that we try to bring across.
The streaming video of the complete talk has been archived in WMV format (859MB) here and here, and in OGG video format (445MB) here and here.
FACT - Freedom Against Censorship Thailand 