An affable police major-general, Suraphon Tuanphong, was today’s first witness for the prosecution. The major-general described himself to the court as an expert at deciphering lèse majesté from coded phrases on the Internet.

The witness is vice-secretary of the Royal Thai Police working group on lèse majesté. Even though he missed the group’s meeting on Prachatai, he felt confident in his courtroom presentation.

Suraphon stated that one of the comments to Prachatai’s webboard for which Chiranuch has been charged was critical of ‘Mama Blue Diamond’ attending the funeral of a PAD protester who was killing in political clashes. He stated it obviously described the Queen and that ‘flower palace’ meant the Royal residence, Chitralada, and ‘Nai 04’ referred to the Crown Prince, heir to Thailand’s throne.

The police officer considered these codewords to be ‘inappropriate’ and insulting to the Royal family. He stated that ‘police have a duty to prosecute’ in such cases because political conflict could easily escalate from influence of the Internet. However, such comments appeared not only on Prachatai but on many other websites.

In responce to defence cross-examination, Major-General Suraphon admitted that netizens using Prachatai were by no means in universal agreement over such comments and that they generated much discussion both positive and negative. However, the police working group reached the conclusion in December 2008 that if “Bento” should be prosecuted for her comments, so should Prachatai.

However, the police found no collaboration between “Bento”, the only commenter for be prosecuted, unsuccessfully, for lèse majesté comments, and Chiranuch as webmaster of Prachatai. The witness conceded that posters may not even have written the comments themselves but could have been copied from other sources.

Suraphon also noted that users of Prachatai’s webboard requested that such comments be removed on many occasions and that the website universally complied with such requests. However, he felt that the webmaster must be responsible for such content.

The honourable judge immediately opined that ‘anyone would know’ these codewords refer to the Royals. But he questioned whether the comments were actually insulting and does a webmaster bear co-responsibility for them.

The judge summarily dismissed a second prosecution witness, the new secretary of the police working group on lèse majesté, saying that it was unnecessary for the court to hear from every single person who had worked on the Prachatai case.

As this courtroom theatre develops, we all must bear in mind that one brave journalist is facing 20 years in prison for comments not her own.

Chiranuch’s resumes next week, on Tuesday, September 6 at Bangkok’s Criminal Court (San Aya) on Ratchadapisek Road near Lat Phrao MTR station, Exit 4. The trial is being heard in courtroom 910 but the case docket number is 1167/2553 in case the courtroom venue changes.

Prosecution witnesses will be heard September 6, 7, 8, 9, 20, 21 and defence witnesses October 11, 12, 13, 14.

Written by CJ Hinke · comments (0)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

The fifth day of trial continued on Friday for independent news portal Prachatai’s webmaster, Chiranuch Premchaiporn independent news portal Prachatai’s webmaster in Bangkok’s Criminal Court.

Chiranuch is charged with ten violations of Thailand’s draconian Computer Crimes Act for alleged lèse majesté. Each count carries a potential sentence of five years imprisonment.

Lieutenant Dr. Wiwat Sittisoradej is a police scientist and has a doctoral degree in physical sciences from Chulalongkorn University appearing for the prosecution.

He copied Chiranuch’s laptop hard disk seized by the police on March 6, 2009 for forensic analysis. Using software developed for the US FBI, he discovered eight modified photos of King Bhumibol to provide the monarch a monkey face which had been deleted from the trash.

These photos must have come from a YouTube video insulting the king. In any case, Chiranuch is not charged with these photos but they were used to set the stage for her accusers.

The police scientist also found eight postings to Prachatai in two folders named ‘Prachatai Webboard’. Although the laptop disk arrived with an evidence sticker, it was unsigned, making verification and continuity of evidence impossible.

Furthermore, the transfer disk provided Wiwat was unsealed, suggesting it was not a new disk and raising the possibility it may have been used in other investigations leaving potentially incriminating artifacts.

The lieutenant worked alone without supervision from other police. Normally, police evidence is printed to use as evidence in court. However, Dr. Wiwat felt such copying would put him in violation of lèse majesté laws himself. He also declined to repeat this information in his report.

He found no evidence that either the deleted images or the eight postings had been created or posted from Chiranuch’s computer.

The most interesting part of the police scientist’s testimony was regarding the way email works. Thunderbird, an offline email client similiar to Microsoft’s Outlook application was found on Jiew’s laptop. As offline clients are set to default save incoming emails and their attachments to disk.

Dr. Wiwat readily conceded the probability that the images and postings were received by Chiranuch in email and were not redistributed by her.

The police witness was shown a report from a lèse majesté seminar held at Thammasat University in 2008. Dr. Wiwat also conceded that statements calling for amendment or repeal of Thailand’s lèse majesté laws used in postings may have come from this document.

Although the police scientist found some of the postings to contain language he considered impolite, he found no direct mentions of the monarchy. Lt. Wiwat said that a computer user could not be in violation for simply receiving these emails.

The witness also found no links to Prachatai by IP address meaning Jiew’s laptop was not the server for Prachatai’s webboard.

Pol. Lt. Dr. Wiwat was the fifth government witness, leaving nine more for the prosecution. As it became obvious trial would not be completed by the end of next week, a decision was made to adjourn for a later date.

Chiranuch’s trial will resume Thursday, September 1st and continue on Sept 2nd, 6th through 9th, 20th and 21st to hear nine remaining prosecution witnesses. The defence will begin on Tuesday, October 11th through 14th to hear eight witnesses.

An after-party was held at the Prachatai offices for friends and supporters, legal and media observers, thus this late posting. Our toast was:

FREE JIEW!

Written by CJ Hinke · comments (5)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

The trial of Chiranuch Premchaiporn, independent news portal Prachatai’s webmaster continued Thursday in Bangkok’s Criminal Court. Two further prosecution witnesses were called to testify.

The morning session was devoted to MICT lawyer Somsak Supajirawat. He testified to cooperating with the Royal Thai Police after they issued search warrants for the Prachatai offices and an arrest warrant for Chiranuch on March 6, 2009.

Crime Suppression Division police seized six computer’s and Chiranuch laptop. When Jiew was in police custody, her laptop disk was copied in her presence. Of course, all the information—evidence!—recovered was already on the World Wide web.

Following this arrest Chiranuch was charged with four counts of lèse majesté using Thailand’s Computer Crimes Act, each carrying a potential five-year sentence. Somsak was aware of the MICT order to block Prachatai.

However, the MICT lawyer raised serious doubts regarding the continuity, maintenance and integrity of physical, forensic and digital computer evidence as it was monitored, investigated, examined and circulated within the ICT ministry and among several police divisions.

Somsak remembered Jiew well from her arrest. It added a surreal touch to the proceedings to see another prosecution witness smile and greet Chiranuch in the courtroom while attempting to lock her up. Such sincere antics remind observers, “This ain’t no party. This ain’t no disco. This ain’t no fooling around.”

A very real person who is dedicated solely to serving the online community is fighting for her life. The adversarial justice system treats this as a game—the prosecution “wins” when a defendant goes to prison.

The afternoon session saw prosecution witness Pairat Yawong, a private Bangkok lawyer partner of the firm Law Hom 999. A police lieutenant with Crime Suppression Division at Hua Mark police station retained Pairat for the police to examine a single posting to determine its legal status.

The witness declined to provide the officer’s name, citing legal confidentiality even though he had been paid with public funds. When questioned by the defence, Pairat refused to answer if his association with this lieutenant was in regards to the 2004 disappearance of prominent Muslim lawyer Somchai Neelapaichit. Somchai’s disappearance has been linked to Thai police and is the subject of ongoing legal proceedings. This case is still unsolved.

The lawyer found the posting to Prachatai’s webboard by ‘Bento’ referred to Her Majesty the Queen and His Royal Highness the Crown Prince, as well Chitralada Palace, the Royal residence, in an oblique manner. The post mentions the Queen’s attendance at the October 12, 2008 funeral for a 28-year old Yellowshirt woman killed in clashes between police and protestors. This is simply factual reporting but was widely seen as symbolic of the Queen’s support for the PAD.

Although many social activists were killed over the six decades of this Royal family’s sovereignty, no other funeral was ever attended by a member of the Royal family. Although her attendance merely states a fact, Pairat characterised this mention as lèse majesté as it could lead the public to believe the Queen was interfering in Thai politics.

Lawyer Pairat stated that he had no opinion regarding lèse majesté (perhaps the only one in Thailand!) or any suspected movement against the monarchy but that he sometimes turned to Prachatai for news.

The witness testified that the only web fora in which he had participated were regarding legal matters and that his posts always appeared immediately suggesting no monitoring or moderation of posts.

As Pairat stated ‘Bento’’s post insulted the Queen, he said that repetition of lèse majesté could manipulate public opinion against the monarchy “because there is already a climate of public suspicion.”

Jiew’s trial is not a trial for lèse majesté because none of the posts expressed her own opinions. A free press, a free Internet and lèse majesté prosecutions are on trial in this case.

Not only Chiranuch’s freedom but the future of a free Internet is at stake.

Chiranuch’s trial resumes Friday, February 11, at Bangkok’s Criminal Court (San Aya), on Ratchadapisek Road opposite Soi 38, Lat Phrao MTR station. Chiranuch’s trial is in Courtroom 701 on February 11 and 14-17, although the judge may postpone next week to allow a schedule to hear all 28 witnesses. The case is certain to go overtime but another courtroom slot is unavailable before December.

The trial of alleged NorPhorChorUSA webmaster Tantawut Taweewarodomkul, nicknamed Kenny, also facing lèse majesté charges under Thailand’s Computer Crimes Act as well as similar Criminal Code charges finished today. A judgement will be rendered on March 15 and it appears the prosecution case is rather weak.

Kenny has been held without bail since April 2010. NorPhorChor is an acronym for the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship, commonly known as the Redshirts.

WE URGE ALL READERS TO SPEND AT LEAST ONE MORNING OR AFTERNOON SESSION TO SUPPORT JIEW AND TO STAND UP FOR FREE SPEECH.

WE LOVE JIEW! WE LOVE PRACHATAI!

FREE KENNY!

Written by CJ Hinke · comments (3)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

The third day for prosecution witnesses in the trial of Prachatai webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn opened in Bangkok’s Criminal Court Wednesday.

We have written that Chiranuch is facing 50 years on ten charges under Thailand’s draconian Computer Crimes Act. If convicted, Chiranuch could be sentenced to 50 years, five years on each count, but in fact the maximum she could serve is 20 years.

The second witness for the prosecution, Thanit Prapathanan, a legal advisor to Thailand’s ICT ministry since 2005, testified that he had personally seen all ten comments to Prachatai’s public webboard which resulted in Jiew’s charges. The postings and comments to this forum were made anonymously. Chiranuch is charged with lèse majesté because she failed to delete them promptly.

Thanit is designated a “competent official” under the CCA with sole responsibility for protecting Thailand’s monarchy from insult. Lèse majesté is considered a threat to national security.

Thanit received the Prachatai material from the first prosecution witness, MICT’s chief censor, Aree Jivorarak, in the form of documents, DVDs, VCDs and audio CDs for his review. He forwarded these to the Ministry of Justice for their comments and then sought a court order to block Prachatai.

The material included an audio CD of a speech made from the Redshirt stage by Darunee Charnchoensilpakul, nicknamed Da Torpedo, who received an 18-year sentence for lèse majesté. A comment to one of the posts included a hyperlink to this speech on a third-party site. Although the speech was never hosted on Prachatai, MICT is alleging Prachatai is also guilty of repeating its lèse majesté and included a police transcript of the speech in their evidence against Chiranuch.

MICT’s lawyer stated that any intermediary shares the same criminal liability as the poster. Creating a hub for people to communicate and share information made Prachatai liable for all its webboard’s users.

This statement alone reinforced Thai government’s mission in this trial—to intimidate webmasters and stifle free expression among netizens. Government draws its line in the sand but never tells netizens where it is so we never know when we are crossing into criminality.

Thanit expressed concern over defence cross-examination. However, the chief judge reassured him he could reserve his answers.

The lawyer stated he knew of public opposition to the Computer Crimes Act drafted by the ICT ministry and passed by the military coup’s legislature. He said he was aware that free speech was guaranteed by the Thai Constitution—no lesser laws may restrict that right. However, Thanit said that parts of the CCA did just that. He also said he knew that lèse majesté charges have been used to silence political opponents.

In the afternoon session, MICT’s Thanit said the computer law permits prosecution of Internet intermediaries. Such charges do not require any proof of intent to defame. Such content is criminal even if only momentary on the website.

Defence lawyers pointed out that the ICT ministry’s website itself linked to media hosting lèse majesté content. The witness stated that MICT could not delete content from third parties so was, therefore not liable for their content. This appears to contradict his statements of Prachatai’s liability for postings, comments and hyperlinks not their own.

Thanit clearly stated, however, that web hosts cannot be held criminally liable for hyperlinks. A website would only be charged if it refused to delete such links at government “request”.

He said, if a web forum is public and not moderated, it can easily violate the computer law. Webmasters knowingly take that risk if they do not censor their boards in a timely fashion. However, there is no time limit—when illegal content is posted, a webmaster is guilty even if such content in promptly removed.

The MICT lawyer stated that he assessed lèse majesté on the basis of the topic, the post and comments to the post when viewed as a whole.

Thanit said it was easier for MICT to prosecute Prachatai as “IP addresses can be manipulated and posters may be hard to find”.

One of the postings for which Chiranuch is charged was titled “Ratchadamnoen, Pantip and Jae Da”. (Pantip is a highly-regulated, moderated and self-censored web forum requiring users to sign their names and provide government identification. Ratchadamnoen was Pantip’s political forum which it closed due to user comments. Jae Da refers to Darunee, Da Torpedo.) The witness stated MICT regards any reference to Da Torpedo to be illegal!

Thanit stated “the uneducated” will believe the comment, “The Queen was behind the military coup.” When the defence asked how the Queen was defamed because 2006’s was regarded as a ‘good coup’. the witness replied, “Because the coup overthrew the government and Constitution.”

Contradicting the testimony yesterday by MICT’s chief censor, Thanit said he found no evidence banned books were sold by Prachatai.

The defence cited a December 2010 report from the iLaw Foundation which found websites hosting alleged lèse majesté content had increased from 900 in 2007 to 35,000 in 2010. The witness thinks their purpose is to abolish Thailand’s monarchy.

Today’s witness closed with a rather chilling statement: “Freedom has its limits.”

Chiranuch’s trial resumes Thursday, February 10, at Bangkok’s Criminal Court (San Aya), on Ratchadapisek Road opposite Soi 38, Lat Phrao MTR station. Chiranuch’s trial is in Courtroom 701 on February 10 &11 and 14-17. The case is certain to go overtime but another courtroom slot is unavailable before December.

Alleged NorPhorChorUSA webmaster Tantawut Taweewarodomkul, nicknamed Kenny, is also facing lèse majesté charges under Thailand’s Computer Crimes Act as well as similar Criminal Code charges.

Kenny has been held without bail since April 2010. NorPhorChor is an acronym for the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship, commonly known as the Redshirts. Tantawut’s trial will enter its second day Thursday, February 10 in Courtroom 906.

WE URGE ALL READERS TO SPEND AT LEAST ONE MORNING OR AFTERNOON SESSION TO SUPPORT JIEW AND KENNY AND TO STAND UP FOR FREE SPEECH.

WE LOVE JIEW! WE LOVE PRACHATAI!

FREE KENNY!

DA IS FREE!

Written by CJ Hinke · comments (10)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

The second day in the lèse majesté trial against Chiranuch Premchaiporn, webmaster of Thai independent news portal, Prachatai, using the Computer Crimes Act began Tuesday.

Chiranuch, nicknamed Jiew, was charged over ten comments to Prachatai’s public webboard which Thai government says she was not prompt enough to delete. Each charge carries a potential sentence of five years. Chiranuch is facing 50 years in prison for being a journalist. Bangkok’s Criminal Court was once again filled with local and international supporters, media and foreign diplomats.

The defence cross-examination of Aree Jivorarak, chief of Thailand’s ICT ministry and Thai government’s chief censor, continued from Friday.

At today’s hearing, Chiranuch’s defence sought to examine each of the alleged comments insulting Thailand’s monarchy. The defence questioned the indirect phraseology used by the commentators.

Some examples were, does it insult His Majesty the King or Her Majesty the Queen to suggest that they supported the Thai military’s coup d’etat in 2006? Can the use of the pronouns he and she definitively be taken to mean the King, Queen or Heir Apparent? Is any discussion of Thailand’s monarchy, its meaning and duties, demeaning the institution?

One poster asked Prachatai readers to “understand” the King’s own words. Aree repeatedly applied the word “inappropriate”. Of course, inappropriate does not mean illegal!

A posting to Prachatai’s web forum included a hotlink to a Mediafile.com audio file of of a speech made from a Redshirt stage by Darunee Charnchoensilpakul, nicknamed Da Torpedo. Darunee was torpedoed with an 18-year sentence for this instance of lèse majesté in which she called for abolition of the Royals.

The audio file was not enough for our MICT. The file was transcribed and added to the police charges against Chiranuch. However, Mediafile was not blocked and no prosecution was initiated against the file’s uploader.

This raises a crucial legal question as yet untested. Does the Computer Crimes Act criminalize hotlinks?

The MICT chief censor stated that his ministry could not pursue prosecutions but merely recommend their investigation to the Royal Thai Police. The police also are in charge of tracing IP addresses suspected of illegality. In Thailand, ISPs always connect to Internet users via a telephone line which, of course, has an owner and a fixed address.

When asked if the ICT ministry was pursuing a vendetta against Prachatai, the witness stated he did not want to answer, even when directed by the judge. In fact, Aree continued to be evasive of defence questioning. This writer counted at least 34 instances in which he answered, “I’m not sure”, “I don’t remember”, and “I’d have to check”.

He also stated that the law does not have any notice-and-takedown provision. However, Aree said Chiranuch uniformly cooperated in every instance with MICT when they requested deletion of her.

Thailand’s chief censor also explained that his ministry only censors using Google Search and does not filter web fora. When asked if such filtering is done in other countries, Aree stated, “Only in China.”!

On redirect examination by the public prosecutor, the MICT censor admitted to participation in the draft of the draconian computer law promulgated by the military coup legislature. Again today, the prosecutor asked questions of this prosecution witness which contained the right answers.

On defence redirect questioning, Thailand’s censor chief also stated that he had seen banned books on sale from Prachatai. However, he could recall no specific titles and was unsure whether or not banning had taken place. He had not only not tried to buy any of these so-called banned books but wrote no report as to their sale on the website.

Although Thailand’s Computer Crimes Act requires application of a court order to block web pages, often pages were blocked months before. At least 425,296 web pages are blocked in Thailand under martial law until December 22, rising at a rate of around 690 per day.

The principles of freedom of expression as a basic human right also constitutionally protect what Thai government calls lèse majesté. What is at issue is the intent to defame. Another crucial consideration in defamation is whether the statements written are true or not.

It is clearly impossible for someone who did not write the posting to be guilty of any illegality. If government wants to censor our Internet, then it must also police the Internet. It is not the responsibility of webmasters to do government’s dirty work of censorship for them.

Chiranuch’s trial resumes Wednesday, February 9, at Bangkok’s Criminal Court (San Aya), on Ratchadapisek Road opposite Soi 38, Lat Phrao MTR station. Chiranuch’s trial is in Courtroom 701 on February 9-11 and 14-17 and probably longer.

Alleged NorPhorChorUSA webmaster Tantawut Taweewarodomkul, nicknamed Kenny, is also facing lèse majesté charges under Thailand’s Computer Crimes Act as well as similar Criminal Code charges.

Kenny has been held without bail since April 2010. NorPhorChor is an acronym for the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship, commonly known as the Redshirts. Tantawut’s trial will enter its second day Wednesday, February 9 in Courtroom 906.

WE URGE ALL READERS TO SPEND AT LEAST ONE MORNING OR AFTERNOON SESSION TO SUPPORT JIEW AND KENNY AND TO STAND UP FOR FREE SPEECH.

WE LOVE JIEW! WE LOVE PRACHATAI!

FREE KENNY!

Written by CJ Hinke · comments (13)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

The trial of Chiranuch Premchaiporn, nicknamed Jiew, opened on Friday at Bangkok’s Criminal Court, the venue changed to Courtroom 701. A larger courtroom was needed due to an unprecedented number of observers from numerous Thai and foreign NGOs, local and international media, and foreign embassies.

Chiranuch is a founding signer to Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT) and an activist with Than Netizen Network.

The public prosecutor opened Thai government’s case against Chiranuch, webmaster of Thailand’s only independent news portal, Prachatai.com.

Chiranuch has been charged with ten violations of the country’s draconian and unconstitutional Computer Crimes Act which was the first law to be passed by Thailand’s military coup legislature in 2007. Each charge carries a sentence of five years in prison. However, Thailand’s Constitution carries specific protections for free expression which cannot be amended by any lesser law.

However, Chiranuch has not been charged for making such comments herself. Rather, she faces prison stemming from pseudonymous postings and comments to Prachatai’s public webboard in mid-2008, although she was not arrested until March 2009.

Chiranuch has been charged because it is alleged she failed to delete the lèse majesté comments quickly enough from Prachatai, allowing them to remain eleven days in total.

The morning session opened with the first prosecution witness, Aree Jivorarak, chief of Thailand’s Ministry of Information and Communication Technology’s IT Regulation Bureau. The chief judge, the prosecutor and the witness all spoke in subdued tones without amplification as the content of the postings were read aloud by the witness, nearly inaudible in the public gallery.

Repetition of lèse majesté by anyone is, of course, also lèse majesté and often courts are cleared of the public in such trials. In this case, we were not able to hear them anyway.

The witness seemed frequently confused by the questions posed by the prosecution who seemed on many occasions to lead or direct the MICT censor in his replies.

Thailand’s chief censor smiled and waved to Chiranuch in the dock whom he acknowledged he had consulted frequently and noted that she had always been cooperative and receptive in removing such comments from the Prachatai webboard. Aree also acknowledged that, during the period which is the subject of this trial, MICT had not informed the webmaster about the offending comments.

These charges also resulted in the closure of Prachatai’s public web forum in July 2010. Prachatai was the only forum where netizens could express an opinion on issues of the day. Now we have none.

The judges were all quite young and Chiranuch’s supporters had hope that they might have some Internet experience. However, questions from the bench were required of Aree as to the working definitions of URL, IP address, DNS and ISP. The youth of the judges and a single public prosecutor belied the serious weight Thai government gives to this case.

The afternoon session was given over to the defence bar, a team of three experienced human rights advocates. Even the judges laughed aloud when trial observers broke into spontaneous applause when the sound system was turned on so we could finally hear the proceedings.

Defence cross-examination elicited some surprising testimony from the government’s witness. The ICT ministry, for example, seemed unaware that Prachatai is governed by the directors of a foundation consisting of numerous prominent academics.

When questions were posed about who in government exactly decides content is illegal and what criteria are used to judge such content as lèse majesté, the witness became increasingly vague. Aree stated such decisions were made in committee from various ministries and the Royal Thai Police. However, he was unable not only to name the committee members or their specific agencies but was unsure of the agencies represented themselves.

Thailand’s chief censor also exhibited confusion over what content was considered ‘inappropriate’ and which content was clearly illegal by precise legal definition. Aree stated that there was little oversight over MICT’s censors who would know lèse majesté when they saw it!

There were numerous direct questions posed to the bureaucrat regarding the exact context of lèse majesté. Aree failed to reply to several of these defence questions and sat mute, with no direction the court to answer.

The MICT censor chief also questioned the intentions of the public participants in Prachatai’s web forum. Aree said he also found many of Prachatai’s news articles to be ‘inappropriate’ and solely intended to criticise Thai government.

The witness also relied overwhelmingly on presumption as all ten comments alleged to be defaming the monarchy were cast in indirect terms. He stated that any reader would know that reference to “the blue whale” would know the code for Her Majesty Queen Sirikit, whose Royal colour is blue. That any Thai would know “the blind father” referred to His Majesty King Bhumibol who is sight impaired from youth.

However, when Aree was shown ten pages of comments from Prachatai’s webboard and asked by the defence to mark those he considered lèse majesté, he marked only three items which were not disclosed by the court.

MICT’s bureaucrat also acknowledged that the ministry had tracked the posters of the pseudonymous comments to Prachatai by IP address but only one of them had been charged. This may well be the netizen acquitted last week.

Thailand’s Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva met with members of the Thai Netizen Network in December 2009 and stated the Computer Crimes Act would never be used to suppress citizen media or free public expression.

He has commented publicly at least three times on the Prachatai case, stating the arrest of Chiranuch was the ‘most regrettable’ of his tenure, promising to look into the case and, finally expressing surprise the case against Chiranuch had not been dropped.

The government has had more than two years to drop these spurious charges. The prime minister lies. Under his administration, Thailand has chosen to make the Internet its enemy. We are the Internet generation and Thailand is making war on its people.

Thailand’s iLaw Foundation found in December 2010 that 185 people had been charged under the Computer Crimes Act in a four year period. Thai government is systematically using this law to arrest Thai netizens. Academic Dr. David Streckfuss estimates any lèse majesté charge carries a 98% conviction rate which has resulted in sentences up to 18 years. He estimates 172 such arrests in 2009 alone.

Furthermore, Thailand has blocked 425,296 web pages during the period of martial law April 7 to December 22, 2010 by emergency decree. Prachatai was among the first websites blocked. Not one of those websites has been unblocked since the expiration of emergency powers. iLaw estimates that this number is rising by approximately 690 new blocks per day.

The government plans to call 14 witnesses as does the defence. It is highly unlikely Chiranuch’s trial will be completed in the eight days allotted by the court.

Chiranuch’s case is a landmark for the climate of free expression in Thailand. What is decided by this court will determine whether we live in a democracy governed by human rights and civil liberties or whether we are governed by a military junta at their whim.

For further background see “Overview of Chiranuch’s free speech trial” at http://facthai.wordpress.com/2011/02/04/overview-of-chiranuch’s-free-speech-trial-thai-netizen/.

Unfortunately, Chiranuch’s trial was not the only lèse majesté case starting trial in Bangkok’s Criminal Court today. NorPhorChorUSA webmaster Tantawut Taweewarodomkul, nicknamed Kenny, was also facing lèse majesté charges under Thailand’s Computer Crimes Act as well as similar Criminal Code charges.

Kenny has been held without bail since April 2010. NorPhorChor is an acronym for the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship, commonly known as the Redshirts. The atmosphere in Courtroom 906 was far more serious.

If reason does not prevail in Thailand, we have no hope for freedom in our future.

The trials resume Tuesday, February 8, at Bangkok’s Criminal Court (San Aya), On Ratchadapisek Road opposite Soi 38, Lat Phrao MTR station. Chiranuch’s trial is in Courtroom 701 on February 8-10 and 11-17 and probably longer. Tantawut’s trial will continue in Courtroom 906.

Written by CJ Hinke · comments (0)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

Buried in Manager’s propaganda, we learn that the new Army commander has signed a memorandum of understanding with the ICT minister and the ministers of justice and culture. The MOU specifies 43,000 new websites to be blocked immediately and 3,000 pending for lèse majesté content.

Thai government's official media releases since the Emergency Decree April 7 already totalled 210,110 blocked websites.

Websites blocked prior to Emergency Decree April 7: 65,000

Thai government has no plan to lift the state of emergency but they seem to be blocking as fast as they can in case the situation reverts to ‘normal’ and they must once again seek court orders for blocking under the Computer Crimes Act 2007.

Relying solely upon govt media releases to date, Thailand is now blocking 277,610 websites.

Written by CJ Hinke · comments (1)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

Truth on Trial in Thailand details a 110-year trajectory of lèse majesté prosecutions, “sedition and treason, the press and cinema, anti-communism, contempt of court”, and libel since 1900. This censorship centres on the legal and cultural concept min phraboromdechanuphap––หมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ.

Although the genesis of modern censorship in Thailand resulted from public opinion surrounding the 1946 gunshot death of King Ananda, lèse majesté laws laws came to be fully employed “from the late 1950s onward under military dictatorship”…using the banner (till today) of national security. At that time and till the present, some considered, rightly or wrongly, that the King’s younger brother, Bhumibol, was involved in the Ananda’s death.

Thailand’s lèse majesté slide toward dictatorship resulted in Pridi Banomyong, the 1932 revolutionist, author of the first Thai Constitution and widely-revered “father of Thai democracy”, being accused of regicide in the death of King Ananda. Although the official government announcement unambiguously stated the young king’s death was accidental, three Palace servants were executed in 1955 for this crime, nine years after the event, with no intervention or Royal pardon from the crown. Pridi himself died in exile in France; even after his death, his ashes were not allowed to be returned to Thai soil.

In 1973 a Thai expatriate group “claimed the [present] king legitimated a dictatorship which suppressed the people” and accused the king of being a traitor to the nation and its people. A 1983 underground, infamous but widely-distributed book, “Nine Reigns of the Chakri Dynasty” accused all Chakri crowns, including King Bhumibol, of a host of crimes.

More recently in 2008, Chulalongkorn University Giles Ji Ungpakorn became the first Thai academic to be charged with lèse majesté in more than 50 years. His crime was quoting the banned, seminal Bhumibol biography in English, Paul Handley’s The King Never Smiles, in referencing his book, A Coup for the Rich.

The long-term effects of reliance upon defamation law have skewed the truth in Thailand and created authoritarian structures which still drive Thai politics, especially the military, belying any appearance of democracy. Defamation law employs a singular exemption—if it can be proven by a defendant that such are “an expression of a sincere opinion”. This book contends that Thai history was suspended in 1958, setting us up for “an endless state of crisis” which continues until today.

Streckfuss quotes historian Antoon de Baets: ’[D]efamation cases and threats to sue in defamation cases have a chilling effect on the historical debate; they are often but barely veiled attempts at censorship.” Nowhere has this proven more true than in Thailand, where inequities in the law provide any citizen may charge any other person for the thinnest expression critical of the country’s monarchy.

This situation has resulted in the current “high degree of self-censorship” [Patrick Jory]. As public conversation regarding the Thai monarchy is increasingly suppressed by fear of spurious prosecution, the debate has resulted in numerous subterfuges to preserve an author’s anonymity. Circumvention by anonymous proxy, IP spoofing, VPN and other means is becoming increasingly common in the daily wars between netizens and their government.

lèse majesté prosecutions have occurred throughout history, equal to treason, blasphemy or heresy, when intrigues made monarchs far less secure than they are today. Rather than leaders, modern constitutional monarchs such as King Bhumibol are seen as unifying symbols or figureheads for the nation. However, in Thailand, the king is also characterised as “Head of State”, implying influence and power.

Certainly, when the sovereign blesses us with his rare advice, no one follows it. King Bhumbibol’s 2005 birthday address made it clear that he encouraged criticism as he was, after all, human. A commoner uttering such a sentiment would surely be found guilty of lèse majesté in Thai courts.

However, the current situation is that government bureaucrats make it their mission to ‘protect the monarchy’ whether the king wants or needs such protection or not. By doing so, they ingratiate themselves with their fellow toadies and make sure no taint of disloyalty might touch them.

These same bureaucrats created the secret “Taskforce 6080” with a secret budget in 2007 a year after Thailand’s military coup d’etat. The taskforce was set up by the Internal Security and Operations Command (ISOC) to counter any public expression that the Palace might be behind the 2006 coup.

It has become obvious to any thoughtful observers of Thai political gymnastics that these efforts have little to do with the present king and everything to do with his successor, Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn. Vajiralongkorn has been characterised by the international press as “feared”, “loathed”, “hated” or “distrusted” or even “dissolute” or “corrupt” by many Thais who speak very carefully in private only with people they trust.

This writer finds these sentiments overstated but such conversations hardly constitute an “anti-monarchy conspiracy”. While the Crown Prince had, let us say kindly, an impetuous youth and middle age, he seems to have grown far more responsible in his 50s. However, he has not been made party to the duties of kingship by his father beyond the purely ceremonial so it remains to be seen if he can retain the monarchy as a symbol of the Thai nation. These are uncharted waters and time will tell. But most of us in Thailand are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until he proves himself unworthy.

Egregious repression bearing even a mist of emanating from the throne will surely lead to the downfall of the 10th Chakri king, as stated in Thai cultural mythology. However, such repression is unlikely to come from the next king but from government lackeys. It would seem the Thai governments in flux may be, wittingly or unwittingly, setting up the future king for a fall from eminence precisely because of the national insecurity resulting in mass censorship.

The sheer volume of lèse majesté accusations is staggering, especially when one considers such accused may be gaoled for fifteen years or more. In addition to the sanctions of the Thai Criminal Code, many more prosecutions rest on the Computer Crimes Act 2007 which was the first law urgently passed by Thailand’s military coup-appointed legislature.

CCA prosecutions may not legally be initiated by anyone but the police. However, in practice, citizen charges are precisely what the police are permitting to take place. The military-supported CCA draft included the death penalty for computer crimes. The current version reduces the most severe penalties for lèse majesté to a span from three to 20 years. It should also be noted that any accused may be held by police without being charged for up to 84 days for the completion of its investigations.

The most prominent case in point is that of Chiranuch Premchaiporn, director of the independent online news website, Prachatai. Prachatai has long hosted one of the few open, public web discussion fora in Thailand. Some public posts to Prachatai were deemed to constitute lèse majesté and Chiranuch, as webmaster, was accused for not “moderating” these comments fast enough. She faces 50 years for 10 CCA charges and, as of September 27, two more for another 10 years. Journalism is obviously a dangerous profession in Thailand.

However, such accusations need not be current. Disgraced Prime Minister Thaksin’s office minister, Jakrapob Penkair, was charged with lèse majesté for maligning the first Chakri king who reigned from 1782 to 1809 as part of a panel at the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand (FCCT). The panel’s moderator, BBC correspondent Jonathan Head, was also accused as was the FCCT’s entire 13-member executive board of foreign journalists.

Thailand’s double-speak Ministry of Information and Communication Technology was created by the Thaksin government and began by censoring just 1,247 websites in January 2004 on a blocklist they published to the ministry’s website. This was the first ands last blocklist the Thai government has ever made public.

By 2008, MICT announced a program to block only 1,000 websites “containing lèse majesté content” at a proposed cost of Bt495 million or $15 million USD.

Nine Thai government agencies now block at least 210,110 websites according to official media releases from April 7. They use a secret blocklist and an undisclosed budget.

Emergency decree was applied to 24 provinces but, as of October 1, it remains in force only in three provinces and the capital. However, rule of law under the Computer Crimes Act has not returned to the rest of Thailand. No court orders have been sought to again block the websites currently blocked by emergency powers and massive censorship remains.

Not content with blocking the Internet, Thai government then began to monitor community radio and cable television “around the clock”. Much of this monitoring has been accomplished using another military-sponsored law, the Internal Security Act 2007 and its spawn, the Internal Security Operations Command, responsible for the most blatant extrajudicial killings, kidnappings and disappearances.

Martial law is a dangerous predicament for any country. No matter that, in Thailand, “emergency powers” result from a legislated “emergency decree”. The decree, in force from April 7, 2010, surrenders all government power to the military and suspends the rule of law. Except, apparently, in cases of lèse majesté because such cases have been even more aggressively pursued using both the Criminal Code and Computer Crimes Act since the prime minister’s decree.

Incidentally, the decree needs be renewed every 60 days and there seems to be no end in sight. Just when the Decree comes up for renewal, there’s another fugitive sighted or another minor bombing. History might show us how quickly Cambodia slipped into Year Zero or Burma fell to military dictatorship, too fast for any citizen to make a difference. Some think Thailand is quickly approaching its own Year Zero.

It’s time we the people decided what exactly lèse majesté means for defendants, for rule of law rests with precision. Is, for example, not standing for the royal anthem preceding a film, as did Chotisak Onsoong, lèse majesté? This sounds ridiculous to any thinking person, does it not? Does it not seem more important to the future of our society to find out what exactly Khun Chotisak was thinking?

Numbers, of course, speak louder than words. 765 persons were prosecuted for lèse majesté “between 2006 and 2009—an average of almost 191 per year—a 115% increase over the immediate previous decade when there was an average of just five new cases per year”.

Since the 2006 military coup d’etat there has been a 2000% increase in new lèse majesté prosecutions. In 2009, an all-time high of 164 new lèse majesté cases were pursued. Although reporting on almost all lèse majesté cases fall victim to the Thai media’s self-censorship, the conviction rate for such cases tried between 1992 and 2005 averaged 94%. Furthermore, there are no lèse majesté cases on record in which defendants were allowed to enter into evidence what they said was true or for the public good.

Sentences are mitigated by 50% if the accused shows suitable contrition and pleads guilty; this situation is almost universally true. In many cases, the king, on the prisoner’s application, grants Royal pardon. However, there are at least some lèse majesté prisoners who would not seek the king’s pardon.

“[T]here must be scores if not hundreds of Thais” in prison for this “crime”, at least 170 political prisoners, none of whom is known to human rights organisations or, indeed, to the wider Thai society.

Dr. Streckfuss’ Truth on Trial in Thailand questions our “Thainess”, or what makes us Thai. Our government has become a “defamation regime”—anyone who doesn’t agree with the body politic must be censored, censured and gaoled. Any suggestion that lèse majesté law be repealed or even amended is seen as a sign of disloyalty.

The cumulative efforts of the military and police, the politicians, the rich and privileged elites have succeeded in creating a xenophobic culture in which Thais reject any sincere offers of international oversight or even media commentary. These forces have manipulated many Thais into being knee-jerk Royalists. We routinely and systematically whitewash our history, setting the stage for an inevitable dictatorship.

The Thai regime has created a climate in which street demonstrations chant, “Ai [a grave insult] B******* ordered the [Redshirt] killings” and anti-monarchy graffiti are posted to public hoardings and toilet walls. As the reader can see, we must even self-censor the actual chant! It would seem lèse majesté law is having exactly the opposite effect politicians want us to believe. Or perhaps that’s just bureaucratic smoke-and-mirrors—the issue is simply about government control of the people.

Now you see it, now you don’t. So who’s got the dhamma? Surely not Thai politicians or generals or judges.

However, no one can afford not to be seen as loyal. These Royalists in Thai government are those committing lèse majesté by using our King without his consent to support their own agenda. Their agenda is perpetual power.

Truth on Trial in Thailand resurrects the censored ghosts of the 1948 Dusun-Nyor massacre, the October 1973 and 1976 students, the Black May 1992 victims, the Muslims murdered at Krue Se and Tak Bai in 2004, the Redshirts slaughtered at Ratchaprasong in Bloody April 2010 and applies them to Thailand’s living history. Only if history is healed, Thailand “can move forward once again…when Truth finally has its day in court…”

Written by CJ Hinke · comments (7)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

On June 15, the Thai cabinet approved the creation of a Bureau of Prevention and Eradication of Computer Crime to “protect the monarchy”. The new office adds to censors at the ICT Ministry, the Royal Thai Police, military agencies CRES and CAPO, an Army ‘war room’ and the Culture ministry. Can’t have too many censors! (We may have missed some…)

On June 17, Thailand’s new ICT minister announced a blacklist of 200 persons banned from posting to the Internet. This restriction was undefined but presumably all sites bearing these names will be blocked. Although the names of former PM office minister Jakrapob Penkair and Chulalongkorn University professor Giles Ji Ungpakorn, both in exile over flimsy lèse majesté charges, are known to be on the blacklist, the rest of the list is secret. This means people can’t defend their reputations. Are you on the list? Am I?

Included in the announcement of the blacklist on June 17, government is threatening to “take charge” of websites it doesn’t like!

Thailand is rapidly become an Internet desert approaching leaders’ paranoia in Burma and North Korea.

IT industry and development will surely be looking for the exits.

Government shuts 43,000 more websites for lèse majesté, plans to block 3,000 more, total up to 113,000 – Manager: June 18, 2010 – Translated by Frank G. Anderson.

Piraphan (Justice), Juti (ICT), Niphit (Culture)

ICT – Justice – Culture sign an MOU protecting the monarchy from cyber attack, disclose shutting down 43,000 monarchy-defaming websites, with three thousand more waiting orders to be closed. The new agency to open within three months. The people have to know what they are doing.

At 09:00 am at the Ministry of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Mr. Juti Krairirk, Minister, together with Mr. Phiraphan Saliratwiphak, Minister of Justice, and Mr. Niphit Inthornsombat, Minister of Culture, gave a joint press conference and signed a joint effort memorandum among the three ministries for protecting the monarchy, society and the people from threats from impact from communications technology and inappropriate communications.

Mr. Juti stated that at present inasmuch as threats to national security were being thwarted only by the military, there were still threats of magnitude against the monarchy and dangers against security, the Justice Ministry had to provide oversight because it was deemed to be extremely close [to the King]. Therefore the memorandum of joint cooperation was signed under the policy of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, in order to give the three ministries and all agencies associated with relevant networks integrated operations to oversee, protect and prevent from occurring any threats to the institution of the monarchy. This includes following and apprehending any group to prevent legal wrongdoing such as behavior like gambling, and online pornography which are harmful to children and youth.

“We will have substantial resolutions for protection and prevention. At the beginning there will be a joint effort with the Ministry of Justice to review resolutions related to security, the economy, and society, to jointly set up agencies to proceed with these tasks. In addition, there has already been cooperation among the three ministries to use the law and those joined together to carry out these duties,” the ICT Minister said.

Mr. Phiraphan stated that coordination of joint cooperation between the three ministries will result in quick action by overseeing threats to security. In any event, as to the Ministry of Justice in the past, there were orders to close 43,000 websites that defamed the monarchy, and there are another 3,000 awaiting to be closed after orders have been issued. As well, groups are being continually apprehended that commit offenses related to the above. In this, I would like society to join together in realizing that the institution of the monarchy is different from institutions in foreign countries, whereby in Thailand the institution of the monarchy is included in one Thai legal provision under national security. Therefore it is necessary that information on the Internet be correct.

“The institution of the Thai monarchy is related to society and the Thai people in a form different from institutions in other countries, whereby in Thailand it is held that if there were no monarchy it is not known whether there would be any Thailand today or not. As such, the monarchy is held to be the most important institution in the nation. Therefore, there is a necessity to construct correct understanding among Thai people and foreigners because problems that occur on the Internet are not problems that occur just for children and young and society, but also pose extreme dangers that have to be quickly dealt with – that is, dangers to the security of the nation’s highest institution,” the Minister of Justice said.

Mr. Niphat said, “Affixing signatures to this memorandum will hold us to joint principles, that is, everyone has the same king. This, no matter what ideas may be in other matters which is a right of individual choice, in the matter of the monarchy, everyone must have the duty to join in protecting it, whereby the Justice Ministry will integrate with others to enforce related laws. For example, there is the Film and Video Act of 2008, and prime ministerial regulations Creative Media and National Security Act of 2008, together with a strong network of more than one million persons of culture assisting. Regardless, the people should see results from the signing of this joint MOU within three months, whereby the three government ministries will have the duty to proceed and produce indicators reflecting [the results of this effort.”].

Written by CJ Hinke · comments (2)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

However, ISA has lived on to manipulate public opinion by creating a climate of fear in ordinary Thais by being invoked against public demonstrations. ISA has been used against largely nonviolent rallies seven times since July 2009.

The largest of these, with more than half a million demonstrators, many from the rural Northeast provinces called Isaan, started in March. The Redshirts (not be be confused with other Reds) began after Thailand’s prime minister, billionaire businessman Thaksin Shinawatra was deposed and exiled by military coup d’etat on September 19, 2006. His populist policies such as free universal health care and education through high school covered up huge corruption on his watch but made him an icon of the rural people.

The original Red movement focussed on getting him back. It is highly unlikely to think this will happen. Early this year Thailand’s Supreme Court confiscated the ill-gotten billions he made while he was prime minister.

Since Thaksin’s ignominious self-exile rather than face criminal charges, the billionaire fugitive has picked up at least several foreign passports and has been waging an information war from abroad against Thai government and paying for at least a portion of the Reds’ operating expences. His words to his followers have been continuously blocked by Thai government on satellite television, videolinks, websites and social networking. Thaksin’s views were widely held by government to be anti-monarchy and Republican and his goals suspect.

The government propaganda machine has geared to great lengths to instill fear through all levels of public media. Whatever government says to the contrary, normal life in Bangkok and the Thai economy have been hardly affected, let alone ground to a halt.

However, the Reds are growing in number and the new, urban faces don’t care much for Thaksin. The present-day Red movement’s stated aims are to remove the appointed coalition government composed of the old elite, called ammart, and hold free elections immediately. Of course, billionaire Thaksin was hardly less than elite himself but he was overwhelmingly elected by popular vote. For better or worse, whenever elections are held, it is likely former Thaksin cronies will sweep overwhelmingly into power.

To reach the goal of free elections, another goal of the Reds is to dissolve the present appointed ammart Parliament. The military coup government rescinded the widely-respected pre-Thaksin 1997 Constitution, called the People’s Charter and protecting human rights and civil liberties, in order to protect themselves from prosecution.

The military appointed a drafting committee which resulted in the latest 2007 Constitution which was narrowly approved by general referendum. Most of the public’s “Yes” votes were thought cast simply to call a stop to the endless discussion. So the third goal of the Reds is to revoke the present military Constitution and return to the 1997 charter but with amendments subject to public referendum. There is concern that some of the Reds’ amendments may pave the way for Thaksin’s return to power.

With this backdrop of the Reds’ fluid rallies, there have been more than 11 bomb attacks in Bangkok, mostly using military-issue M79 hand grenades.

Bombings have occurred at the Supreme Court, the Elections Commission, the homes of the Royal Privy councillor, Prem Tinsulanonda, and the prime minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva, the Ministry of Health, the Customs Department, a Highways Department depot, the Bangkok Bank headquarters and branches and the Thanachart Bank—we’re certain we missed some! In addition, there have been some Molotov cocktail attacks but it is also uncertain these were heaved by the Reds rather than a ‘fourth hand’ with a government agenda.

Just prior to the Emergency Decree, two Bangkok television stations, one military and one government, were bombed, injuring 11. None of these show definitive proof of Reds’ involvement and may well have been used by a “fourth hand” acting to justify further government repression.

Thailand employs 700 of the British GT200 bomb detectors recently discredited as useless. But, of course, they can also detect ‘drugs’!

As Redshirts entered Parliament…

Lawmakers left the same way they were appointed–

by the back door!

Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban

On March 23, Thailand’s government again invoked the provisions of the Internal Security Act giving government widely repressive powers to counter the Reds’ huge street demonstrations. On April 7, after weeks of protest, government used the powers of Emergency Decree to declare martial law.

Reds found Thai government unresponsive to their demands, so they peacefully stormed Parliament forcing many humiliated lawmakers to leave by climbing ladders over the back wall to be evacuated by helicopter. Although the Reds captured weapons from Parliament’s police and military security, they publicly returned all weapons to police.

Reds finally struck at the heart of Bangkok, not Parliament but the downtown shopping district, forcing major department stores and shopping complexes to close giving new meaning to ‘exclusive’.

However, once Reds vacated the station, government once again pulled the station from the airwaves by Saturday morning. Government is certainly not trying to win Red trust by treachery and broken promises.

As at Parliament, weapons and equipment captured from police and troops were later returned and accounted for.

April 9, third day of martial law, the Deputy PM’s CRES center authorised the ICT ministry to block further websites and Twitter if they were being ‘provocative’ in inciting disunity. (It has been our observation that government is easily provoked!) He stated that a further 9-10,000 websites (press reports vary) had been blocked since the start of Red rallies in March and that a list of 700 more will follow. Obviously this list had been prepared long beforehand to take advantage of the fact court orders were not necessary.

So far, Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT) has not been blocked, as we were during the Red demonstrations in April 2009. However, these new government figures bring the total number of websites blocked in Thailand near to 65,000.

Citizen journalists write the only real news available, as it happens. But bloggers can bearly keep up with Thailand’s fast-paced game. Thailand’s situation has often been compared to Nepal, where the Royals were slaughtered and the monarchy deposed by Maoists. So far, we are not Kyrgyzstan and there is no body count. Let’s hope it holds until Thai government retires gracefully.

Saturday Midnight Update—Troops moved in just after dark to clear the shopping belt and streets near Parliament, mostly using rubber bullets and teargas. However, at this moment there are 11 confirmed dead Reds—including a Japanese Reuters photographer on assignment—so there were at least some live rounds fired. Scores if not hundreds wounded.

Written by CJ Hinke · comments (0)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper