"While we will not take down videos that do not violate our policies and will not assist in implementing censorship, we have offered to educate the Thai ]Information and Communication Technology] ministry about YouTube and how it works," said YouTube spokeswoman Julie Supan.

In effect, Supan is implying that video clips insulting the Thai King do not violate YouTube's policies. What kind of twisted policies was she talking about? Will YouTube tolerate video clips that defame the religious icons of other countries?

When the ICT authorities learned about the controversial video clip posted in the US last week, they immediately sought cooperation from YouTube. They asked that YouTube remove the clip. If YouTube had done so, the matter would have ended there. But YouTube said "no". This forced the ICT to move last Wednesday to block the entire YouTube site. There followed much criticism that the military-installed government of Thailand had once again imposed censorship without any regard for freedom of expression. This subject has received widespread attention. The Nation has received a great deal of letters, most of which denounced the ICT Ministry's action and also suggested that Thailand could not keep up with the Internet world.

We are amazed by the whole episode. First, they let somebody insult our King. Then they lecture Thailand on how to embrace the Internet without any reservations.

All students in US journalism school have to take a course on the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which protects freedom of the press and freedom of expression. One can go to a public place to air grievance against the government or a public leader and be protected by the First Amendment. But if one were to cry "fire" in a packed theatre during a movie, then one would not be protected by the First Amendment.

In short, freedom of expression must come with responsibility.

YouTube is preaching freedom of expression on the Internet. But it fails to exercise that freedom with responsibility.

Although the original clip was removed by the YouTube user who created it, similar videos have popped up since. By yesterday morning, some 20 clips related to the controversy were reportedly posted on the site. Most of them mocked the King and the Thai government, but others featured YouTube users discussing free speech, censorship and cultural sensitivity.

In Thailand, the King is held in utmost reverence. He is not only head of state but also a spiritual leader of Thailand. It is wrong on the part of YouTube to equate the Thai King with George Bush by suggesting that Bush has been the target of similar ridicule. By tolerating the insulting video clips, YouTube is also holding up the Thai people's faith in the monarch to ridicule.

Yesterday, Sitthichai Pookaiyaudoom, the ICT minister, vowed to continue blocking YouTube until the offensive clips about the King are removed. Anybody in his capacity would have done the same. Sithichai was also right to have accused the firm's parent company, Google, of practising double standards.

"Those clips are very harsh to the feelings of Thai people and our culture," Sitthichai said in an interview with a Thai television channel yesterday. "Google has said they have no censorship policy, but they earlier agreed to censor their website in China when the same kind of dispute occurred, because China is so much more powerful compared to Thailand."

We understand that it is impossible to go after all these stupid video clips, but at least YouTube must try to do something. Quite to the contrary, it does not take Thai sensitivities into consideration at all. This matter really needs broader debate. We are ready to listen. But for now, we do not accept YouTube's arrogance.