Excellent Article On Red Shirt Demo

[onlooker]

Given that The Nation and Bangkok Post cant be bothered to report accurately, Nick's piece in New Mandala is a very interesting insight into the Red Shirts & loads of photos too.

Se

Bangkok or Bust Part 1

[WinnieTheKhwai]

Agreed, excellent!

Both great and sad at the same time, that we can't get comprehensive first-hand account from the print media.

A nice quote I thought was:

We talked about how they felt about protesting in Bangkok they said that they were surprised how well they were received by Bangkokians: “Before we thought Bangkok people are all Yellow, and only us upcountry folks are Red. Now we can see that we are just the same.”

and:

Back home I went through the online editions of The Nation and the Bangkok Post. I wondered if I was at a different protest than they were. What I read there must have been a rather boring affair – a few people and not much support. The protest I went to was quite different – even though there was incredible heat it was a festive and at times even almost ecstatic event.

This of course leads us to ask whether most of the mainstream media, apart from a few individual journalists, is just sloppy in its reporting, or if there was a blatant suppression of news. The event was covered by on-the-ground journalists. I saw them filming and taking photos. What though happened in the editorial offices then escapes my knowledge.

The effects of this biased reporting are evident on this forum (and in real life) every day. Some (most?) people just gobble up what they're fed.

Edited March 26, 2010 by WinnieTheKhwai

[Boksida]

This is quite a relief for me. After reading this forum I feared I had travelled to a parallel universe last weekend but now it looks like somebody else was there too, so maybe it was real after all.

[NADTATIDA1]

Yes answers a lot of questions and gives the reader some insight into what the real story was about.

Refreshing!

[anotherpeter]

Some slightly biased statements:

In the run up, the rumor mill ran wild again, especially stirred by the government which gave out conflicting statements by the hour, about violence, and possible intelligence of bomb and grenade attacks, which were then denied by other quarters of the same government.

Lots of talk of violence from some of the red leaders.

Also, some questionable numbers: 120,000 in the drive through Bangkok ... even the reds were only saying 65,000.

But overall, a good inside view.

[thaihome]

I certainly agree it was an excellent on the ground report of the various demonstrations and that in many cases is indeed missing from the English papers in Thailand.

But did anyone else note he did not once mention Thaksin nightly phone-in speeches and the self serving rants they contained? Did he once mention what the political goals of the rallies are? Did he mention the hate-filled vitriolic rhetoric that emanates from the stage every night? Even if he chooses not to mention how much or how many were paid to attend, did he investigate how all the organizational support that is evident was paid for or why that individual may doing so?

Nick’s political leanings are well known, though he goes to great pains to deny them. This article is just as one-sided as what he claims the “main stream” press is doing. Being on the ground and writing about how happy everyone was does not in itself make for unbiased reporting.

[givenall]

Some slightly biased statements:

In the run up, the rumor mill ran wild again, especially stirred by the government which gave out conflicting statements by the hour, about violence, and possible intelligence of bomb and grenade attacks, which were then denied by other quarters of the same government.

Lots of talk of violence from some of the red leaders.

Also, some questionable numbers: 120,000 in the drive through Bangkok ... even the reds were only saying 65,000.

But overall, a good inside view.

I am not even sure it was 65000. I was watching from my place and although was a long march, but the number of people going through was very light. They would have 2 or 3 cars go by then nothing after about 3 to 5 min then another 2 or 3 taxi or motor bike. So making it long does not increase the number

[WinnieTheKhwai]

This article is just as one-sided as what he claims the "main stream" press is doing.

That may very well be true. Still, it's nice to see some balance and counter-points. If it wasn't for people like him, we would have nothing by the English language printed newspapers. Imagine if your only source of news was Fox.. (Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Fox precisely because it represents a particular world view. But imagine have ONLY Fox. )

[anotherpeter]

Some slightly biased statements:

In the run up, the rumor mill ran wild again, especially stirred by the government which gave out conflicting statements by the hour, about violence, and possible intelligence of bomb and grenade attacks, which were then denied by other quarters of the same government.

Lots of talk of violence from some of the red leaders.

Also, some questionable numbers: 120,000 in the drive through Bangkok ... even the reds were only saying 65,000.

But overall, a good inside view.

I am not even sure it was 65000. I was watching from my place and although was a long march, but the number of people going through was very light. They would have 2 or 3 cars go by then nothing after about 3 to 5 min then another 2 or 3 taxi or motor bike. So making it long does not increase the number

Yes, besides the reds saying 65,000 the only other reports I saw said 25,000. So it would be somewhere inbetween I would expect.

[thaihome]

That may very well be true. Still, it's nice to see some balance and counter-points. If it wasn't for people like him, we would have nothing by the English language printed newspapers. Imagine if your only source of news was Fox.. (Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Fox precisely because it represents a particular world view. But imagine have ONLY Fox. )

So you think writing an article that highlights only the party atmosphere and attitude of the people at the demonstration is a “counter point” to articles in the mainstream English press that highlight what the leadership is saying and what the goals of the demonstration are?

TH

[WinnieTheKhwai]

Yes! (And not sure if you're red the linked article, but it explains plenty about the goals of the demonstration as well)

[lovelomsak]

I couldnot finish the srticle I became so emotional seeing the faces of the people who are taking part in this. It is a no win situation for them it brought me to tears. They are asking for a simple democratic right (a government that is placed there by the votes of the people. )I am just an old hippie who has a hard time handling mans inhumanities to man sorry.

Edited March 26, 2010 by lovelomsak

[thaihome]

Yes! (And not sure if you're red the linked article, but it explains plenty about the goals of the demonstration as well)

It completely ignores the reason for the demonstration now, how it is financed and what the ultimate goal is.

Reason: This was as soon after Thaksin assets were seized they could get it organized.

Financed: I think this is known, but just in case Thaiksin is paying for it.

Ultimate goal: Dissolution of the house before the legal term expires in the hope the PTP can either win majority (doubtful) or form a new coalition that will allow Thaksin to if not return to Thailand at least change the constitutions so he gets his money back.

If these people truly want to change the way things are in Thailand, then they should to back to their provinces and have a long discussion with political bosses there that have used and abused them for years and in December 2011 vote them out of office and elect people that will look out for their interests.

TH

[thaihome]

.... They are asking for a simple democratic right (a government that is placed there by the votes of the people. )...

What the fuc_k is the matter with you people. Can't you read? Can't you think for yourself.

THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT WAS ELECTED BY THE VOTES OF THE PEOPLE

TH

[lovelomsak]

.... They are asking for a simple democratic right (a government that is placed there by the votes of the people. )...

What the fuc_k is the matter with you people. Can't you read? Can't you think for yourself.

THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT WAS ELECTED BY THE VOTES OF THE PEOPLE

Hey we all know this government wasnot elected so cut the crap .

[lovelomsak]

.... They are asking for a simple democratic right (a government that is placed there by the votes of the people. )...

What the fuc_k is the matter with you people. Can't you read? Can't you think for yourself.

THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT WAS ELECTED BY THE VOTES OF THE PEOPLE

Hey we all know this government wasnot elected so cut the crap .

THE WORLD KNOWS IT YOU KNOW IT EVERYONE KNOWS IT.

[lovelomsak]

.... They are asking for a simple democratic right (a government that is placed there by the votes of the people. )...

What the fuc_k is the matter with you people. Can't you read? Can't you think for yourself.

THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT WAS ELECTED BY THE VOTES OF THE PEOPLE

Hey we all know this government wasnot elected so cut the crap .

THE WORLD KNOWS IT YOU KNOW IT EVERYONE KNOWS IT.

IF YOU CALL DISSOLVING ANOTHER PARTY TO GET POWER AN ELECTION THEN THAT IS ELECTED IN YOUR BOOKS NOT MINE

[anotherpeter]

IF YOU CALL DISSOLVING ANOTHER PARTY TO GET POWER AN ELECTION THEN THAT IS ELECTED IN YOUR BOOKS NOT MINE

The Democrats didn't get into power because the PPP was dissolved.

After the PPP were dissolved, most of the MPs went to the PTP. They still could have formed government, but the smaller coalition partners decided that they didn't want to be involved with them, so they changed their support to the Democrats.

[lovelomsak]

IF YOU CALL DISSOLVING ANOTHER PARTY TO GET POWER AN ELECTION THEN THAT IS ELECTED IN YOUR BOOKS NOT MINE

The Democrats didn't get into power because the PPP was dissolved.

After the PPP were dissolved, most of the MPs went to the PTP. They still could have formed government, but the smaller coalition partners decided that they didn't want to be involved with them, so they changed their support to the Democrats.

SORRY STILL NOT ELECTED

[thaihome]

IF YOU CALL DISSOLVING ANOTHER PARTY TO GET POWER AN ELECTION THEN THAT IS ELECTED IN YOUR BOOKS NOT MINE

The Democrats didn't get into power because the PPP was dissolved.

After the PPP were dissolved, most of the MPs went to the PTP. They still could have formed government, but the smaller coalition partners decided that they didn't want to be involved with them, so they changed their support to the Democrats.

SORRY STILL NOT ELECTED

Name me one Member of Parilment that voted for the current Prime Minister that was not elected.

TH

[rixalex]

Hey we all know this government wasnot elected so cut the crap .

What's with the "we"? Speak for yourself.

Every MP in the government was elected by the people.

[lovelomsak]

Hey we all know this government wasnot elected so cut the crap .

What's with the "we"? Speak for yourself.

Every MP in the government was elected by the people.

I AMNOT GOING TO ARQUE .YOU GUYS KNOW WHAT AN ELECTION IS OR MAYBE YOU DONOT. PERHAPS PROPAGANDA IS MORE YOUR GAME SO YES NOT WE "ME"

Edited March 26, 2010 by lovelomsak

[thaihome]

Hey we all know this government wasnot elected so cut the crap .

What's with the "we"? Speak for yourself.

Every MP in the government was elected by the people.

I AMNOT GOING TO ARQUE .YOU GUYS KNOW WHAT AN ELECTION IS OR MAYBE YOU DONOT. PERHAPS PROPAGANDA IS MORE YOUR GAME SO YES NOT WE "ME"

No, your ignorance of the Thai political system is the problem.

I would happily engage in a reasonable discussion on this issue, but it appear you are unable to face the facts and choose not to answer simple questions.

Again, name one MP that is not elected that voted the current PM into office. That is how a government in Thailand is elected. That is how the previous two governments formed from the current Parliament were elected. Now what is your problem exactly.

Did you know that Thaksin was never directly elected to Parliament. He was elected based on the party list, nobody ever has put a mark next to Thaksin's name on single ballot, ever.

Now, Abhisit is actually an elected member of Parliament.

TH

[lovelomsak]

Hey we all know this government wasnot elected so cut the crap .

What's with the "we"? Speak for yourself.

Every MP in the government was elected by the people.

I AMNOT GOING TO ARQUE .YOU GUYS KNOW WHAT AN ELECTION IS OR MAYBE YOU DONOT. PERHAPS PROPAGANDA IS MORE YOUR GAME SO YES NOT WE "ME"

No, your ignorance of the Thai political system is the problem.

I would happily engage in a reasonable discussion on this issue, but it appear you are unable to face the facts and choose not to answer simple questions.

Again, name one MP that is not elected that voted the current PM into office. That is how a government in Thailand is elected. That is how the previous two governments formed from the current Parliament were elected. Now what is your problem exactly.

Did you know that Thaksin was never directly elected to Parliament. He was elected based on the party list, nobody ever has put a mark next to Thaksin's name on single ballot, ever.

Now, Abhisit is actually an elected member of Parliament.

TH

Is getting 2,000 people together to take over an airport till a gevernment is dissolved part of thai politcal system too.

[TAWP]

Ban on all caps usage, please.

[rixalex]

Is getting 2,000 people together to take over an airport till a gevernment is dissolved part of thai politcal system too.

The airport nonsense was disgraceful and i condemn it (as i'm sure you condemned the red riot during SongKran?), but it wasn't the reason why the government was dissolved.

[scorecard]

Yes! (And not sure if you're red the linked article, but it explains plenty about the goals of the demonstration as well)

I sidn't read much substantive stuff about goals.

Would you ike to share, pls.

[rixalex]

But did anyone else note he did not once mention Thaksin nightly phone-in speeches and the self serving rants they contained? Did he once mention what the political goals of the rallies are? Did he mention the hate-filled vitriolic rhetoric that emanates from the stage every night?

I'm pleased to see you raised this matter with him. His answer of being bored with listening to speeches i think was very weak and hid the true reason - that being that Thaksin's involvement in the movement destroys its credibility; something he obviously has a personal interest in not doing.

[monkfish]

Pitty you don't see pics like this in the Thai media.

Looks like 65k to me in fact more.

Notice the red color to the left reaches the horizon.

[way2muchcoffee]

Pitty you don't see pics like this in the Thai media.

Looks like 65k to me in fact more.

Notice the red color to the left reaches the horizon.

Wow. 0.1% of the population. And they are there on an all-expenses paid trip to the big mango with some of them getting 3 times the daily wage back home. Impressive indeed.