Thai Yellow Shirts Rally Against Cambodian Border Pacts

[webfact]

Thai 'Yellow shirts' rally against Cambodian border pacts

BANGKOK, November 2, 2010 (AFP) - About 2,000 Thai royalist "Yellow Shirts" rallied Tuesday in front of parliament to protest against an agreement that they say will recognise an unfounded Cambodian land claim.

A 750-strong police presence was on hand in Bangkok as the Yellows, known as the People's Alliance for Democracy, shouted "Traitors!" as lawmakers and senators inside debated memorandums of understanding with Cambodia.

Ties between the neighbouring countries have been strained since July 2008 by a series of deadly border clashes over land surrounding an 11th century Cambodian temple after it was granted UN World Heritage status.

"We today come to show our stand against the MOUs which will make the country lose 4.6 kilometres (three miles) to Cambodia," Sondhi Limthongkul, the Yellow Shirt leader, told reporters during the seven-hour demonstration.

The group would like to see Thailand regain control of the ancient Preah Vihear temple, which the World Court ruled in 1962 belonged to Cambodia, although the main entrance lies in Thailand.

Parliamentarians set up a joint committee Tuesday to further discuss the pacts over the border, which has never been fully demarcated, partly because it is littered with landmines left over from decades of war in Cambodia.

The Yellow Shirts are a force to be reckoned with in Thailand's colour-coded political landscape, backed by the Bangkok-based elite and pledging allegiance to the monarchy.

Their 2006 rallies helped trigger a coup that unseated the now-fugitive Thaksin Shinawatra, hero of the mostly poor, working class "Red Shirts", whose Bangkok protests this year culminated in deadly clashes with troops.

The Yellows also held a crippling airport siege in 2008 against the then pro-Thaksin government that left thousands stranded.

-- (c) Copyright AFP 2010-11-02

[asiawatcher]

Wha....???? Tell someone who cares!

[animatic]

Wha....???? Tell someone who cares!

They really have devolved to a one trick pony,

in a rinky dink one ring circus,

that only plays border towns,

that no one visits.

[hanuman1]

The Yellow Shirts are a force to be reckoned with in Thailand's colour-coded political landscape, backed by the Bangkok-based elite and pledging allegiance to the monarchy.

When reporting on Yellow-shirts, why does the media always bring up this thing about them 'pledging allegiance to the monarchy'?

I thought all Thais were required to pledge allegiance to the monarchy. And since one either does or does not pledge allegiance (there can be no halfway house) to something, why then does this epithet always come up with the Yellows alone?

Since the act of pledging allegiance to the monarchy cannot be held in anything other than relatively high regard by the population at large, do such epithets not then provide the Yellows with something of a moralistic 'leg-up' each time The Nation, err, I mean The Media, mentions them in this way?

Cheers

[jayjay0]

The Yellow Shirts are a force to be reckoned with in Thailand's colour-coded political landscape, backed by the Bangkok-based elite and pledging allegiance to the monarchy.

When reporting on Yellow-shirts, why does the media always bring up this thing about them 'pledging allegiance to the monarchy'?

I thought all Thais were required to pledge allegiance to the monarchy. And since one either does or does not pledge allegiance (there can be no halfway house) to something, why then does this epithet always come up with the Yellows alone?

Since the act of pledging allegiance to the monarchy cannot be held in anything other than relatively high regard by the population at large, do such epithets not then provide the Yellows with something of a moralistic 'leg-up' each time The Nation, err, I mean The Media, mentions them in this way?

Cheers

Your rite All Thai's pledge support to the monarchy. Problem being for some of them it is just words and they never take the trouble to reaffirm them. I do not believe all groups are required to pledge loyalty to the Monarchy. Can't rightly recall that being part of the red shirts demands.

Don't get me wrong I in no way would be a yellow or a red shirt supporter. I would be a pink shirt with a little bit of yellow in it.

[phiphidon]

The Yellow Shirts are a force to be reckoned with in Thailand's colour-coded political landscape, backed by the Bangkok-based elite and pledging allegiance to the monarchy.

When reporting on Yellow-shirts, why does the media always bring up this thing about them 'pledging allegiance to the monarchy'?

I thought all Thais were required to pledge allegiance to the monarchy. And since one either does or does not pledge allegiance (there can be no halfway house) to something, why then does this epithet always come up with the Yellows alone?

Since the act of pledging allegiance to the monarchy cannot be held in anything other than relatively high regard by the population at large, do such epithets not then provide the Yellows with something of a moralistic 'leg-up' each time The Nation, err, I mean The Media, mentions them in this way?

Cheers

Your rite All Thai's pledge support to the monarchy. Problem being for some of them it is just words and they never take the trouble to reaffirm them. I do not believe all groups are required to pledge loyalty to the Monarchy. Can't rightly recall that being part of the red shirts demands.

Don't get me wrong I in no way would be a yellow or a red shirt supporter. I would be a pink shirt with a little bit of yellow in it.

The difference being The Nation generally annotates any story about the red shirts with variations on a phrase such as this;

At least 89 people died and nearly 1,900 were injured during two months of political unrest, with several confrontation between army personnel and Red Shirt protesters in April and May.

Subtly done, but insidious. A variation is played out on this very forum by seeing how many times you can insert comments on "thaksin", "jatuporn", "anti-democracy", "armed red shirts" etc into any discussion regardless of context.

[SergeiY]

The Yellow Shirts are a force to be reckoned with in Thailand's colour-coded political landscape, backed by the Bangkok-based elite and pledging allegiance to the monarchy.

When reporting on Yellow-shirts, why does the media always bring up this thing about them 'pledging allegiance to the monarchy'?

I thought all Thais were required to pledge allegiance to the monarchy. And since one either does or does not pledge allegiance (there can be no halfway house) to something, why then does this epithet always come up with the Yellows alone?

Since the act of pledging allegiance to the monarchy cannot be held in anything other than relatively high regard by the population at large, do such epithets not then provide the Yellows with something of a moralistic 'leg-up' each time The Nation, err, I mean The Media, mentions them in this way?

Cheers

Your rite All Thai's pledge support to the monarchy. Problem being for some of them it is just words and they never take the trouble to reaffirm them. I do not believe all groups are required to pledge loyalty to the Monarchy. Can't rightly recall that being part of the red shirts demands.

Don't get me wrong I in no way would be a yellow or a red shirt supporter. I would be a pink shirt with a little bit of yellow in it.

The difference being The Nation generally annotates any story about the red shirts with variations on a phrase such as this;

At least 89 people died and nearly 1,900 were injured during two months of political unrest, with several confrontation between army personnel and Red Shirt protesters in April and May.

Subtly done, but insidious. A variation is played out on this very forum by seeing how many times you can insert comments on "thaksin", "jatuporn", "anti-democracy", "armed red shirts" etc into any discussion regardless of context.

Its AFP. AFP always tries very hard to stay neutral as possible and it are news for the global market not the local market. So you will always find these simplifying lines in their news.

[jayjay0]

The Yellow Shirts are a force to be reckoned with in Thailand's colour-coded political landscape, backed by the Bangkok-based elite and pledging allegiance to the monarchy.

When reporting on Yellow-shirts, why does the media always bring up this thing about them 'pledging allegiance to the monarchy'?

I thought all Thais were required to pledge allegiance to the monarchy. And since one either does or does not pledge allegiance (there can be no halfway house) to something, why then does this epithet always come up with the Yellows alone?

Since the act of pledging allegiance to the monarchy cannot be held in anything other than relatively high regard by the population at large, do such epithets not then provide the Yellows with something of a moralistic 'leg-up' each time The Nation, err, I mean The Media, mentions them in this way?

Cheers

Your rite All Thai's pledge support to the monarchy. Problem being for some of them it is just words and they never take the trouble to reaffirm them. I do not believe all groups are required to pledge loyalty to the Monarchy. Can't rightly recall that being part of the red shirts demands.

Don't get me wrong I in no way would be a yellow or a red shirt supporter. I would be a pink shirt with a little bit of yellow in it.

The difference being The Nation generally annotates any story about the red shirts with variations on a phrase such as this;

At least 89 people died and nearly 1,900 were injured during two months of political unrest, with several confrontation between army personnel and Red Shirt protesters in April and May.

Subtly done, but insidious. A variation is played out on this very forum by seeing how many times you can insert comments on "thaksin", "jatuporn", "anti-democracy", "armed red shirts" etc into any discussion regardless of context.

You are becoming a expert at defending your pals. Never miss a trick. Have you figured out how to blame the government for the rain yet. If you haven't it is not for lack of trying.

Just out of curiosity if you think so highly of that pair why don't you show them some respect and CAPITALIZE the first letter in there name. I personally think they are scum but I do show a little respect. Thaksin Jatuporn didn't feel a thing.

Rant on

[phiphidon]

When reporting on Yellow-shirts, why does the media always bring up this thing about them 'pledging allegiance to the monarchy'?

I thought all Thais were required to pledge allegiance to the monarchy. And since one either does or does not pledge allegiance (there can be no halfway house) to something, why then does this epithet always come up with the Yellows alone?

Since the act of pledging allegiance to the monarchy cannot be held in anything other than relatively high regard by the population at large, do such epithets not then provide the Yellows with something of a moralistic 'leg-up' each time The Nation, err, I mean The Media, mentions them in this way?

Cheers

Your rite All Thai's pledge support to the monarchy. Problem being for some of them it is just words and they never take the trouble to reaffirm them. I do not believe all groups are required to pledge loyalty to the Monarchy. Can't rightly recall that being part of the red shirts demands.

Don't get me wrong I in no way would be a yellow or a red shirt supporter. I would be a pink shirt with a little bit of yellow in it.

The difference being The Nation generally annotates any story about the red shirts with variations on a phrase such as this;

At least 89 people died and nearly 1,900 were injured during two months of political unrest, with several confrontation between army personnel and Red Shirt protesters in April and May.

Subtly done, but insidious. A variation is played out on this very forum by seeing how many times you can insert comments on "thaksin", "jatuporn", "anti-democracy", "armed red shirts" etc into any discussion regardless of context.

You are becoming a expert at defending your pals. Never miss a trick. Have you figured out how to blame the government for the rain yet. If you haven't it is not for lack of trying.

Just out of curiosity if you think so highly of that pair why don't you show them some respect and CAPITALIZE the first letter in there name. I personally think they are scum but I do show a little respect. Thaksin Jatuporn didn't feel a thing.

Rant on

Pals, not really, I've said before that I do not have time for politicians of any flavour. I also do not have any time for one sided arguments. There are generally at least two sides to a discussion. For the sake of balance I like to provide an alternative viewpoint. If you disagree, fine, try and persuade me otherwise. I'm open to listening. Sorry about the disrespect I showed that "scum", in future I will capitalize their initial letter.

[Buchholz]

The Yellow Shirts are a force to be reckoned with in Thailand's colour-coded political landscape, backed by the Bangkok-based elite and pledging allegiance to the monarchy.

When reporting on Yellow-shirts, why does the media always bring up this thing about them 'pledging allegiance to the monarchy'?

Probably because the other "colour-coded political landscape" has a number of their personnel who don't share the same feelings, Reds like Jakrapob, Giles, Darunee, Suchart to name a few. One only needs to look at yesterday's news for an example:

Red leader arrested for lese majeste

Edited November 2, 2010 by Buchholz

[whybother]

Its AFP. AFP always tries very hard to stay neutral as possible and it are news for the global market not the local market. So you will always find these simplifying lines in their news.

It's pretty much the same for any of the international reports, you will nearly always read the same one liners:

- the Yellow Shirts, loyal to the Monarchy, who blockaded the airports in 2008 ...

- the Red Shirts mainly from the North and North-east, supporters of fugitive ex-PM Thaksin ... protests killing 91 people ...

[whybother]

The difference being The Nation generally annotates any story about the red shirts with variations on a phrase such as this;

At least 89 people died and nearly 1,900 were injured during two months of political unrest, with several confrontation between army personnel and Red Shirt protesters in April and May.

Subtly done, but insidious. <snip>

Subtly done? Favouring who?

That statement is usually worded in a way that implies that the army killed and injured everyone. AAP often adds a "mostly civilians".

[whybother]

But anyway, the OP is about the Yellow Shirts.

It looks like they're out to be a pain in the a... again.

Is it really worth going to war over a piece of land that the world court has already said belongs to Cambodia?

Thailand signed off on a map over a hundred years ago. The world court decided nearly 50 years ago that the map the Thais signed off on is the official map.

Maybe the Yellow Shirts want to go back to the borders used before the French forced negotiated with the Thais, which included land through to Siem Reap.

[Buchholz]

Not really a pain. They protested peacefully. The Cabinet signed off on the Memorandums. They dispersed and went home.

A good lesson for the Reds in that.

[whybother]

Not really a pain. They protested peacefully. The Cabinet signed off on the Memorandums. They dispersed and went home.

A good lesson for the Reds in that.

I suppose we'll see how long that lasts. They protested peacefully at the airports ... but that was a real pain.

[Buchholz]

Not really a pain. They protested peacefully. The Cabinet signed off on the Memorandums. They dispersed and went home.

A good lesson for the Reds in that.

I suppose we'll see how long that lasts. They protested peacefully at the airports ... but that was a real pain.

Perhaps they have learned a few things in the intervening two years.

[whybother]

Not really a pain. They protested peacefully. The Cabinet signed off on the Memorandums. They dispersed and went home.

A good lesson for the Reds in that.

It appears that they didn't sign off on them.

[random]

Sondhi is currently a sentenced criminal having been found guilty of defamation on two occasions and I believe sentenced to 6 month imprisonment on each matter, he is currently out pending an appeal, surely committing an act against the SoE should be enough to lock him up to stop his trouble stirring considering he is already a convicted criminal now.

[whybother]

Sondhi is currently a sentenced criminal having been found guilty of defamation on two occasions and I believe sentenced to 6 month imprisonment on each matter, he is currently out pending an appeal, surely committing an act against the SoE should be enough to lock him up to stop his trouble stirring considering he is already a convicted criminal now.

It's clear that the government is allowing protests during the SOE, so he isn't "committing an act against" it.

[jayboy]

The Yellow Shirts are a force to be reckoned with in Thailand's colour-coded political landscape, backed by the Bangkok-based elite and pledging allegiance to the monarchy.

When reporting on Yellow-shirts, why does the media always bring up this thing about them 'pledging allegiance to the monarchy'?

Probably because the other "colour-coded political landscape" has a number of their personnel who don't share the same feelings, Reds like Jakrapob, Giles, Darunee, Suchart to name a few. One only needs to look at yesterday's news for an example:

Red leader arrested for lese majeste

Typical.The post is about the yellow rallies on the Cambodian border and here you are making ignorant and snide remarks about red loyalties.Of course there are different points of view but Thailand isn't a totalitarian state, and diversity within the law is a positive thing.The loyalty of the vast majority of all Thais is beyond question.Most reasonable people believe that if there is any damage done to the highest institution that is the fault of people like Prem and the quasi fascist yellow movement.

Returning to the matter in hand I would recommend the Bangkok Post editorial today.It makes the point that even little Kasit is furious about the stupidity and sheer ignorance of the current yellow protest.Morons all.

[random]

Sondhi is currently a sentenced criminal having been found guilty of defamation on two occasions and I believe sentenced to 6 month imprisonment on each matter, he is currently out pending an appeal, surely committing an act against the SoE should be enough to lock him up to stop his trouble stirring considering he is already a convicted criminal now.

It's clear that the government is allowing protests during the SOE, so he isn't "committing an act against" it.

So there is no SoE, or rather the SoE in place is open to interpretation depending on what the Government thinks at any given time.

There is either an SoE or there isn't, what is the point in having it if it is not adhered to? Oh yeah, I remember, it is to lock up anyone the government sees fit to lock up without charge and to cause hardship for the opposition.

[whybother]

Sondhi is currently a sentenced criminal having been found guilty of defamation on two occasions and I believe sentenced to 6 month imprisonment on each matter, he is currently out pending an appeal, surely committing an act against the SoE should be enough to lock him up to stop his trouble stirring considering he is already a convicted criminal now.

It's clear that the government is allowing protests during the SOE, so he isn't "committing an act against" it.

So there is no SoE, or rather the SoE in place is open to interpretation depending on what the Government thinks at any given time.

There is either an SoE or there isn't, what is the point in having it if it is not adhered to? Oh yeah, I remember, it is to lock up anyone the government sees fit to lock up without charge and to cause hardship for the opposition.

I haven't read the exact wording of the SOE, but the government have allowed several red shirt protests in the last couple of months without locking any of them up.

We can't be having double standards now, can we?

[phiphidon]

Not really a pain. They protested peacefully. The Cabinet signed off on the Memorandums. They dispersed and went home.

A good lesson for the Reds in that.

It appears that they didn't sign off on them. http://www.thaivisa....ost__p__3998144

So a demonstrating mob can affect the parliamentary process - not a good signal to give out, surely?

[whybother]

Typical.The post is about the yellow rallies on the Cambodian border and here you are making ignorant and snide remarks about red loyalties.Of course there are different points of view but Thailand isn't a totalitarian state, and diversity within the law is a positive thing.The loyalty of the vast majority of all Thais is beyond question.Most reasonable people believe that if there is any damage done to the highest institution that is the fault of people like Prem and the quasi fascist yellow movement.

<snip>

It was actually a pro-red shirt poster that asked a question about why the yellow shirts are always referred to as "pro-monarchy". And the Buchholz's response was that it is because there are those within the red shirts that are anti-monarchy.

[whybother]

Not really a pain. They protested peacefully. The Cabinet signed off on the Memorandums. They dispersed and went home.

A good lesson for the Reds in that.

It appears that they didn't sign off on them. http://www.thaivisa....ost__p__3998144

So a demonstrating mob can affect the parliamentary process - not a good signal to give out, surely?

Do you mean, like, forcing the government into an election?

[random]

Sondhi is currently a sentenced criminal having been found guilty of defamation on two occasions and I believe sentenced to 6 month imprisonment on each matter, he is currently out pending an appeal, surely committing an act against the SoE should be enough to lock him up to stop his trouble stirring considering he is already a convicted criminal now.

It's clear that the government is allowing protests during the SOE, so he isn't "committing an act against" it.

So there is no SoE, or rather the SoE in place is open to interpretation depending on what the Government thinks at any given time.

There is either an SoE or there isn't, what is the point in having it if it is not adhered to? Oh yeah, I remember, it is to lock up anyone the government sees fit to lock up without charge and to cause hardship for the opposition.

I haven't read the exact wording of the SOE, but the government have allowed several red shirt protests in the last couple of months without locking any of them up.

We can't be having double standards now, can we?

I am aware of this fact that they have allowed red shirt gatherings (I wouldn't call the one where they went to pay respects to the dead a protest hence my use of the word gatherings), so why bother with the SoE if you are not going to enforce it fully, surely that will just lead to uncertainty amongst the population. If you recall in Chang Mai a few students were arrested for demonstrating yet they allow thousands out to demonstrate without censure, and led by a convicted criminal no less in Sondhi.

My point is there should be some sort of continuance with this so people know what is happening, either have the SoE or don't have it so as to not lead to confusion and the belief that it is in force just so they can cherrrypick certain parts of it to lock people up without charge and to stop any opposition to them. lets be honest here it didn't exactly stop any bombings did it?

There is clearly no need to the SoE apart from the fact they want to use it to quash dissenting voices with the threat of imprisonment without charge.

[Buchholz]

The Yellow Shirts are a force to be reckoned with in Thailand's colour-coded political landscape, backed by the Bangkok-based elite and pledging allegiance to the monarchy.

When reporting on Yellow-shirts, why does the media always bring up this thing about them 'pledging allegiance to the monarchy'?

Probably because the other "colour-coded political landscape" has a number of their personnel who don't share the same feelings, Reds like Jakrapob, Giles, Darunee, Suchart to name a few. One only needs to look at yesterday's news for an example:

Red leader arrested for lese majeste

Typical.The post is about the yellow rallies on the Cambodian border and here you are making ignorant and snide remarks about red loyalties.Of course there are different points of view but Thailand isn't a totalitarian state, and diversity within the law is a positive thing.The loyalty of the vast majority of all Thais is beyond question.

The only thing "typical" is your flaming of other members.

My post was a direct reply to the on-topic post above it. Nothing "ignorant" about it.

I explained why the media refers to the yellows as pro-monarchy by contrasting that with why the Reds are not, going so far as identifying a few of the specific Reds that are not. Their "diversity" is NOT within the law.

It's true that the vast majority of Thais are loyal, but it's also true that a significant contingent of Reds are not, which explains why the phrase cited is not used by media descriptions of the Reds.

Edited November 3, 2010 by Buchholz

[rixalex]

Buchwald has been vary reasonable and patient with you and still you fight him.

How did Buchholz become Buchwald?

[jayjay0]

Buchwald has been vary reasonable and patient with you and still you fight him.

How did Buchholz become Buchwald?

Darned if I know. do you think there is a chance of two different people posting alike. To be honest I really don't know I just copied the name and pasted it.

Reread my post and you will see in it a article by Buchwald. To be honest I did not notice the discrepancy. As far as I am concerned they are both right on.

Edited November 3, 2010 by jayjay0

[cdnvic]

Multiple posts deleted for:

Discussion of the Monarchy in a political context.

Flaming, and name calling.

Quoting of the above. If you see someone flaming you or making comments on the Monarchy don't quote it, it will just get deleted. We don't have time to surgically remove quotes from posts.

I strongly suggest everyone cool off before posting again, and that people use some discretion when posting on the subject of the Monarchy.