Thousands Of Thai Red Shirts Gather In Bangkok

[Emptyset]

It must be me, I still don't get it. May be I do and just don't like my conclusion? Probably just the lack of details in newsflashes.

- commemorate the 7th month anniversary of the unrest

- demanded the government to release the jailed red shirt leaders

- remembrance ceremony of the red shirt protestors killed inside Wat Pathum Wanaram Buddhist Temple during the unrest

- gather at the 10th and 19th day of every month until they obtain justice and truth over the death of protesters would be unveiled

- UDD would continue twice monthly rallies until justice is returned and its core leaders detained for terrorism-related charges are released

- protests on the 10th and the 19th of every month until their demands for justice are met

So now the questions:

- Any compassion for the non-red deaths ?

- What are the demands for justice ?

- Why always 'release our leaders' with so many common red-shirts having to rely on the government to help ?

- Any 'mea culpa' for being at least similarly guilty of 91 deaths like the government?

- Any 'mea culpa' for the 60+ grenade attacks by 'red sympathisers' ?

- Any 'real' program to help people to reach self-reliance, empowerment and improved circumstances ?

The conditions for terminating the monthly protests seem just as open ended as those made in March - May this year. Count on extra traffic jams at Ratchaprasong twice a month for a long time to come

Red shirts might be in denial, but it's not like the government isn't. Sansern still denies soldiers were responsible for even a single death. Has anyone from the government apologized? I don't think the inability to admit mistakes/wrongs is particular to red shirts, I think it's an aspect of Thai culture in general. However, even Arisman admitted they should've gone home after April 10th and Sombat did apologize to people & businesses affected when he spoke at Rajaprasong, we don't know what other leaders think since they're either jailed or in exile. The only one we hear from is Jatuporn, who, as we know, is a moron that we should expect nothing from. If only we could hear and see less from him and more from Sombat, we'd know reds are heading in the right direction:

"Nevertheless, Sombat, like other reds, has been accused of fighting for Thaksin Shinawatra. Sombat publicly declared, however, that his ideal red-shirt movement is one that has transcended the attachment to ousted prime minister.

“I think Thaksin’s time is up.

I think he had the red shirts to the end. Although not all reds have transcended Thaksin, if the movement continues for another four to five years, I think the whole movement will leave him behind.

“I think those who are very progressive no longer talk about Thaksin. Sure, there are a lot of reds who still think Thaksin is their inspiration. And since there’s nobody today, they think of Thaksin. But it has been four years [since he was ousted in a coup] and I think they can survive without Thaksin.”

http://asiancorrespondent.com/43985/what-is-the-backstory-of-the-new-red-shirt-leader-sombat/

[Emptyset]

So how to regard this 'red-shirt' movement? Militants, a bunch of liars, grass-root protesters, democracy lovers, people with real grieves? Probably all applies. Doesn't make it easier for non-believers though. Trying to publicly distance the movement from mistakes in the past may be a good way to win the hearts of many more people.

One thing seems clear, when people talk about 'elite' they mostly mean the other side's elite, not theirs. Unless Thailand manages to get rid of the patronage system nothing will change fundamentally. Democracy has to be earned

Don't disagree with what you say. One thing is clear, if the red shirts eyes don't open to Thaksin and some of their own leaders, well, certainly "true democracy" cannot be achieved. They also need to come up with a coherent game plan and vision for the country which they can all agree on which in turn might persuade some in the "not sure" camp, of which there are still many.

I personally find it difficult to say which side is right or wrong & which direction the country would be off going in. So I'm trying not to invest too much support in anyone as things can quickly change & re-alignments made. I mean I quite like Abhisit, he's got some good ideas and left to his own devices, I think he'd do a very decent job as PM, but I don't like some of the people he's gotten involved with nor the fact that he seemed to have sacrificed some of his ideals during his tenure as PM. Though fair to say all politicians seem to put pragmatism above ideals when they actually gain power. I certainly admired him a lot more as an opposition leader than I do now, feel he might be irrevocably tainted & doomed to be a polarizing figure at least in the foreseeable future. I also quite like some red shirts & their leaders, especially Sombat but I also have time for Thida & Dr Weng, plus a few others. I think it's clear Abhisit & some of the more forward thinking red shirts have more in common than extremists from either side. But I've got absolutely no respect for Thaksin, and with people like Panlop, Manoon & Chavalit maneuvering in the shadows the red shirts can still be used for reactionary purposes. Have to say I'm in the "not sure" camp too, keeping an open mind & not thinking dichotomously is obviously the way to go (in an ideal world of course, in reality people with a stake in things tend to choose sides). That's the problem with this conflict, people are so partisan they lost sight of right and wrong.

Emptyset - you make several good points. And it's refreshing to see a post here that isn't saturated with the anti-Red vitriol that seems to be all the rage nowadays.

I looked back at some old threads and noticed there's been an anti-Red flavor here for four years. The length of time corresponds to when they first became a violent group. For some reason, that seems to have turned people off to them.

The current Reds attempting to put forth a united face for all that is good and worthy is unachievable. As the Reds have been told, they need to sever the Thaksin strings entirely if they ever wish to achieve credibility.

Until they do so, they will never be regarded with any legitimacy.

I doubt it's entirely or even mostly to do with violence, when I read this board a couple of years ago, a lot of people seemed to support PAD and the support didn't drop much even when it was clear they were willing to use violence.

"As the Reds have been told..." - told by who? You? And why would they listen to someone who displays contempt for them? People don't tend to listen to what they're "told" by those completely dismissive of them. I often discuss Thaksin with red shirts and usually savage him and his record, but they continue listening to me because I'm willing to listen to them. That said, most will defend Thaksin to an extent now whereas a lot of them didn't like him before (especially people on the left) & took a stand against him. It's obvious that their main enemy is the traditional elites & the military, they want the power structure reformed and the red shirts give them the best opportunity to do that - so they see some level of support for Thaksin as a necessary evil. I'm not sure about this position myself, clearly there's a bit of cognitive dissonance involved, they know Thaksin is bad but at the same time they know they're going to have to go part of the way with him... unless, that is, red shirts as a whole move on from him. And I don't see why that can't happen eventually, like Sombat says.

I've actually had much harsher responses from govt supporters when I've offered mild criticism of Abhisit, generally, than from red shirts on Thaksin. However, I only really have in-depth discussions with middle-class types, fair to say I don't know what the response would be if I went to certain parts of Issan and started sounding off about Thaksin. Mind you, I've discussed it with taxi drivers and they seem to think supporting the red shirts and not supporting Thaksin is an acceptable position.

[Emptyset]

"That said, most will defend Thaksin to an extent now whereas a lot of them didn't like him before (especially people on the left) & took a stand against him." Oops, that makes no sense. I'm talking specifically about the red shirts that were anti-Thaksin or had doubts about him before the coup but are now apparently on the same side.

[Throatwobbler]

Here we go again

Same record, another year. Thaksin isn't funding the red shirts. The red shirts have grown beyond Thaksin. Thaksin is just a spiritual leader...

Nonsense. For the past two years this has proven to be complete tripe as any visit to a red rally will quickly remind anyone. Now we're expected to believe it for a third year on the run, whille his letters are being read out by the leaders...? (didn't the letter say something to the effect of the "war" not being over?)

Thaksin's money is funding the movement to achieve Thaksin's aims. Want to know what they are? Ask any Thai - red, anti or neutral - in private.

To back up your point I just spent some time in rural Chaing Rai and to the people there it is all about Thaksin. people who come on here claiming otherwise are living in a dream world.

[Emptyset]

Here we go again

Same record, another year. Thaksin isn't funding the red shirts. The red shirts have grown beyond Thaksin. Thaksin is just a spiritual leader...

Nonsense. For the past two years this has proven to be complete tripe as any visit to a red rally will quickly remind anyone. Now we're expected to believe it for a third year on the run, whille his letters are being read out by the leaders...? (didn't the letter say something to the effect of the "war" not being over?)

Thaksin's money is funding the movement to achieve Thaksin's aims. Want to know what they are? Ask any Thai - red, anti or neutral - in private.

To back up your point I just spent some time in rural Chaing Rai and to the people there it is all about Thaksin. people who come on here claiming otherwise are living in a dream world.

And who here is claiming it isn't about Thaksin? I'm merely pointing out there are clearly two strands in the red shirts, the larger one, which includes the majority of "grassroots" and those upcountry, is built around Thaksin and their love for him and is mostly run by ex-TRT apparatchiks. The other much smaller group which is mainly Bangkok based and middle class, is leftish, progressive & more skeptical about Thaksin and his record. Obviously there's some crossover. Both groups have united because they have a common enemy. Some of us are hoping the progressive strand gains traction, but if it happens it'll take time (& is probably contingent on PT losing the next election). If leftists in the movement think they're not getting anywhere, I'd imagine there'll be a more obvious bifurcation or total parting of ways. Looks to me like the Thaksinistas are picking up some of their ideas though whilst some like Sombat have been able to take a more vocal anti-Thaksin stance whilst still playing a major role in the movement - obviously Sombat has no control over the UDD, but he is responsible for all the major red shirt protests, in and around Bangkok, that came after the crackdown. Well, up to the last one at least, where UDD took the major role again. Other hand, it might be more a divergence between the urban and rural, if you've got the internet or are able to meet up regularly with more educated red shirts then you might develop more advanced political views, whereas if you're in some rural area... well it's understandable that Thaksin is still strong in their minds as they might not be getting a chance to be exposed to new theories & new modes of thinking.

[rubl]

It must be me, I still don't get it. May be I do and just don't like my conclusion? Probably just the lack of details in newsflashes.

- commemorate the 7th month anniversary of the unrest

- demanded the government to release the jailed red shirt leaders

- remembrance ceremony of the red shirt protestors killed inside Wat Pathum Wanaram Buddhist Temple during the unrest

- gather at the 10th and 19th day of every month until they obtain justice and truth over the death of protesters would be unveiled

- UDD would continue twice monthly rallies until justice is returned and its core leaders detained for terrorism-related charges are released

- protests on the 10th and the 19th of every month until their demands for justice are met

So now the questions:

- Any compassion for the non-red deaths ?

- What are the demands for justice ?

- Why always 'release our leaders' with so many common red-shirts having to rely on the government to help ?

- Any 'mea culpa' for being at least similarly guilty of 91 deaths like the government?

- Any 'mea culpa' for the 60+ grenade attacks by 'red sympathisers' ?

- Any 'real' program to help people to reach self-reliance, empowerment and improved circumstances ?

The conditions for terminating the monthly protests seem just as open ended as those made in March - May this year. Count on extra traffic jams at Ratchaprasong twice a month for a long time to come

Red shirts might be in denial, but it's not like the government isn't. Sansern still denies soldiers were responsible for even a single death. Has anyone from the government apologized? I don't think the inability to admit mistakes/wrongs is particular to red shirts, I think it's an aspect of Thai culture in general. However, even Arisman admitted they should've gone home after April 10th and Sombat did apologize to people & businesses affected when he spoke at Rajaprasong, we don't know what other leaders think since they're either jailed or in exile. The only one we hear from is Jatuporn, who, as we know, is a moron that we should expect nothing from. If only we could hear and see less from him and more from Sombat, we'd know reds are heading in the right direction:

"Nevertheless, Sombat, like other reds, has been accused of fighting for Thaksin Shinawatra. Sombat publicly declared, however, that his ideal red-shirt movement is one that has transcended the attachment to ousted prime minister.

�I think Thaksin�s time is up.

I think he had the red shirts to the end. Although not all reds have transcended Thaksin, if the movement continues for another four to five years, I think the whole movement will leave him behind.

�I think those who are very progressive no longer talk about Thaksin. Sure, there are a lot of reds who still think Thaksin is their inspiration. And since there�s nobody today, they think of Thaksin. But it has been four years [since he was ousted in a coup] and I think they can survive without Thaksin.�

http://asiancorrespondent.com/43985/what-is-the-backstory-of-the-new-red-shirt-leader-sombat/

The inability to admit mistakes / wrongs may not be red-shirt only, but it simply doesn't help their cause. If they are seen as like the government, but only another color, why would we need them? Replace one group of elite by another? Only because they have a nicer color?

"even Arisman admitted they should've gone home after April 10th" first time I hear that. "Sombat did apologize to people & businesses affected when he spoke at Rajaprasong", was he involved in the March - May 'activities'?

Stop trying to be seemingly neutral. As you said before in this thread "Thaksin is still one of the main motivators for people to join". As long as that is the case with red-shirt leaders saying 'it's not about Thaksin' and 'we want him back' confusion remains, goals are dubious. Lots of people not convinced 'we want democracy', 'we want justice', 'we want our leaders freed'.

I cannot and will not speak for Thai people, but for me the red-shirts still have a long way to go. All the talk about red-shirts, UDD/DAAD, 24th of June, this/that fraction only emphasizes that the grass root red-shirts are still lost in the political arena and better distance themselves from any of the 'big mouths' and start afresh back home. Make kanman's accountable, make local politicians accountable. Grow up!

[Buchholz]

I looked back at some old threads and noticed there's been an anti-Red flavor here for four years. The length of time corresponds to when they first became a violent group. For some reason, that seems to have turned people off to them.

The current Reds attempting to put forth a united face for all that is good and worthy is unachievable. As the Reds have been told, they need to sever the Thaksin strings entirely if they ever wish to achieve credibility.

Until they do so, they will never be regarded with any legitimacy.

I doubt it's entirely or even mostly to do with violence, when I read this board a couple of years ago,

As said, you need to read further back. In this very similarly titled thread:

Thousands Protest Outside Thai Privy Council Chairman's Home

to this thread:

Thousands Of Thai Red Shirts Gather In Bangkok

one can see the earlier apprehension that posters had regarding the Red Shirts:

This guy wants democracy so bad he'll break your legs to get it.

Edited December 20, 2010 by Buchholz

[Buchholz]

"As the Reds have been told..." - told by who?

It's been implied or stated by a great number of people both inside and outside the government. People don't trust the Reds, and justifiably so, as long as the Thaksin and Jatuporn factor is so overwhelmingly omnipresent. If they are truly about "democracy", they should dump them.

It's obvious that their main enemy is the traditional elites & the military

I would say a major obstacle is the huge number of Thais that associate them with blood pourings and hospital raids, etc. The middle of the road Thais that abhor some of their actions is a major stumbling block. If they could tap into the huge majority, that's the key for their success. Unfortunately for the Reds, that doesn't seem ever likely to happen. The more fractious the Reds become, the less support they are garnering. Their best hope is to completley ditch the Reds group and start something else afresh.

they know Thaksin is bad but at the same time they know they're going to have to go part of the way with him... unless, that is, red shirts as a whole move on from him. And I don't see why that can't happen eventually, like Sombat says.

When and if that does happen, they should get back to us. Until such time, they're spinning their wheels with waning support. Still, Sombat doesn't sound too different than I what I said above and you asked who was saying it.

[Siam Simon]

I looked back at some old threads and noticed there's been an anti-Red flavor here for four years. The length of time corresponds to when they first became a violent group. For some reason, that seems to have turned people off to them.

The current Reds attempting to put forth a united face for all that is good and worthy is unachievable. As the Reds have been told, they need to sever the Thaksin strings entirely if they ever wish to achieve credibility.

Until they do so, they will never be regarded with any legitimacy.

I doubt it's entirely or even mostly to do with violence, when I read this board a couple of years ago,

As said, you need to read further back. In this very similarly titled thread:

Thousands Protest Outside Thai Privy Council Chairman's Home

to this thread:

Thousands Of Thai Red Shirts Gather In Bangkok

one can see the earlier apprehension that posters had regarding the Red Shirts:

This guy wants democracy so bad he'll break your legs to get it.

Try reading a few of Sriracha John's posts from that period to get a feel for what Buchholz is trying to tell you .

[Buchholz]

Stop trying to be seemingly neutral.

It's seemingly the latest tactic whereas several previous others have similarly failed.

As you said before in this thread "Thaksin is still one of the main motivators for people to join". As long as that is the case with red-shirt leaders saying 'it's not about Thaksin' and 'we want him back' confusion remains, goals are dubious. Lots of people not convinced 'we want democracy', 'we want justice', 'we want our leaders freed'.

You got it right.

[Buchholz]

This guy wants democracy so bad he'll break your legs to get it.

Try reading a few of Sriracha John's posts from that period

Or just about anybody else in that thread. In reading those older threads, I didn't see too many Red Shirt supporters/apologists then.

[Siam Simon]

Stop trying to be seemingly neutral.

It's seemingly the latest tactic whereas several previous others have similarly failed.

As you said before in this thread "Thaksin is still one of the main motivators for people to join". As long as that is the case with red-shirt leaders saying 'it's not about Thaksin' and 'we want him back' confusion remains, goals are dubious. Lots of people not convinced 'we want democracy', 'we want justice', 'we want our leaders freed'.

You got it right.

The above replies by John sum up everything that's wrong about the discussions on these threads. It was the same when Nick Nostitz kindly gave his time to post for a few days a while back: The forum's right wing extremists were palpably furious, led by John/Buchholz flailing away, trying desperately to discredit Nick any which way. Now John/Buchholz is on the march against another poster pushing sanity ahead of factionalism. My, my.

[Buchholz]

Stop trying to be seemingly neutral.

It's seemingly the latest tactic whereas several previous others have similarly failed.

As you said before in this thread "Thaksin is still one of the main motivators for people to join". As long as that is the case with red-shirt leaders saying 'it's not about Thaksin' and 'we want him back' confusion remains, goals are dubious. Lots of people not convinced 'we want democracy', 'we want justice', 'we want our leaders freed'.

You got it right.

It was the same when Nick Nostitz kindly gave his time to post for a few days a while back: The forum's right wing extremists were palpably furious, led by Buchholz flailing away, trying desperately to discredit Nick any which way. Now Buchholz is on the march against another poster pushing sanity ahead of factionalism. My, my.

As it seems you have difficulty reading, I was agreeing with another poster's points. The same as in the other thread you mention. Sorry to disappoint you, but there are a great number of people that share my views.

You overly dramatic "palpably furious" and "flailing away" are reflective of your own self-perceived hysteria.

.

[Siam Simon]

It was the same when Nick Nostitz kindly gave his time to post for a few days a while back: The forum's right wing extremists were palpably furious, led by Buchholz flailing away, trying desperately to discredit Nick any which way. Now Buchholz is on the march against another poster pushing sanity ahead of factionalism. My, my.

cut// You overly dramatic "palpably furious" and "flailing away" are reflective of your own self-perceived hysteria.

.

No, John, they are only reflective of your own fixations.

Edited December 21, 2010 by Siam Simon

[whybother]

Or just about anybody else in that thread. In reading those older threads, I didn't see too many Red Shirt supporters/apologists then.

Looking back at that thread, it seems that the Red Shirts haven't changed one bit.

I think you've realised that Simon. That's why you continually post comments against other posters rather than add some reasoning for your support of the red shirts.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

Sorry to disappoint you, but there are a great number of people that share my views.

On Thaivisa? Undoubtedly but having lots of Thaivisa posters share your opinions should be a cause for considerable concern, not self-congratulation.

[Siam Simon]

Or just about anybody else in that thread. In reading those older threads, I didn't see too many Red Shirt supporters/apologists then.

Looking back at that thread, it seems that the Red Shirts haven't changed one bit.

I think you've realised that Simon. That's why you continually post comments against other posters rather than add some reasoning for your support of the red shirts.

But you would say that, wouldn't you? Plus, I'm not a Red Shirt supporter.

[whybother]

Or just about anybody else in that thread. In reading those older threads, I didn't see too many Red Shirt supporters/apologists then.

Looking back at that thread, it seems that the Red Shirts haven't changed one bit.

I think you've realised that Simon. That's why you continually post comments against other posters rather than add some reasoning for your support of the red shirts.

But you would say that, wouldn't you? Plus, I'm not a Red Shirt supporter.

Edited December 21, 2010 by whybother

[animatic]

Seem the humor quotient is being raised to new levels.

Seems the graduate school course in 'Applied Irony' is filled to capacity.

Edited December 21, 2010 by animatic

[Siam Simon]

But you would say that, wouldn't you? Plus, I'm not a Red Shirt supporter.

Plus, I should point out that changing the font of another poster's quoted text is very naughty. If I were as sneaky and snide as one of the forum's more prolific right wing extremists I would report your post to the mods. But I'm not, so I won't.

[whybother]

But you would say that, wouldn't you? Plus, I'm not a Red Shirt supporter.

Plus, I should point out that changing the font of another poster's quoted text is very naughty. If I were as sneaky and snide as one of the forum's more prolific right wing extremists I would report your post to the mods. But I'm not, so I won't.

Next time I'll just modify it by cutting out the part that I'm not responding to. Or, maybe even go back and edit the post to modify the quote, as some are want to do.

But, please, if you have a problem with the way that I edited the post, please report it to the mods. How will people learn otherwise?

[Siam Simon]

But you would say that, wouldn't you? Plus, I'm not a Red Shirt supporter.

Plus, I should point out that changing the font of another poster's quoted text is very naughty. If I were as sneaky and snide as one of the forum's more prolific right wing extremists I would report your post to the mods. But I'm not, so I won't.

Next time I'll just modify it by cutting out the part that I'm not responding to. Or, maybe even go back and edit the post to modify the quote, as some are want to do.

But, please, if you have a problem with the way that I edited the post, please report it to the mods. How will people learn otherwise?

Plus, I'm trying to help. What part of my advice about not changing quoted font don't you understand? It's hardly rocket science.

[whybother]

Plus, I should point out that changing the font of another poster's quoted text is very naughty. If I were as sneaky and snide as one of the forum's more prolific right wing extremists I would report your post to the mods. But I'm not, so I won't.

Next time I'll just modify it by cutting out the part that I'm not responding to. Or, maybe even go back and edit the post to modify the quote, as some are want to do.

But, please, if you have a problem with the way that I edited the post, please report it to the mods. How will people learn otherwise?

Plus, I'm trying to help. What part of my advice about not changing quoted font don't you understand? It's hardly rocket science.

Actually, aren't the rules that you are not allowed to change the quoted post at all? It's seems you're quoting a rule and ignoring it at the same time.

[Siam Simon]

Plus, I should point out that changing the font of another poster's quoted text is very naughty. If I were as sneaky and snide as one of the forum's more prolific right wing extremists I would report your post to the mods. But I'm not, so I won't.

Next time I'll just modify it by cutting out the part that I'm not responding to. Or, maybe even go back and edit the post to modify the quote, as some are want to do.

But, please, if you have a problem with the way that I edited the post, please report it to the mods. How will people learn otherwise?

Plus, I'm trying to help. What part of my advice about not changing quoted font don't you understand? It's hardly rocket science.

Actually, aren't the rules that you are not allowed to change the quoted post at all? It's seems you're quoting a rule and ignoring it at the same time.

Anyway, Plus, I'll stick to my policy of letting the mods mod.

[philw]

Sorry to disappoint you, but there are a great number of people that share my views.

On Thaivisa? Undoubtedly but having lots of Thaivisa posters share your opinions should be a cause for considerable concern, not self-congratulation.

Good one !!!

[whybother]

Sorry to disappoint you, but there are a great number of people that share my views.

On Thaivisa? Undoubtedly but having lots of Thaivisa posters share your opinions should be a cause for considerable concern, not self-congratulation.

Good one !!!

Are you sharing Sweeney's opinion? Should that be causing Sweeney considerable concern?

[whybother]

Anyway, Plus, I'll stick to my policy of letting the mods mod.

Then WHY did you bring this up in the first place?

Pointing out the breaking of a rule, after only just previously breaking it yourself.

Then pointing out your policy is to let the mods mod, after a number of posts doing the exact opposite.

Edit: and what is this "Plus" thing? Is this one of your "John" delusions? Or maybe it's something to do with accusing me of being Thai?

Edited December 21, 2010 by whybother

[Insight]

Yet another attempt at derailing a red shirt thread into a who-is-really-who slanging match...

[rubl]

Thousands of Thai Red Shirts gather in Bangkok

Just to annoy left and right wingers and especially people in Bangkok who just want to peacefully go about their business

"She has also said the Reds would step up the campaign to secure the release of their leaders with gatherings twice a month in Bangkok."

Have fun

[Buchholz]

Sorry to disappoint you, but there are a great number of people that share my views.

On Thaivisa? Undoubtedly but having lots of Thaivisa posters share your opinions should be a cause for considerable concern, not self-congratulation.

It wasn't meant as a self-congratulation, just a statement of reality for both inside and outside of Thaivisa.