Pheu Thai And Red Shirts Do Nothing To Help Their Own

[Buchholz]

Red Shirt people wear shirts in colors other than the color red.

They have done so for years.

It is a false assertion that because the people in the boat were not wearing red shirts, they were "Non RED shirt people"

"It is a false assertion that because the people in the boat were not wearing red shirts, they were "Non RED shirt people" "

I agree

"Red Shirt people wear shirts in colors other than the color red.

They have done so for years. "

it's just your comment suggested that years ago, they did wear red shirts exclusively... that's all.

Pretty much, they used to. So much so, that many people still today mistakenly believe that if someone isn't wearing a shirt that is colored red, they are not Red Shirt people.

I believe it was Natthawut who prompted the change to wearing other colors in an effort to make the police task of identifying them more difficult.

i just don't get how someone can make a conclusive comment like red shirts exclusively wore red shirts years ago and not now.

obviously during a protest or demonstration, they are going to wear red... just as supporters of a football team would wear their colours.

but to put forward the point about red shirts not exclusively wearing red for years, in response to a picture of members of the public in a rescue boat, sounds to me like you were saying they used to exclusively always wear red shirts while going about their normal daily lives

and i don't believe that was ever true... remember you said 'exclusively'

If predominantly satisfy you, that's fine, too.

I know Red Shirts that did wear Red Shirts exclusively in public until the recommendation from one of the Red Shirt Leaders to discontinue the practice.

If your experiences were different, that's fine, too.

.

[nurofiend]

Pretty much, they used to. So much so, that many people still today mistakenly believe that if someone isn't wearing a shirt that is colored red, they are not Red Shirt people.

I believe it was Natthawut who prompted the change to wearing other colors in an effort to make the police task of identifying them more difficult.

i just don't get how someone can make a conclusive comment like red shirts exclusively wore red shirts years ago and not now.

obviously during a protest or demonstration, they are going to wear red... just as supporters of a football team would wear their colours.

but to put forward the point about red shirts not exclusively wearing red for years, in response to a picture of members of the public in a rescue boat, sounds to me like you were saying they used to exclusively always wear red shirts while going about their normal daily lives

and i don't believe that was ever true... remember you said 'exclusively'

If predominantly satisfy you, that's fine, too.

I know Red Shirts that did wear Red Shirts exclusively in public until the recommendation from one of the Red Shirt Leaders to discontinue the practice.

If your experiences were different, that's fine, too.

.

that's fine

i wasn't purposely looking for an argument, i was just taken aback by the seemingly definitiveness of your statement.

Edited October 29, 2011 by nurofiend

[Buchholz]

Pretty much, they used to. So much so, that many people still today mistakenly believe that if someone isn't wearing a shirt that is colored red, they are not Red Shirt people.

I believe it was Natthawut who prompted the change to wearing other colors in an effort to make the police task of identifying them more difficult.

i just don't get how someone can make a conclusive comment like red shirts exclusively wore red shirts years ago and not now.

obviously during a protest or demonstration, they are going to wear red... just as supporters of a football team would wear their colours.

but to put forward the point about red shirts not exclusively wearing red for years, in response to a picture of members of the public in a rescue boat, sounds to me like you were saying they used to exclusively always wear red shirts while going about their normal daily lives

and i don't believe that was ever true... remember you said 'exclusively'

If predominantly satisfy you, that's fine, too.

I know Red Shirts that did wear Red Shirts exclusively in public until the recommendation from one of the Red Shirt Leaders to discontinue the practice.

If your experiences were different, that's fine, too.

that's fine

i wasn't purposely looking for an argument, i was just taken a back by the seemingly definitiveness of your statement.

It was definitive to point out the misconception, that persists to this day, by those who define Red Shirts by their wearing the color red.

.

[nurofiend]

If predominantly satisfy you, that's fine, too.

I know Red Shirts that did wear Red Shirts exclusively in public until the recommendation from one of the Red Shirt Leaders to discontinue the practice.

If your experiences were different, that's fine, too.

that's fine

i wasn't purposely looking for an argument, i was just taken a back by the seemingly definitiveness of your statement.

It was definitive to point out the misconception, that persists to this day, by those who define Red Shirts by their wearing the color red.

.

well that's exactly what i found definitive about your statement

which is red shirts used to exclusively wear red shirts and now they don't

i think both assertions in the above sentence are misconceptions!

edit to add: obviously the second assertion being blocked by the misconception of the first

Edited October 29, 2011 by nurofiend

[Buchholz]

If predominantly satisfy you, that's fine, too.

I know Red Shirts that did wear Red Shirts exclusively in public until the recommendation from one of the Red Shirt Leaders to discontinue the practice.

If your experiences were different, that's fine, too.

that's fine

i wasn't purposely looking for an argument, i was just taken a back by the seemingly definitiveness of your statement.

It was definitive to point out the misconception, that persists to this day, by those who define Red Shirts by their wearing the color red.

.

well that's exactly what i found definitive about your statement

which is red shirts used to exclusively wear red shirts and now they don't

i think both assertions in the above sentence are misconceptions!

edit to add: obviously the second assertion being blocked by the misconception of the first

It is not a misconception that they exclusively wore red at one time.

That was already covered in our previous exchange.

To repeat what you already had said "fine" to, your experiences were different.

I think we've finally ground this into the dirt.

.

Edited October 29, 2011 by Buchholz

[nurofiend]

It is not a misconception that they exclusively wore red at one time.

That was already covered in our previous exchange.

To repeat what you already had said "fine" to, your experiences were different.

I think we've finally ground this into the dirt.

.

we have ground this into the dirt...

but i disagree that they all exclusively wore red at one time going about their daily business (not protesting, demonstrating), which is what the people in the boat were doing.

so yes if you experienced different, then we can end this discussion.

[Buchholz]

It is not a misconception that they exclusively wore red at one time.

That was already covered in our previous exchange.

To repeat what you already had said "fine" to, your experiences were different.

I think we've finally ground this into the dirt.

.

we have ground this into the dirt...

but i disagree that they all exclusively wore red at one time going about their daily business (not protesting, demonstrating), which is what the people in the boat were doing.

so yes if you experienced different, then we can end this discussion.

That's what my experiences were and to which I had thought we were agreement on an hour and a half ago.

[monkfish]

Does everyone forget why Red Shirts stopped wearing RED! mmmm

Was it to avoid having their heads removed by high velocity 6mm SIG SAUER sniper bullets??

Anyhow this doesn't seem to be the issue at the moment.

Most disturbing is why people go to so much trouble to discredit someone doing relief work!!

The picture provided by our own resident part time journalist proves there were no RED SHIRTS at all on the boat.

Of course the artist made sure each passenger was wearing at least 1 red article for example the Old Lady with a RED bow tie I mean how sick id thit!

So no Red shirt news in because they are busy doing relief work!

so hell lets make something up to stir some sh@t

Well go ahead guys because the Thai people on the STREET know what's going on and they can smell it a mile away! and it stinks.

Was going to say something about the opposition but cos TV doesn't like it too much won't.

[monkfish]

It is not a misconception that they exclusively wore red at one time.

That was already covered in our previous exchange.

To repeat what you already had said "fine" to, your experiences were different.

I think we've finally ground this into the dirt.

.

we have ground this into the dirt...

but i disagree that they all exclusively wore red at one time going about their daily business (not protesting, demonstrating), which is what the people in the boat were doing.

so yes if you experienced different, then we can end this discussion.

Its obvious in the picture that they are all Red shirt's because they all have at least ONE piece of RED garment whether is be a neck wallet, bow tie, fanny-bag, hand bag or what ever!!

That picture is definitely not edited!!! sarcasm of course.

Edited October 29, 2011 by monkfish

[monkfish]

A so-called Red Shirt relief boat approaches a flooded community with it's prominently displayed sticker making it clear that the supplies onboard are only for Red Shirt supporters:

Scene 1

Boat: "Are you people red shirt supporters?"

Community: "Yes, are there any Red Shirt leaders in nearby boats who we can kiss ar$e to? That large sack of rice looks really heavy. Can we give you some help offloading it?"

Scene 2

Boat: "are you people Red Shirt supporters?

Community: "Away with you, you filthy Red Shirt dogs, we would rather starve than accept your tainted hospitality."

Does anybody know how this alleged shirt-coloured relief actually works? (other than as daft propaganda by right wing extremists on TVF, of course)

Scene 3:

Boat: "are you people Red Shirt supporters?

Community: "why you ask and who cares? We're all Thai in need. You come here to help us, or to ask stupid questions?"

So as an astute person of the world do you think any of the people on the boat picture posted by buchholz are red shirts.

If so how many and why?

[nicknostitz]

[

You will note that I said the basis of modern journalism is "sound reasoning based on facts." (I am indeed aware of fact checking and fact checkers, thank you.) You of course recognize I am posting about general circulation daily and Sunday newspapers. As to specialization, reading the Economist or watching Bloomberg, I get a lot of facts, sources, and much else too by way of opinion (along with the appropriate disclaimers).

I take it that by "gutter journalism" you refer to the Murdoch clan and Board of Directors (excepting the WSJ)?

I think we also could agree that Journalism in a democracy such as Thailand's is comparable to the parliamentary system. As we would not expect the Thai parliamentary system to be of the same caliber and quality as that of the UK (ahem), neither should we expect Thai English language journalism to be on a par with the Times whether in London or New York - or the Washington Post for that matter. In 2007 after Thaksin was kicked out of Hong Kong, Phillip Bowering wrote an opinion column in the South China Morning Post that, if the former PM were to return to Thailand, he might do well to have learned something of the democratic government of HKG and to consider some of it as perhaps suitable to Thailand.

None of the publications mentioned by have ever been anything else than staunchly traditional in their journalistic approach.

Thanong's little scribbling is neither factual nor sound, as i have shown.

And you posting is neither as well - first you state that BP and the Nation are international standard publications, now you draw a rather strange parallel between the parliament and the quality of newpapers (Apples...Oranges...?), and now you state that BP and the Nation now cannot be compared to international standard publications. If you want to make a point, you can't change your line of argumentation just as convenient to you - that is usually just the reserve of politicians.

[ThaiOats]

It is not a misconception that they exclusively wore red at one time.

That was already covered in our previous exchange.

To repeat what you already had said "fine" to, your experiences were different.

I think we've finally ground this into the dirt.

.

we have ground this into the dirt...

but i disagree that they all exclusively wore red at one time going about their daily business (not protesting, demonstrating), which is what the people in the boat were doing.

so yes if you experienced different, then we can end this discussion.

Its obvious in the picture that they are all Red shirt's because they all have at least ONE piece of RED garment whether is be a neck wallet, bow tie, fanny-bag, hand bag or what ever!!

That picture is definitely not edited!!! sarcasm of course.

Monkfish, if you're claiming to be someone with excellent photoshop skills, you're not fooling anybody. Some of the RED articles of clothing that you have given almost everyone on that boat can easily spotted as fake (such as the woman's cap) and the English sticker (not because it was in English). There were more boats like these and whether or not only REDs rode in them is irrelevant to the fact that the intention was there thus rubl's 3rd scenario is highly plausible. If my intention was to shoot someone dead and I didn't score a fatal blow, it doesn't justify my intention does it?

Yes I understood the sarcasm but that doesn't discredit the original photo.

Edited October 29, 2011 by ThaiOats

[ThaiOats]

How do you conspiracy theorist explain this photo then? Also photoshopped?

If I am not mistaken, the location is at the elephant building at the Lardprao/Pahon Yothin intersection, and this is where i have seen a team of a Red Shirt community radio station being positioned. Neither run by either the UDD or the government. Just a small team that does things on their own.

Usually, the criticism of Red Shirts is usually countered by a criticism of Yellow shirts and the Democrats. What red shirt apologists fail to realize that a lot of people on here don't support Yellow and fall into the category of "multi-colored shirts" aka regular people who don't take political sides. The fact the matter is that the Reds clearly favor one political side and are the ones causing this rift in Thailand. When asked in America "are you a Democrat or a Republican" I'd reply "neither, depends on the candidate". That's a more neutral approach that MANY people have and quite IMHO is the way it should be.

Now onto the quote. Just because it's a small team that does things on their own doesn't excuse the whole Red Shirt community from the negativity. They (the Red shirts) are accountable for any actions done by their people unless they admit that it was wrong and reprimand the people who've misrepresented them. Unless that's done, the negativity stays. In one example, unless the masses of the Red-Shirts came out and say "what Jatuporn and Arisman did in advocating the destruction of Thailand was wrong, they're not what we are" then it's safe to assume that the Red Shirts support it. Same as this boat issue. It's a stigma surrounding the Reds which the apologists have to deal with and have to understand.

So Nick, while you're involved in monitoring the Reds closely and trying to bring them into a better light, you'd have to convince a lot of people that you DO NOT agree with what they've done.

[koosdeboer]

How do you conspiracy theorist explain this photo then? Also photoshopped?

If I am not mistaken, the location is at the elephant building at the Lardprao/Pahon Yothin intersection, and this is where i have seen a team of a Red Shirt community radio station being positioned. Neither run by either the UDD or the government. Just a small team that does things on their own.

Usually, the criticism of Red Shirts is usually countered by a criticism of Yellow shirts and the Democrats. What red shirt apologists fail to realize that a lot of people on here don't support Yellow and fall into the category of "multi-colored shirts" aka regular people who don't take political sides. The fact the matter is that the Reds clearly favor one political side and are the ones causing this rift in Thailand. When asked in America "are you a Democrat or a Republican" I'd reply "neither, depends on the candidate". That's a more neutral approach that MANY people have and quite IMHO is the way it should be.

Now onto the quote. Just because it's a small team that does things on their own doesn't excuse the whole Red Shirt community from the negativity. They (the Red shirts) are accountable for any actions done by their people unless they admit that it was wrong and reprimand the people who've misrepresented them. Unless that's done, the negativity stays. In one example, unless the masses of the Red-Shirts came out and say "what Jatuporn and Arisman did in advocating the destruction of Thailand was wrong, they're not what we are" then it's safe to assume that the Red Shirts support it. Same as this boat issue. It's a stigma surrounding the Reds which the apologists have to deal with and have to understand.

So Nick, while you're involved in monitoring the Reds closely and trying to bring them into a better light, you'd have to convince a lot of people that you DO NOT agree with what they've done.

Great post

[Buchholz]

Now onto the quote. Just because it's a small team that does things on their own doesn't excuse the whole Red Shirt community from the negativity. They (the Red shirts) are accountable for any actions done by their people unless they admit that it was wrong and reprimand the people who've misrepresented them. Unless that's done, the negativity stays. In one example, unless the masses of the Red-Shirts came out and say "what Jatuporn and Arisman did in advocating the destruction of Thailand was wrong, they're not what we are" then it's safe to assume that the Red Shirts support it. Same as this boat issue. It's a stigma surrounding the Reds which the apologists have to deal with and have to understand.

So Nick, while you're involved in monitoring the Reds closely and trying to bring them into a better light, you'd have to convince a lot of people that you DO NOT agree with what they've done.

The accountability factor is the reoccurring fallacy that never seems to get answered, eg. it was already brought up twice in this thread alone without being addressed and numerous other times in quite a few threads. Despite it coming up without answer, the excuse continues to still get trotted out by those who would seek to lessen the impact on the Red Shirts any time an adverse act by any of the so-called factions happens.

But then, maybe it will occur this time and the Red Shirts will come out to identify those responsible, condemn the discrimination, and promise to avoid any further division fostered by Red Shirts.

But then again, maybe not.

.

[philw]

It is not a misconception that they exclusively wore red at one time.

That was already covered in our previous exchange.

To repeat what you already had said "fine" to, your experiences were different.

I think we've finally ground this into the dirt.

.

we have ground this into the dirt...

but i disagree that they all exclusively wore red at one time going about their daily business (not protesting, demonstrating), which is what the people in the boat were doing.

so yes if you experienced different, then we can end this discussion.

Well done NF, brilliant.......

Through a sunday hangover, very amusing.

Bit cruel though, do you think he noticed ????

[nicknostitz]

How do you conspiracy theorist explain this photo then? Also photoshopped?

If I am not mistaken, the location is at the elephant building at the Lardprao/Pahon Yothin intersection, and this is where i have seen a team of a Red Shirt community radio station being positioned. Neither run by either the UDD or the government. Just a small team that does things on their own.

Usually, the criticism of Red Shirts is usually countered by a criticism of Yellow shirts and the Democrats. What red shirt apologists fail to realize that a lot of people on here don't support Yellow and fall into the category of "multi-colored shirts" aka regular people who don't take political sides. The fact the matter is that the Reds clearly favor one political side and are the ones causing this rift in Thailand. When asked in America "are you a Democrat or a Republican" I'd reply "neither, depends on the candidate". That's a more neutral approach that MANY people have and quite IMHO is the way it should be.

Now onto the quote. Just because it's a small team that does things on their own doesn't excuse the whole Red Shirt community from the negativity. They (the Red shirts) are accountable for any actions done by their people unless they admit that it was wrong and reprimand the people who've misrepresented them. Unless that's done, the negativity stays. In one example, unless the masses of the Red-Shirts came out and say "what Jatuporn and Arisman did in advocating the destruction of Thailand was wrong, they're not what we are" then it's safe to assume that the Red Shirts support it. Same as this boat issue. It's a stigma surrounding the Reds which the apologists have to deal with and have to understand.

So Nick, while you're involved in monitoring the Reds closely and trying to bring them into a better light, you'd have to convince a lot of people that you DO NOT agree with what they've done.

First of all, it is not my job or aspiration to "bring them into a better light". My job is to show them in a realistic light. Just because here on Thaivisa they majority opinion is distorted beyond any realistic connection does not mean that i have a need to convince people of anything. Facts speak for themselves, and if some on Thaivisa here have difficulties to accept facts, than this is not my problem.

I have already stated that i find this quite scandalous, if indeed they practice what the sticker says. Furthermore, due to the make up of the Red Shirts, which is not an army, but a multifaceted social mass movement which consists of numerous smaller and larger independent groups beyond the control of the UDD leadership (which means also most of the community radio stations), the here voiced criticism would only apply to the Red Shirts as a whole, if indeed such a Red only policy would be a stated and propagated policy by all groups, or a majority of them, especially also by the UDD leadership. I have already stated here that the UDD leadership has already at the beginning of the floods clearly said that they help all regardless of color. So has Sombat's independent Red Shirt affiliated group Red Sunday, and his Mirror Foundation is actively involved in relief work. Also, on the ground, i have said already, i have seen Red Shirts helping all, and working together with soldiers.

Again - this is a minority faction, most likely. Their stickers on the boats are scandalous. But first i would like to know if indeed they practice what their distasteful stickers say or if it was just an overeager stupid idea they do not follow up on on the ground before i pass any judgement.

Secondly - you are entirely mistaken about the "multi-colored shirts" - who are not "regular people that do not take sides". On the opposite, they began as a faction of the PAD, with covered support of the Democrat party and the military, their leaders were sub-leaders of the PAD, they used PAD guards and a few former Naclop Srivichai as guards in the heyday (after their first protest at Lumpini while wearing pink shirts went way out of hand when many of their protesters tried to lynch passing Red Shirts - and yes, i can prove it as i have photographed it), and the vast majority of attendants have been PAD protesters. Several second tire leaders of the PAD regularly spoke on their stages during last year's protest, such as Gen Pathumpong Kesornsuk and Gen Preecha Iamsuphan. Their rhetoric on the stages was far more vitriolic anti Red than even the PAD was. And they are far more of the political right than the PAD, regularly singing some of the most right wing patriotic songs Thailand that would not be able to be sung on the PAD stages (such as 'Nac Paendin'), as they PAD still has more than a few former left wingers who would not stand for these songs as they imply some of the worst excesses of Thailand's dark times of the 70's.

Now the "multi-colored shirts" are a tiny group under Dr. Tul that bring approximately 20 to at most 50 people to the streets, since their separation from the PAD, and quite irrelevant.

I am quite sure though that regardless of what i say, the majority here on Thaivisa will continue to exaggerate all fault in the Red Shirts, while completely ignoring their positive aspects.

Whatever...

[Buchholz]

It is not a misconception that they exclusively wore red at one time.

That was already covered in our previous exchange.

To repeat what you already had said "fine" to, your experiences were different.

I think we've finally ground this into the dirt.

we have ground this into the dirt...

but i disagree that they all exclusively wore red at one time going about their daily business (not protesting, demonstrating), which is what the people in the boat were doing.

so yes if you experienced different, then we can end this discussion.

Well done NF, brilliant.......

Through a sunday hangover, very amusing.

Bit cruel though, do you think he noticed ????

What are you babbling about?

[hammered]

How do you conspiracy theorist explain this photo then? Also photoshopped?

If I am not mistaken, the location is at the elephant building at the Lardprao/Pahon Yothin intersection, and this is where i have seen a team of a Red Shirt community radio station being positioned. Neither run by either the UDD or the government. Just a small team that does things on their own.

Usually, the criticism of Red Shirts is usually countered by a criticism of Yellow shirts and the Democrats. What red shirt apologists fail to realize that a lot of people on here don't support Yellow and fall into the category of "multi-colored shirts" aka regular people who don't take political sides. The fact the matter is that the Reds clearly favor one political side and are the ones causing this rift in Thailand. When asked in America "are you a Democrat or a Republican" I'd reply "neither, depends on the candidate". That's a more neutral approach that MANY people have and quite IMHO is the way it should be.

Now onto the quote. Just because it's a small team that does things on their own doesn't excuse the whole Red Shirt community from the negativity. They (the Red shirts) are accountable for any actions done by their people unless they admit that it was wrong and reprimand the people who've misrepresented them. Unless that's done, the negativity stays. In one example, unless the masses of the Red-Shirts came out and say "what Jatuporn and Arisman did in advocating the destruction of Thailand was wrong, they're not what we are" then it's safe to assume that the Red Shirts support it. Same as this boat issue. It's a stigma surrounding the Reds which the apologists have to deal with and have to understand.

So Nick, while you're involved in monitoring the Reds closely and trying to bring them into a better light, you'd have to convince a lot of people that you DO NOT agree with what they've done.

If people dont take sides they certainly are not in the miniscule multi-colour group headed up byu someone who makes most PAD leaders look centrist. The multicoureds are certainly not a centrist group. Those not taking sides or who can change sides are a big group but they arent represented by any colour coded organization and characterised by wanting to see it all go away

[whybother]

<snip>

Again - this is a minority faction, most likely. Their stickers on the boats are scandalous. But first i would like to know if indeed they practice what their distasteful stickers say or if it was just an overeager stupid idea they do not follow up on on the ground before i pass any judgement.

It is irrelevant what this group does on the ground. The fact that they have the stickers will mean that some people who need help will not ask for it.

If it was an overeager stupid idea, then someone in the group should have taken the stickers off.

[Buchholz]

If I am not mistaken, the location is at the elephant building at the Lardprao/Pahon Yothin intersection, and this is where i have seen a team of a Red Shirt community radio station being positioned. Neither run by either the UDD or the government. Just a small team that does things on their own.

<snip>

Now onto the quote. Just because it's a small team that does things on their own doesn't excuse the whole Red Shirt community from the negativity. They (the Red shirts) are accountable for any actions done by their people unless they admit that it was wrong and reprimand the people who've misrepresented them. Unless that's done, the negativity stays. In one example, unless the masses of the Red-Shirts came out and say "what Jatuporn and Arisman did in advocating the destruction of Thailand was wrong, they're not what we are" then it's safe to assume that the Red Shirts support it. Same as this boat issue. It's a stigma surrounding the Reds which the apologists have to deal with and have to understand.

So Nick, while you're involved in monitoring the Reds closely and trying to bring them into a better light, you'd have to convince a lot of people that you DO NOT agree with what they've done.

<snip>

I have already stated that i find this quite scandalous, if indeed they practice what the sticker says. Furthermore, due to the make up of the Red Shirts, which is not an army, but a multifaceted social mass movement which consists of numerous smaller and larger independent groups beyond the control of the UDD leadership (which means also most of the community radio stations), the here voiced criticism would only apply to the Red Shirts as a whole, if indeed such a Red only policy would be a stated and propagated policy by all groups, or a majority of them, especially also by the UDD leadership. I have already stated here that the UDD leadership has already at the beginning of the floods clearly said that they help all regardless of color. So has Sombat's independent Red Shirt affiliated group Red Sunday, and his Mirror Foundation is actively involved in relief work. Also, on the ground, i have said already, i have seen Red Shirts helping all, and working together with soldiers.

Again - this is a minority faction, most likely. Their stickers on the boats are scandalous. But first i would like to know if indeed they practice what their distasteful stickers say or if it was just an overeager stupid idea they do not follow up on on the ground before i pass any judgement.

<snip>

Once again... an avoidance of addressing the reoccurring sentiment voiced by ThaiOats'

They (the Red shirts) are accountable for any actions done by their people unless they admit that it was wrong and reprimand the people who've misrepresented them. Unless that's done, the negativity stays.

[Moruya]

Thai TV is now showing pictures of the now abandonned FROC centre at Don Muang with hundreds of packages of donated aid - food, clothing etc. Floating in the flood water. They are asking how this could possibly happen when they had 2 weeks' notice.

[nicknostitz]

Once again... an avoidance of addressing the reoccurring sentiment voiced by ThaiOats'

They (the Red shirts) are accountable for any actions done by their people unless they admit that it was wrong and reprimand the people who've misrepresented them. Unless that's done, the negativity stays.

And once again - the Red Shirts are a multifaceted social mass movement consisting of many independent groups that are not under the authority of the UDD leadership, but are to differing degrees affiliated with the UDD. That counts for most community Radio Stations, Sombat's Red Sunday, the groups that were formerly under the now dissolved Red Siam, and many other small groups.

For you the negativity stays regardless, whatever Red Shirts are doing.

[nicknostitz]

<snip>

Again - this is a minority faction, most likely. Their stickers on the boats are scandalous. But first i would like to know if indeed they practice what their distasteful stickers say or if it was just an overeager stupid idea they do not follow up on on the ground before i pass any judgement.

It is irrelevant what this group does on the ground. The fact that they have the stickers will mean that some people who need help will not ask for it.

If it was an overeager stupid idea, then someone in the group should have taken the stickers off.

Yes, i hope someone did take these stupid stickers off.

[TomnearCentral]

Once again... an avoidance of addressing the reoccurring sentiment voiced by ThaiOats'

They (the Red shirts) are accountable for any actions done by their people unless they admit that it was wrong and reprimand the people who've misrepresented them. Unless that's done, the negativity stays.

And once again - the Red Shirts are a multifaceted social mass movement consisting of many independent groups that are not under the authority of the UDD leadership, but are to differing degrees affiliated with the UDD. That counts for most community Radio Stations, Sombat's Red Sunday, the groups that were formerly under the now dissolved Red Siam, and many other small groups.

For you the negativity stays regardless, whatever Red Shirts are doing.

Maybe this has something to do with the fact that a lot of people (most importantly Thai and foreigner alike) really have great difficulties seeing all the positive aspects of the Red Shirt movement up to now?

Would you be so kind to just point out briefly a few of those major positive aspects of the Red Shirt movement? I and a lot of my Thai colleagues and friends have difficulties seeing those positive aspects that you mentioned and at least I would really appreciate it if you could highlight some of those to me so that I could better understand your position.

[Buchholz]

Once again... an avoidance of addressing the reoccurring sentiment voiced by ThaiOats'

They (the Red shirts) are accountable for any actions done by their people unless they admit that it was wrong and reprimand the people who've misrepresented them. Unless that's done, the negativity stays.

And once again - the Red Shirts are a multifaceted social mass movement consisting of many independent groups that are not under the authority of the UDD leadership, but are to differing degrees affiliated with the UDD. That counts for most community Radio Stations, Sombat's Red Sunday, the groups that were formerly under the now dissolved Red Siam, and many other small groups.

So then, it's impossible for any Red Shirt "faction" to condemn the acts of another Red Shirt "faction"... even one as divisive and idiotic as this episode? There are countless incidences where nothing was said about anything by any Red Shirt regarding misdeeds.

In this instance, it seems like such a rudimentary act that could improve their overall creditability. Until such time as someone takes responsibility and hold those reprehensible accountable.... as ThaiOats says, the

negativity stays for all the Red Shirt groups.

.

Edited October 30, 2011 by Buchholz

[whybother]

Thai TV is now showing pictures of the now abandonned FROC centre at Don Muang with hundreds of packages of donated aid - food, clothing etc. Floating in the flood water. They are asking how this could possibly happen when they had 2 weeks' notice.

Stubbornness. Face.

[cdnvic]

From now on every personal attack gets two weeks off (minimum).

You guys should know where the line is by now.

[nicknostitz]

Maybe this has something to do with the fact that a lot of people (most importantly Thai and foreigner alike) really have great difficulties seeing all the positive aspects of the Red Shirt movement up to now?

Would you be so kind to just point out briefly a few of those major positive aspects of the Red Shirt movement? I and a lot of my Thai colleagues and friends have difficulties seeing those positive aspects that you mentioned and at least I would really appreciate it if you could highlight some of those to me so that I could better understand your position.

On a whole, the Red Shirts have initiated a completely new discourse in Thai politics, leading to rapidly growing political consciousness in previously politically apathetic sectors of the population, questioning all aspects of the Thai state. A modern democracy needs a political awakened population, it needs a culture of debate and discussion, and that was before the Red Shirts not existing, politics then being mostly a game of different elites and vested interests.

That does not mean that the Red Shirts are always correct, or that the political development process is finished, far from it - the Red Shirts are often wrong, and there is much more development to take place. But the gates have finally be opened also in Thailand. Lets see what comes out of it.

In regard to this topic, i do find it encouraging that most of the Red Shirt groups have put politics aside for the time being, and use their formidable networks in flood relief, even working together with the military (disregarding the uniformed blather of Thanong in the article that initiated this discussion).

[koosdeboer]

Once again... an avoidance of addressing the reoccurring sentiment voiced by ThaiOats'

They (the Red shirts) are accountable for any actions done by their people unless they admit that it was wrong and reprimand the people who've misrepresented them. Unless that's done, the negativity stays.

And once again - the Red Shirts are a multifaceted social mass movement consisting of many independent groups that are not under the authority of the UDD leadership, but are to differing degrees affiliated with the UDD. That counts for most community Radio Stations, Sombat's Red Sunday, the groups that were formerly under the now dissolved Red Siam, and many other small groups.

For you the negativity stays regardless, whatever Red Shirts are doing.

The red shirts accuse the army of killing 90 people. Doesn't the army consist of many independent groups also?

This is what happens when you affiliate yourself with a group. I for myself, as many others I suppose, don't know everything about all this different red groups. What red group affiliation makes a red village or district? Or are this also different groups per village?

I know that there are many nice people in red shirts. I don't like the bad guyes. Throw them out please. Than I can support them also.