Pheu Thai And Red Shirts Do Nothing To Help Their Own

[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.

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.

.

I can't help it when the English language media is not reflecting the inner discourse of the Red Shirts, in Red Shirt publications and other communication networks such as Radio Stations, Webboards, etc, much criticism is regularly voiced by Red Shirts against other Red Shirt factions, different leaders are often attacked over questions of strategy, tactics and ideology.

[TomnearCentral]

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).

I am sorry, but you really believe that this has or will change due to the Red Shirt movement? Are you telling us that the current leadership is not also a elite and is not "playing" a game?

And if anything, they "helped" to create a huge separation in the country between the two different faction that are right now the Red Shirt followers and all others that do not agree with them.

Just in my humble opinion of course

[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.

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.

You can hardly compare the military and a social mass movement.

I would suggest to find out about the different Red Groups. Unfortunately it is not very easy to get this information from either the Bangkok Post or the Nation, the main channels of English language information here in Thailand. The fault lies entirely with its editors, and people like Thanong, who since years write utter rubbish on the political conflict here.

The Red Village movement is a very new phenomenon in the early stages of development. What can be clearly stated is that it is UDD affiliated, supported by most UDD leaders (not all though!), but so far an independent movement outside the authority of the UDD leadership.

[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.

I can't help it when the English language media is not reflecting the inner discourse of the Red Shirts, in Red Shirt publications and other communication networks such as Radio Stations, Webboards, etc, much criticism is regularly voiced by Red Shirts against other Red Shirt factions, different leaders are often attacked over questions of strategy, tactics and ideology.

Have there been instances whereby rather than criticize, any of the deplorable acts committed by a Red Shirt "faction", was publicly condemned by another Red Shirt "faction"?

Have there been instances where a majority of these factions resoundingly disavowed the acts committed by a Red Shirt group?

It would seem that with the Reds' ample public relations, if either of these happened, it would have made all media outlets across the spectrum, Thai and English media alike.

Instead, all we seem to hear are denials that "any" Red Shirt group did anything negative. Much more like sticking up for each other... which, in turn, naturally leads to the belief they are all together.

How hard would it be for any Red Shirt group to simply come out and say the stickers were wrong?

.

Edited October 30, 2011 by Buchholz

[nicknostitz]

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).

I am sorry, but you really believe that this has or will change due to the Red Shirt movement? Are you telling us that the current leadership is not also a elite and is not "playing" a game?

And if anything, they "helped" to create a huge separation in the country between the two different faction that are right now the Red Shirt followers and all others that do not agree with them.

Just in my humble opinion of course

It has changed already, and is still in a process of further change. The current parliamentary leadership is naturally consisting of many figures of the elites, and by far not all Puah Thai politicians are Red Shirts, or even like the Red Shirt movement.

A "separation" in Thailand has always existed, it was not though defined and brought into the open. A "separation" in society is also not anything that is to be seen negative. All democracies thrive on differing ideas, views and opinions. What is negative that Thailand still has huge difficulties to channel these differences into productive channels, such as debate instead of violence. More development in this regard is needed - by all sides.

[whybother]

<snip>

The Red Village movement is a very new phenomenon in the early stages of development. What can be clearly stated is that it is UDD affiliated, supported by most UDD leaders (not all though!), but so far an independent movement outside the authority of the UDD leadership.

Affiliated. Supported. But independent so that anything bad that they do can't reflect badly on the UDD.

[nicknostitz]

[

Have there been instances whereby rather than criticize, any of the deplorable acts committed by a Red Shirt "faction", was publicly condemned by another Red Shirt "faction"?

Have there been instances where a majority of these factions resoundingly disavowed the acts committed a Red Shirt group?

It would seem that with the Reds' ample public relations, if either of these happened, it would have made all media outlets across the spectrum, Thai and English media alike.

Instead, all we seem to hear are denials that "any" Red Shirt group did something negative.

.

Yes there have been many such instances. For example, during last years protests the UDD leadership has publicly disavowed Sae Daeng and Red Siam, and it has made the medias, even the Bangkok Post and the Nation. There were also many public conflicts between Daeng Siam and the UDD in the first months of 2011.

[animatic]

1319948016[/url]' post='4807466']

1319947400[/url]' post='4807427']

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).

I am sorry, but you really believe that this has or will change due to the Red Shirt movement? Are you telling us that the current leadership is not also a elite and is not "playing" a game?

And if anything, they "helped" to create a huge separation in the country between the two different faction that are right now the Red Shirt followers and all others that do not agree with them.

Just in my humble opinion of course

It won't change when the redshirt movement in general is under the firm guidance of an acquisitive elite itself. Sure you can find individual segments that imagine they are independent, but the hand holding the global red umbrella is clearly "elite" like it or not. This undermines their claims of grass roots independence in no uncertain way.

[animatic]

<br>

<br>[<br><br>Have there been instances whereby rather than criticize, any of the deplorable acts committed by a Red Shirt "faction", was publicly condemned by another Red Shirt "faction"? <br><br>Have there been instances where a majority of these factions resoundingly disavowed the acts committed a Red Shirt group?<br><br>It would seem that with the Reds' ample public relations, if either of these happened, it would have made all media outlets across the spectrum, Thai and English media alike.<br><br>Instead, all we seem to hear are denials that "any" Red Shirt group did something negative.<br><br>.<br>

<br><br><br>Yes there have been many such instances. For example, during last years protests the UDD leadership has publicly disavowed Sae Daeng and Red Siam, and it has made the medias, even the Bangkok Post and the Nation. There were also many public conflicts between Daeng Siam and the UDD in the first months of 2011.<br>

<br>Disavowed Sae Deang, but let him run their barricades defenses until his death?<br>What is thus, some weird twisting of Mission Impossible. <div>Mr. Phelpes the reds will disavow any knowledge of your  team.

</div>

[TomnearCentral]

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).

I am sorry, but you really believe that this has or will change due to the Red Shirt movement? Are you telling us that the current leadership is not also a elite and is not "playing" a game?

And if anything, they "helped" to create a huge separation in the country between the two different faction that are right now the Red Shirt followers and all others that do not agree with them.

Just in my humble opinion of course

It won't change when the redshirt movement in general is under the firm guidance of an acquisitive elite itself. Sure you can find individual segments that imagine they are independent, but the hand holding the global red umbrella is clearly "elite" like it or not. This undermines their claims of grass roots independence in no uncertain way.

Well, Nick told us that it has changed already, so I guess we have to take his word for it.

It just boggles my mind how somebody who is obviously very talented and spending a lot of time on the subject (most likely more than anybody on here) can be so "blind" to some of the most obvious facts.

But hey, I have just been reading and following the various discussions in which Nick was involved in the past and I know there is no way of convincing him to try to see certain very simple things from a more critical perspective.

[nicknostitz]

<br>

<br>[<br><br>Have there been instances whereby rather than criticize, any of the deplorable acts committed by a Red Shirt "faction", was publicly condemned by another Red Shirt "faction"? <br><br>Have there been instances where a majority of these factions resoundingly disavowed the acts committed a Red Shirt group?<br><br>It would seem that with the Reds' ample public relations, if either of these happened, it would have made all media outlets across the spectrum, Thai and English media alike.<br><br>Instead, all we seem to hear are denials that "any" Red Shirt group did something negative.<br><br>.<br>

<br><br><br>Yes there have been many such instances. For example, during last years protests the UDD leadership has publicly disavowed Sae Daeng and Red Siam, and it has made the medias, even the Bangkok Post and the Nation. There were also many public conflicts between Daeng Siam and the UDD in the first months of 2011.<br>

<br>Disavowed Sae Deang, but let him run their barricades defenses until his death?<br>What is thus, some weird twisting of Mission Impossible. <div>Mr. Phelpes the reds will disavow any knowledge of your  team.

</div>

It was not a question of "let him run the barricades" - he did it. To go into details here would derail the topic way too far.

[Buchholz]

Have there been instances whereby rather than criticize, any of the deplorable acts committed by a Red Shirt "faction", was publicly condemned by another Red Shirt "faction"?

Have there been instances where a majority of these factions resoundingly disavowed the acts committed by a Red Shirt group?

It would seem that with the Reds' ample public relations, if either of these happened, it would have made all media outlets across the spectrum, Thai and English media alike.

Instead, all we seem to hear are denials that "any" Red Shirt group did anything negative. Much more like sticking up for each other... which, in turn, naturally leads to the belief they are all together.

How hard would it be for any Red Shirt group to simply come out and say the stickers were wrong?

Yes there have been many such instances. For example, during last years protests the UDD leadership has publicly disavowed Sae Daeng and Red Siam, and it has made the medias, even the Bangkok Post and the Nation. There were also many public conflicts between Daeng Siam and the UDD in the first months of 2011.

And yet Sae Daeng was allowed to remain at the forefront of the Red Shirt movement up until his death.

Specifically regarding actions of Red Shirts and not simply philosopicial differences, have there been instances of public condemnation, for example, did any Red Shirt faction decry the Red Shirt act of splattering HIV-contaminated blood around Bangkok?

.

Edited October 30, 2011 by Buchholz

[animatic]

1319948889[/url]' post='4807529']

1319948578[/url]' post='4807514']

1319948016[/url]' post='4807466']

1319947400[/url]' post='4807427']

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).

I am sorry, but you really believe that this has or will change due to the Red Shirt movement? Are you telling us that the current leadership is not also a elite and is not "playing" a game?

And if anything, they "helped" to create a huge separation in the country between the two different faction that are right now the Red Shirt followers and all others that do not agree with them.

Just in my humble opinion of course

It won't change when the redshirt movement in general is under the firm guidance of an acquisitive elite itself. Sure you can find individual segments that imagine they are independent, but the hand holding the global red umbrella is clearly "elite" like it or not. This undermines their claims of grass roots independence in no uncertain way.

Well, Nick told us that it has changed already, so I guess we have to take his word for it.

It just boggles my mind how somebody who is obviously very talented and spending a lot of time on the subject (most likely more than anybody on here) can be so "blind" to some of the most obvious facts.

But hey, I have just been reading and following the various discussions in which Nick was involved in the past and I know there is no way of convincing him to try to see certain very simple things from a more critical perspective.

It could be simply getting too close to the subject. Even something such as Stockholm Syndrome; stressful situations causing a bonding.. Just examples of how this can happen. Sympathetic entrainment closing off absolute objectivity, has long been been an issue, such as the objections to" embedding reporters" during Desert Storm. Not saying thus is the case, but only a possible explanation. Newspapers can have editorial opinions, reporters are not immune from having their own 'worn on sleeve' opinions.

Edited October 30, 2011 by animatic

[nicknostitz]

Well, Nick told us that it has changed already, so I guess we have to take his word for it.

It just boggles my mind how somebody who is obviously very talented and spending a lot of time on the subject (most likely more than anybody on here) can be so "blind" to some of the most obvious facts.

But hey, I have just been reading and following the various discussions in which Nick was involved in the past and I know there is no way of convincing him to try to see certain very simple things from a more critical perspective.

I am not blind at all to criticism of the Red Shirts, i have done so on numerous occasions (and have been attacked for it by more than a few radical Red Shirt supporters in the cyberword). I do not ignore informed criticism at all, i am just allergic to propaganda, rumors, and third hand "information" disguised as "criticism".

[Buchholz]

<snip>

The Red Village movement is a very new phenomenon in the early stages of development. What can be clearly stated is that it is UDD affiliated, supported by most UDD leaders (not all though!), but so far an independent movement outside the authority of the UDD leadership.

Affiliated. Supported. But independent so that anything bad that they do can't reflect badly on the UDD.

Which historically seems to be the common "out" for the Red Shirts.

[nicknostitz]

It could be getting to close to the subject. Even something such as Stockholm Syndrome. Just examples of how this can happen.Sympathetic entrainment closing of absolute objectivity, has long been been an issue, such as the objections to" embedding reporters" during Desert Storm. Not saying thus is the case, but only a possible explanation. Newspapers can have editorial opinions reporters are not immune from having their own worn on sleeve opinions.

That theory would hold validity if i would only spend my time with Red Shirts. Which i don't - i spent more time than most with the Yellow Shirts and their affiliated groups (as my photos can prove), and i spend much time with the military as well.

Can we stop please discussing "me", and return to the subject.

[animatic]

1319949095[/url]' post='4807537']

1319948858[/url]' post='4807527']

1319948527[/url]">1319948527</a>' post='<a href="tel:4807511">4807511</a>']<br>

1319948099[/url]">1319948099</a>' post='<a href="tel:4807473">4807473</a>']<br>[<br><br>Have there been instances whereby rather than criticize, any of the deplorable acts committed by a Red Shirt "faction", was publicly condemned by another Red Shirt "faction"? <br><br>Have there been instances where a majority of these factions resoundingly disavowed the acts committed a Red Shirt group?<br><br>It would seem that with the Reds' ample public relations, if either of these happened, it would have made all media outlets across the spectrum, Thai and English media alike.<br><br>Instead, all we seem to hear are denials that "any" Red Shirt group did something negative.<br><br>.<br>

<br><br><br>Yes there have been many such instances. For example, during last years protests the UDD leadership has publicly disavowed Sae Daeng and Red Siam, and it has made the medias, even the Bangkok Post and the Nation. There were also many public conflicts between Daeng Siam and the UDD in the first months of 2011.<br>

<br>Disavowed Sae Deang, but let him run their barricades defenses until his death?<br>What is thus, some weird twisting of Mission Impossible. <div>Mr. Phelpes the reds will disavow any knowledge of your  team.

</div>

It was not a question of "let him run the barricades" - he did it. To go into details here would derail the topic way too far.

Ah, so it was nothing more than anarchy behind the barricades. Good to know.

[animatic]

1319949590[/url]' post='4807575']

1319949362[/url]' post='4807568']

It could be getting to close to the subject. Even something such as Stockholm Syndrome. Just examples of how this can happen.Sympathetic entrainment closing of absolute objectivity, has long been been an issue, such as the objections to" embedding reporters" during Desert Storm. Not saying thus is the case, but only a possible explanation. Newspapers can have editorial opinions reporters are not immune from having their own worn on sleeve opinions.

That theory would hold validity if i would only spend my time with Red Shirts. Which i don't - i spent more time than most with the Yellow Shirts and their affiliated groups (as my photos can prove), and i spend much time with the military as well.

Can we stop please discussing "me", and return to the subject.

I was discussing hypotheticals potentially effecting content. Leaving in the previous posters question, would have made that more clear here.

Edited October 30, 2011 by animatic

[DocN]

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.

You want to compare the Army with a political organisation?

Ok....if a General tells a soldier to shoot- the soldier shoots! It's called "an order"!

If the leader of the polotical party that I was a member of, back in Germany, would have told me to "shoot"...I would have told him to shove it! That is called "a free will" or "freedom of opinion"! See the difference?

[MikeOboe57]

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??

[...]

Here's your 6mm SIG Sauer sniper rifle...

6mm SIG Sauer

Would be very hard work to remove someone's head with that.

Nice try anyway, some redshirt apologists might fall for it.

Cheers

Edit: Typo

Edited October 30, 2011 by MikeOboe57

[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.

You want to compare the Army with a political organisation?

Ok....if a General tells a soldier to shoot- the soldier shoots! It's called "an order"!

If the leader of the polotical party that I was a member of, back in Germany, would have told me to "shoot"...I would have told him to shove it! That is called "a free will" or "freedom of opinion"! See the difference?

Nick had answered my question already and he was more polite than you. I also respect him more than you because he is not afraid to use his real name.

If you have an opinion be not afraid to tell who you are. (See the difference?)

[ivowatson]

"i am just allergic to propaganda, rumors, and third hand "information" disguised as "criticism"."

You're a funny guy but i still feel sorry for you. Keep up the good work and be careful in the water. I's a big cruel world.

[serenitynow]

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...

Hi Nick,

You've previously stated that the aim of your work is to document the ongoing Yellow/Red divide in this country and you're not hiding you've disclosed your sympathies which can only allow people to give your work more credibility. Have you ever considered that what REALLY might distinguish your work from many others who tend to be one sided in their opinions, is if you gave some insight into all the myriad divisions within the Red Shirt movement itself. You may find this could lead to a general enlightenment and less division of opinion. Especially if you were to highlight and discredit those factions that serve to undermine what I'm sure you feel is a righteous people's movement. The risk to you is that some of your inside sources may trust you less, but the gain is that your wider readership may come to understand the grievances, goals and aspirations of the movement more. Up to you as they say.

[serenitynow]

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.

.

I can't help it when the English language media is not reflecting the inner discourse of the Red Shirts, in Red Shirt publications and other communication networks such as Radio Stations, Webboards, etc, much criticism is regularly voiced by Red Shirts against other Red Shirt factions, different leaders are often attacked over questions of strategy, tactics and ideology.

You can help it if YOU'RE not writing about it though, can't you?

[DocN]

You want to compare the Army with a political organisation?

Ok....if a General tells a soldier to shoot- the soldier shoots! It's called "an order"!

If the leader of the polotical party that I was a member of, back in Germany, would have told me to "shoot"...I would have told him to shove it! That is called "a free will" or "freedom of opinion"! See the difference?

"Nick had answered my question already and he was more polite than you. I also respect him more than you because he is not afraid to use his real name.

If you have an opinion be not afraid to tell who you are. (See the difference?)"

No, I don't! But please enlighten me...why does it make any difference, if I use a nickname or my real one? Does it make answers and facts more credible? Or do you wanna write me a letter?

[koosdeboer]

You want to compare the Army with a political organisation?

Ok....if a General tells a soldier to shoot- the soldier shoots! It's called "an order"!

If the leader of the polotical party that I was a member of, back in Germany, would have told me to "shoot"...I would have told him to shove it! That is called "a free will" or "freedom of opinion"! See the difference?

"Nick had answered my question already and he was more polite than you. I also respect him more than you because he is not afraid to use his real name.

If you have an opinion be not afraid to tell who you are. (See the difference?)"

No, I don't! But please enlighten me...why does it make any difference, if I use a nickname or my real one? Does it make answers and facts more credible? Or do you wanna write me a letter?

No thanks

[rubl]

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?

Totally irrelevant.

[TAWP]

So Nick and others, if those small radio-stations - spewing vile propaganda and lies - aren't representative of UDD and Red Shirts, alright.

Then tell me, who is? Is Jutaporn, Red Shirt leader and PT MP? Turn your TV to channel Voice TV now and it shows him being out by people close to flooding, doing propaganda speeches from the back of a truck/improvised stage. Is he representative?

[nicknostitz]

So Nick and others, if those small radio-stations - spewing vile propaganda and lies - aren't representative of UDD and Red Shirts, alright.

Then tell me, who is? Is Jutaporn, Red Shirt leader and PT MP? Turn your TV to channel Voice TV now and it shows him being out by people close to flooding, doing propaganda speeches from the back of a truck/improvised stage. Is he representative?

Basically they are all "Red Shirts" or part of the 'Red Shirt movement'.

The Red Shirt movement consists of several independent groups. The largest group is the UDD, of which Jatuporn, Nattawut, etc are the main leaders. Until last year, together with about 20 something leaders formed the central committee of the UDD, with Veera Musikapong as their chairman. This set up has collapsed after the crackdown. In December 2010 the new acting central committee was formed, with Tida Thawornset as a chairwoman, and several other leaders as committee members. Nevertheless, while Jaturporn, Nattawut and Dr. Weng have no "official" position in the Red Shirt leadership - the are though the most loved leaders.

Besides the UDD the Red Shirts have many independent subgroups of varying size, such as Sombat's Red Sunday, The 24th of June Group, or what was formerly known as Daeng Siam, or Red Siam, who have split from the UDD after the 2009 crackdown, have now though been as a group dissolved, are though still existing as an alliance of sub groups. All these groups are not under the authority of the UDD leadership, work though in differing degrees, and depending on occasion together.

The Radio station are more complex, especially regarding their relationship with the UDD. There are also different models of the Radio Stations, which have been developed quite a bit from the early models of Shinawat Habunprad's Taxi Radio Station, Kwanchai's Udon Lovers or the also under Red Shirts highly disputed Chiangmai 51. There are also huge numbers of grassroots organizations which are to varying degrees close to the UDD, or directly under UDD hierarchy. There is no simple model though.

A new development are the Red Shirt villages, where it is yet too early to state too much about them, other than that this is mostly grass roots grown organization. Nevertheless, this movement has its own sort of leadership, but their structures are still in development. While PT party MP's and Red Shirt leaders have been at opening ceremonies, they are still quite adamant that they are not under UDD authority. One of their initiators has told me once that they will collaborate with the UDD when they feel that it is the right thing to do so, but when they don't feel so - they will not.

Basically - the Red Shirt movement is far larger and more complex than many think it is, and their relationship with Pueah Thai Party is even more complicated. There are huge differences in Ideology, tactics or strategy. What though combines all Red Shirts is their wish for democracy, the parliamentary system, to bring the military under the control of elected governments, and the end the power of what they define as "Amart" - the traditional elites.

That is it as brief as i can manage.

Edited October 30, 2011 by nicknostitz

[TAWP]

Thank you Nick for that. I am still not sure who we can say 'represents' Red Shirts, if they were to do something bad (or good), without being accused of trying to paint the whole group in an unfair light.