We Lost To Evil: Rally Leader

[ttelise]

Lost not to a evil leader..but to a stupid cause...people are fed up...

Who cares about the people? Money talks.

The people believe (more than 60%) that corruption is OK. They got what they voted for, they got what they believe in. Who can complain?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect App

Precisely the reason why all the little TV minions should to stop whining and sthu.

Are you including yourself in that statement?

Haha, nice try, but I have not articulated any complaints about any political party in power.

[rixalex]

Nice, so now you are the self-appointed arbiter of who has standing to complain about anything political. I am sure every one will heed that pronouncement.

Not anything political. Just on the matter of protest groups, and specifically the people here who have spent the last two years arguing why the protests of 2010 were justified, and who now perform majestic pirouettes in thinking and act with outrage at a group that dared undertake a protest that barely lasted half a day. Please heed away.

[jayboy]

I am not trying to link specific Democrats to the Siam Pitak rally though I'm sure many attended.I am saying that Siam Pitak included many of the same people and groups as PAD.The relationship between leading Democrats and PAD is matter of record.The common denominator is not just a hatred of Thaksin but a fear of the implications of a genuinely democratic Thailand.

And yes they serve much the same constituency (I'm not really in the business of educating you how the English language is employed,but my use of the word 'constituency' is both precise and accurate.

You are 'sure' many attended but I am sure you couldn't name one. Just muckraking again.

http://oxforddiction...?q=constituency

I assume the OED meets your standards

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect App

.

I could name several.My neighbour is one.Who on earth do you think most of the Pitak Siam rally attenders voted for in the last election ? Duh!

No more please on the 'constituency' matter.I can't deal with it!

According to your logic, the PS are all yellow shirts and therefore voted 'No'.

// French language removed, this is an English language forum //

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect App

God it's hard work sometimes.I didn't say all PS supporters were yellow shirts, though many of them would have been. I said that many of them would have voted Democrat.They are the same constituency.

[Moruya]

Nice, so now you are the self-appointed arbiter of who has standing to complain about anything political. I am sure every one will heed that pronouncement.

Not anything political. Just on the matter of protest groups, and specifically the people here who have spent the last two years arguing why the protests of 2010 were justified, and who now perform majestic pirouettes in thinking and act with outrage at a group that dared undertake a protest that barely lasted half a day. Please heed away.

I must applaud your term 'majestic pirouettes'. Very descriptive and conjures up an accurate vision of the acts underway.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect App

[jayboy]

Nice, so now you are the self-appointed arbiter of who has standing to complain about anything political. I am sure every one will heed that pronouncement.

Not anything political. Just on the matter of protest groups, and specifically the people here who have spent the last two years arguing why the protests of 2010 were justified, and who now perform majestic pirouettes in thinking and act with outrage at a group that dared undertake a protest that barely lasted half a day. Please heed away.

Inappropriate moral equivalence.The redshirts ,however flawed, represented democratic values and progress.The Pitak Siam fascists represented reaction and a hatred of democracy.Not comparable

[Moruya]

God it's hard work sometimes.I didn't say all PS supporters were yellow shirts, though many of them would have bee.I said that many of them would have voted Democrat.They are the same constituency.

Can you draw a Venn diagram of your hypothetical constituency and PM me?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect App

[jayboy]

I am not trying to link specific Democrats to the Siam Pitak rally though I'm sure many attended.I am saying that Siam Pitak included many of the same people and groups as PAD.The relationship between leading Democrats and PAD is matter of record.The common denominator is not just a hatred of Thaksin but a fear of the implications of a genuinely democratic Thailand.

And yes they serve much the same constituency (I'm not really in the business of educating you how the English language is employed,but my use of the word 'constituency' is both precise and accurate.

You are 'sure' many attended but I am sure you couldn't name one. Just muckraking again.

http://oxforddiction...?q=constituency

I assume the OED meets your standards

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect App

.

I could name several.My neighbour is one.Who on earth do you think most of the Pitak Siam rally attenders voted for in the last election ? Duh!

No more please on the 'constituency' matter.I can't deal with it!

Now, now jayboy you being so much more intelligent and smarter that the rest of us old uneducated guys I know you can deal with it.

Actually i can't.I can deal with different views.I can accept I am sometimes wrong.I can accept that I should sometimes look at thing a different way.I can accept that I may be too soft on the redshirts.But old fashioned thickness is hard to deal with, innit?

[Moruya]

Actually i can't.I can deal with different views.I can accept I am sometimes wrong.I can accept that I should sometimes look at thing a different way.I can accept that I may be too soft on the redshirts.But old fashioned thickness is hard to deal with, innit?

I never said you were thick.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect App

[rixalex]

The redshirts ,however flawed, represented democratic values and progress.The Pitak Siam fascists represented reaction and a hatred of democracy.Not comparable

Whatever you believe the respective groups represent - and frankly i think your ideas, particularly about the redshirts are quite ridiculous, but there you go - neither group speaks for or spoke for the nation, and neither group has / had the right to take over Bangkok, create mayhem and make demands. If you support / defend one group's right to do that, but not the other, you are a hypocrite who flip flops on what is right and what is wrong dependant on the circumstance you happen to favour.

[Noistar]

1 million? 12,000 turned up? let's hope it's over - the Police actually did an excellent job for once

Sledgehammer to crack a nut.

What did the police acheive?

A prevention of violence or a prevention of a political rally against the government.

Good job Thailand isn't nuclear capable. Would guarantee there will be no violent demonstrations (well at least not against PT)

[Thai at Heart]

The redshirts ,however flawed, represented democratic values and progress.The Pitak Siam fascists represented reaction and a hatred of democracy.Not comparable

Whatever you believe the respective groups represent - and frankly i think your ideas, particularly about the redshirts are quite ridiculous, but there you go - neither group speaks for or spoke for the nation, and neither group has / had the right to take over Bangkok, create mayhem and make demands. If you support / defend one group's right to do that, but not the other, you are a hypocrite who flip flops on what is right and what is wrong dependant on the circumstance you happen to favour.

Well doing groups taking over bangkok and demanding stuff has to start somewhere.

Maybe it was yesterday?

[tonbridgebrit]

The redshirts ,however flawed, represented democratic values and progress.The Pitak Siam fascists represented reaction and a hatred of democracy.Not comparable

Whatever you believe the respective groups represent - and frankly i think your ideas, particularly about the redshirts are quite ridiculous, but there you go - neither group speaks for or spoke for the nation, and neither group has / had the right to take over Bangkok, create mayhem and make demands. If you support / defend one group's right to do that, but not the other, you are a hypocrite who flip flops on what is right and what is wrong dependant on the circumstance you happen to favour.

Yes, but, we've got to bear in mind that the red shirts were able to draw a big crowd. Is that because lots of people actually supported them ??

As for the guys in this present demonstration, well, they've failed to draw in a big crowd. Is that because most Thais don't actually support this particular group ??

And the red shirts, well, their party did actually win a democratic election later on. Why can't this latest group wait for the next election, and see if they can win an election ?

They won't do that, is that because they know that no way is any political group going to beat the red shirt party ?

And is that because the red shirt party actually represents a group of voters that make up the biggest single voting block in Thailand ?

I think most people in Thailand are actually part of the rural and urban poor !

[DocN]

PS: we will be coming with 1 Million demonstrators! (100.000...500.000...whatever!)

GVT: okay...we bring out the police in full force!

PS: we want a coup!

GVT: fine...we enforce the ISA and search every car that comes into Bangkok!

PS: we will cut through barbed wire and attack the police and we want to get to the rally- site, any way we like!

GVT: okay...her is some teargas!

You handed it to the Government on a silver tray!

You didn't lose to evel!

You lost through stupidity!

[jayboy]

The redshirts ,however flawed, represented democratic values and progress.The Pitak Siam fascists represented reaction and a hatred of democracy.Not comparable

Whatever you believe the respective groups represent - and frankly i think your ideas, particularly about the redshirts are quite ridiculous, but there you go - neither group speaks for or spoke for the nation, and neither group has / had the right to take over Bangkok, create mayhem and make demands. If you support / defend one group's right to do that, but not the other, you are a hypocrite who flip flops on what is right and what is wrong dependant on the circumstance you happen to favour.

I agree with some of this.Neither group spoke for the nation - that can only be determined in a general election.But the fact remains one group commanded huge support and was linked with a party than obtained a clear mandate from the Thai people.The other was Pitak Siam.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect App

[Moruya]

The redshirts ,however flawed, represented democratic values and progress.The Pitak Siam fascists represented reaction and a hatred of democracy.Not comparable

Whatever you believe the respective groups represent - and frankly i think your ideas, particularly about the redshirts are quite ridiculous, but there you go - neither group speaks for or spoke for the nation, and neither group has / had the right to take over Bangkok, create mayhem and make demands. If you support / defend one group's right to do that, but not the other, you are a hypocrite who flip flops on what is right and what is wrong dependant on the circumstance you happen to favour.

Yes, but, we've got to bear in mind that the red shirts were able to draw a big crowd. Is that because lots of people actually supported them ??

As for the guys in this present demonstration, well, they've failed to draw in a big crowd. Is that because most Thais don't actually support this particular group ??

And the red shirts, well, their party did actually win a democratic election later on. Why can't this latest group wait for the next election, and see if they can win an election ?

They won't do that, is that because they know that no way is any political group going to beat the red shirt party ?

And is that because the red shirt party actually represents a group of voters that make up the biggest single voting block in Thailand ?

I think most people in Thailand are actually part of the rural and urban poor !

According to MCOT there were 50,000 there.

Can't remember the most recent turn outs of the UDD but not very many were there.

Same thing with the million man march with a million litres of petrol to set Bangkok on fire. Not many there

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect App

[Thai at Heart]

PS: we will be coming with 1 Million demonstrators! (100.000...500.000...whatever!)

GVT: okay...we bring out the police in full force!

PS: we want a coup!

GVT: fine...we enforce the ISA and search every car that comes into Bangkok!

PS: we will cut through barbed wire and attack the police and we want to get to the rally- site, any way we like!

GVT: okay...her is some teargas!

You handed it to the Government on a silver tray!

You didn't lose to evel!

You lost through stupidity!

Absolutely correct.

[LomSak27]

Thanksgiving is over, Xmas, right around the corner, where does the time go. Protest rally in bangkok, eh, so thats what those flyers were about;

'We Won't Wait For Santa Claus'

[Zatoichi]

People may take my post as they please. However, please note, that I only said that the quote came to mind when I read the article. Not that I compare the issues.

Had the red shirts been truly a oppressed group, and not just a mercenary terrorist organisation, they would have spawned a leader organically. Someone from the common man rank and file, with a gift for eloquence who's words crystallized the struggles, and the yearning to be free, of their people. That person would have then lead the red shirt movement from the front line, not fearing any one or any thing, having already come to terms with the very good possibility of martyrdom. He or she would have lead them in peaceful protest, with a clear and defined agenda that spelled out peace with dignity and inclusion.

But no, the red shirts have a cowardly, greedy, cold blooded, criminal financier that pays off what unscrupulous savages he can, and has his minions terrorise everyone else, while he pulls the strings from afar hiding behind his empty headed, semi-illiterate, kid sister.

Hence why I believe the General and his people are fighting the good fight, and like Dr. Kings quote says "Right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant"

Edited November 25, 2012 by Zatoichi

[Thai at Heart]

People may take my post as they please, however note that I only said that the quote came to mind when I read the article. Not that I compare the issues thusly.

Had the red shirts been truly a oppressed group, and not just a mercenary terrorist organisation, the would have spawned a leader organically Someone from the common man rank and file, with a gift for eloquence who's words crystallized the struggles, and the yearning to be free, of their people. That person would have then lead the red shirt movement from the front line, not fearing any one or any thing, having already come to terms with the very good possibility of martyrdom. He or she would have lead them in peaceful protest with a clear and defined agenda that spelled out peace with dignity and inclusion.

But no, the red shirts have a cowardly, greedy, cold blooded, criminal financier that pays off what unscrupulous savages he can, and has his minions terrorist everyone else, while he pulls the strings from afar hiding behind his empty headed, semi-illiterate, kid sister.

Hence why I believe the General and his people are fighting the good fight, and like Dr. Kings quote says "Right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant"

Neither side is fighting the good fight. They are self serving political organizations.

[rixalex]

The redshirts ,however flawed, represented democratic values and progress.The Pitak Siam fascists represented reaction and a hatred of democracy.Not comparable

Whatever you believe the respective groups represent - and frankly i think your ideas, particularly about the redshirts are quite ridiculous, but there you go - neither group speaks for or spoke for the nation, and neither group has / had the right to take over Bangkok, create mayhem and make demands. If you support / defend one group's right to do that, but not the other, you are a hypocrite who flip flops on what is right and what is wrong dependant on the circumstance you happen to favour.

I agree with some of this.Neither group spoke for the nation - that can only be determined in a general election.But the fact remains one group commanded huge support and was linked with a party than obtained a clear mandate from the Thai people.The other was Pitak Siam.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect App

Yes agreed. But protesting rights are not variable or changeable dependent on size of popularity. Protesting rights in a democracy are equal, be it one man protesting for himself or be it millions of people protesting for themselves.

[jayboy]

People may take my post as they please. However, please note, that I only said that the quote came to mind when I read the article. Not that I compare the issues.

Had the red shirts been truly a oppressed group, and not just a mercenary terrorist organisation, they would have spawned a leader organically. Someone from the common man rank and file, with a gift for eloquence who's words crystallized the struggles, and the yearning to be free, of their people. That person would have then lead the red shirt movement from the front line, not fearing any one or any thing, having already come to terms with the very good possibility of martyrdom. He or she would have lead them in peaceful protest, with a clear and defined agenda that spelled out peace with dignity and inclusion.

But no, the red shirts have a cowardly, greedy, cold blooded, criminal financier that pays off what unscrupulous savages he can, and has his minions terrorise everyone else, while he pulls the strings from afar hiding behind his empty headed, semi-illiterate, kid sister.

Hence why I believe the General and his people are fighting the good fight, and like Dr. Kings quote says "Right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant"

Except it's not a discussion about Thaksin and the florid language you use indicates you have difficulty in striking a reasonable balance.I have reservations about THaksin too but he was undoubtedly a catalyst, and remains by far the most popular male politician in the country.I am uncomfortable about treating the views of millions of Thais with such scorn (or retreat into the absurd copout that they have been brainwashed or "brought.)"You, perhaps oblivious of the obvious consequences, invoked the memory of Dr King and I responded with the reminder he would without doubt have been on the side of the redshirts: you half seem to be suggesting that you are too but you can't quite get round to saying it.

Edited November 25, 2012 by jayboy

[Scott]

A post with an oversized picture has been deleted as well as replies to that post.

Oversized pictures cause formatting problems and make it very difficult to read the thread.

[binjalin]

People may take my post as they please. However, please note, that I only said that the quote came to mind when I read the article. Not that I compare the issues.

Had the red shirts been truly a oppressed group, and not just a mercenary terrorist organisation, they would have spawned a leader organically. Someone from the common man rank and file, with a gift for eloquence who's words crystallized the struggles, and the yearning to be free, of their people. That person would have then lead the red shirt movement from the front line, not fearing any one or any thing, having already come to terms with the very good possibility of martyrdom. He or she would have lead them in peaceful protest, with a clear and defined agenda that spelled out peace with dignity and inclusion.

But no, the red shirts have a cowardly, greedy, cold blooded, criminal financier that pays off what unscrupulous savages he can, and has his minions terrorise everyone else, while he pulls the strings from afar hiding behind his empty headed, semi-illiterate, kid sister.

Hence why I believe the General and his people are fighting the good fight, and like Dr. Kings quote says "Right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant"

nonsense and this is about PT not necessarily the red shirts OR Thaksin

[Buchholz]

Those of you who think this was nothing to do with the Dems obviously didn't watch the show co-hosted by the Suthep on Blue Sky last night

Do you have some quotes to share?

.

[Zatoichi]

People may take my post as they please. However, please note, that I only said that the quote came to mind when I read the article. Not that I compare the issues.

Had the red shirts been truly a oppressed group, and not just a mercenary terrorist organisation, they would have spawned a leader organically. Someone from the common man rank and file, with a gift for eloquence who's words crystallized the struggles, and the yearning to be free, of their people. That person would have then lead the red shirt movement from the front line, not fearing any one or any thing, having already come to terms with the very good possibility of martyrdom. He or she would have lead them in peaceful protest, with a clear and defined agenda that spelled out peace with dignity and inclusion.

But no, the red shirts have a cowardly, greedy, cold blooded, criminal financier that pays off what unscrupulous savages he can, and has his minions terrorise everyone else, while he pulls the strings from afar hiding behind his empty headed, semi-illiterate, kid sister.

Hence why I believe the General and his people are fighting the good fight, and like Dr. Kings quote says "Right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant"

Except it's not a discussion about Thaksin and the florid language you use indicates you have difficulty in striking a reasonable balance.I have reservations about THaksin too but he was undoubtedly a catalyst, and remains by far the most popular male politician in the country.I am uncomfortable about treating the views of millions of Thais with such scorn (or retreat into the absurd copout that they have been brainwashed or "brought.)"You, perhaps oblivious of the obvious consequences, invoked the memory of Dr King and I responded with the reminder he would without doubt have been on the side of the redshirts: you half seem to be suggesting that you are too but you can't quite get round to saying it.

Then by all means let me clarify. I am in no way behind the red shirts in any way shape or form. I respect the monarchy, I live in and love Bangkok.

Before Taksin, I don't think there was significant cause for revolt amongst Thailand's rural people. Lest a real leader, like someone with the qualities I mentioned earlier, would have developed and succeeded. What the red shirts are is a revolting perversion of a "For the people" movement, nothing more than mercenaries and greedy scum lured by a vacuum of power and the promises of free handouts. As for what Dr. King would say, or do, or feel, whom he might side with if any, I can't claim to say. He was a better man than I in that way and I won't try and put hypothetical words in the man's mouth.

[jayboy]

Then by all means let me clarify. I am in no way behind the red shirts in any way shape or form. I respect the monarchy, I live in and love Bangkok.

Before Taksin, I don't think there was significant cause for revolt amongst Thailand's rural people. Lest a real leader, like someone with the qualities I mentioned earlier, would have developed and succeeded. What the red shirts are is a revolting perversion of a "For the people" movement, nothing more than mercenaries and greedy scum lured by a vacuum of power and the promises of free handouts. As for what Dr. King would say, or do, or feel, whom he might side with if any, I can't claim to say. He was a better man than I in that way and I won't try and put hypothetical words in the man's mouth.

Noted your views that the redshirts are :

"a revolting perversion of a "For the people" movement, nothing more than mercenaries and greedy scum lured by a vacuum of power and the promises of free handouts." Not really any need for me to discuss further and with these words you define yourself clearly.

As for Dr King you appear to be saying you are not familiar enough with his life and work to express an informed opinion.Let me then enllghten you.Without a shadow of a doubt he would have been a supporter of the Thai redshirt movement.

[Scott]

Since when did someone decide this thread is about the Red Shirts?

Stay on-topic.

[Moruya]

People may take my post as they please. However, please note, that I only said that the quote came to mind when I read the article. Not that I compare the issues.

Had the red shirts been truly a oppressed group, and not just a mercenary terrorist organisation, they would have spawned a leader organically. Someone from the common man rank and file, with a gift for eloquence who's words crystallized the struggles, and the yearning to be free, of their people. That person would have then lead the red shirt movement from the front line, not fearing any one or any thing, having already come to terms with the very good possibility of martyrdom. He or she would have lead them in peaceful protest, with a clear and defined agenda that spelled out peace with dignity and inclusion.

But no, the red shirts have a cowardly, greedy, cold blooded, criminal financier that pays off what unscrupulous savages he can, and has his minions terrorise everyone else, while he pulls the strings from afar hiding behind his empty headed, semi-illiterate, kid sister.

Hence why I believe the General and his people are fighting the good fight, and like Dr. Kings quote says "Right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant"

Except it's not a discussion about Thaksin and the florid language you use indicates you have difficulty in striking a reasonable balance.I have reservations about THaksin too but he was undoubtedly a catalyst, and remains by far the most popular male politician in the country.I am uncomfortable about treating the views of millions of Thais with such scorn (or retreat into the absurd copout that they have been brainwashed or "brought.)"You, perhaps oblivious of the obvious consequences, invoked the memory of Dr King and I responded with the reminder he would without doubt have been on the side of the redshirts: you half seem to be suggesting that you are too but you can't quite get round to saying it.

Brought?

Tut tut.

I think your comments on Mister King do him a posthumous disservice. I can't for the life of me see him as a Thaksin minion

[jayboy]

I think your comments on Mister King do him a posthumous disservice. I can't for the life of me see him as a Thaksin minion

Indeed. I think it is quite possibly the most idiotic and disgusting comment I've seen on this forum. The Thaksin minions have really been going in to overdrive the past couple days in their propaganda war on the issue of this protest.

Back to the topic - the Pitak Siam leader's comment was that "they lost to evil".Part of the trouble with the political conflict in Thailand is that it tends too often to be seen as a struggle between absolute good and absolute evil, in Manichaean terms if you like.I'm not sure that one side is worse than the other and, looking forward, I believe Thais on both sides should tone down the rhetoric.I'm fascinated that my reference to Dr King can be described by a presumably sane person as "the most idiotic and disgusting comment I've seen on the forum".Nobody suggested that Dr King would have been a minion of Thaksin:he would not have been a minion of anyone.However based on knowledge of his politics, his sympathy for the repressed and general humanity he would without a doubt felt at home with the best of the redshirt movement.

[Moruya]

I think your comments on Mister King do him a posthumous disservice. I can't for the life of me see him as a Thaksin minion

Indeed. I think it is quite possibly the most idiotic and disgusting comment I've seen on this forum. The Thaksin minions have really been going in to overdrive the past couple days in their propaganda war on the issue of this protest.

Back to the topic - the Pitak Siam leader's comment was that "they lost to evil".Part of the trouble with the political conflict in Thailand is that it tends too often to be seen as a struggle between absolute good and absolute evil, in Manichaean terms if you like.I'm not sure that one side is worse than the other and, looking forward, I believe Thais on both sides should tone down the rhetoric.I'm fascinated that my reference to Dr King can be described by a presumably sane person as "the most idiotic and disgusting comment I've seen on the forum".Nobody suggested that Dr King would have been a minion of Thaksin:he would not have been a minion of anyone.However based on knowledge of his politics, his sympathy for the repressed and general humanity he would without a doubt felt at home with the best of the redshirt movement.

With Jatuporn his right hand man.

Good God!