Dr Tul Cancels Campaign In Khon Kaen

[sabaijai]

Dr Tul cancels campaign in Khon Kaen

Leader of multicoloured campaign decided to return to Bangkok on Friday after a group of red shirts in Khon Kaen province blocked an exit road near Khon Kaen airport and searched for him.

They stopped every vehicle going out of the airport and searched for Dr Tul Sitthisomwong.

Tul is a leader of the multicoloured protests organised to counter the red shirts protest and to show their opposition to the reds' demand for PM Abhisit Vejjajiva to dissolve the Parliament.

The doctor arrived at Khon Kaen airport by TG 044 at 1.30pm. He was scheduled to attend a campaign organised by multicoloured people in Khon Kaen at 4pm.

Seeing the red shirts outside the airport, organisers of the campaign had an urgent meeting with Tul who arrived and waited inside the airport, suggesting that he cancelled his plan and returned to Bangkok.

They informed Tul that leader of the red shirts in Khon Kaen who led the searching was Sunya Simma, who led red shirts in seizing military trucks and detaining soldiers in the province recently.

Tul then decided to take TG 045 at 2.20pm to return to Bangkok. The activity in the province started as scheduled.

-- The Nation 2010-05-01

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[Bkung]

The red always says , " The rights to demonstration was according to Constitution of the Thai people to express themselves in a peaceful manner " So Why the multicolor leader was block this is not a fair game and I think Thai press freedom are one of the best in the world and not as the red accuse sided to one party.

[KireB]

Nothing new here! The REd movement wont allow any form of opposition and that exactly why this movement is so dangerous! The Shinawatras/UDD need to be stopped before its too late.

[Jerrytheyoung]

IMHO, the Foreign Embassies taking into account the stubborness of both sides, the escalation in provocations, the fact that more and more leaders are outlawed pushing them toward the extreme, the absence of dialog, the police and Army obviously split, have raised the level of ban/warning for travelling to Thailand.

A major incident can inflame the Country into Civil war. We are no more in the rationale, Passions are taking over. Dr Tul has taken the wise decision avoiding a local conflict which may have degenerated into a major incident.

On the long term, we must think also to the current parliamentary system which is conducting to series of coup/crisis. The Parliamentary system is based on the Anglo/saxon model and is maybe not so well adapted for the Thai disposition. France after nearly a Century of turbulences, has decided to move to another system in 1958 because the parliamentary system is not adapted to the French disposition.

Constitutional lawyers should try to find other ways. Democracy is not only a parliamentary system; It is obvious that, respecting the Monarchy, new ways have to be explored and the current constitution will have to be reconsidered. For Anglo-saxons people who know only one system, respecting democracy can be done by other ways; for example a parliamentary system may be be balanced with direct elections. I just throw the idea on the table to open the discussion: why not a PM directly elected?

Edited May 1, 2010 by Jerrytheyoung

[KireB]

IMHO, the Foreign Embassies taking into account the stubborness of both sides, the escalation in provocations, the fact that more and more leaders are outlawed pushing them toward the extreme, the absence of dialog, the police and Army obviously split, have raised the level of ban/warning for travelling to Thailand.

A major incident can inflame the Country into Civil war. We are no more in the rationale, Passions are taking over. Dr Tul has taken the wise decision avoiding a local conflict which may have degenerated into a major incident.

On the long term, we must think also to the current parliamentary system which is conducting to series of coup/crisis. The Parliamentary system is based on the Anglo/saxon model and is maybe not so well adapted for the Thai disposition. France after nearly a Century of turbulences, has decided to move to another system in 1958 because the parliamentary system is not adapted to the French disposition.

Constitutional lawyers should try to find other ways. Democracy is not only a parliamentary system; It is obviously that, respecting the Monarchy, new ways have to be explored and the current constitution will have to be reconsidered. For Anglo-saxons people who know only one system, respecting democracy can be done by other ways; for example a parliamentary system may be be balanced with direct elections. I just throw the idea on the table to open the discussion: why not a PM directly elected?

Excellent post Jerry.

[difos57]

The red shirt terrorist say they are a democratic party and if the majority of the people do not believe them, they will bomb the majority until they do.

[brahmburgers]

Blocking Dr. Tul from speaking is nothing new for hot head Reds.

For months before the ongoing rallies, Red hot heads were violently blocking others (who don't repeat their own rhetoric) from appearing in regions north and NE.

The Reds have as much to do with democracy as a spot of cricket poop has to do with the space shuttle.

[hammered]

Preventing alternative views and discussion is the aim here allied to a message that will be noticed by locals of "if you think you can have different views from us forget it". Intimidation and control of the message (indoctrination)

[AleG]

This just goes to show why immediate dissolution of the parliament and snap elections should be out of the question. The climate (imposed by the red shirt movement) is not conductive to free elections.

[Jerrytheyoung]

Every time a party is disbanded because of individual actions and you ban the leaders (which may have not been involved in the fiddling) from politic for a long period, you push people to work outside the normalcy.

Every time you issue a warrant against a political leader, you push him to work outside the normalcy..

Or there will be an amnesty in the final agreement or we are heading to a Larger confrontation.

I am afraid the amnesty is not something acceptable by the government and will not be accepted by its supporters ...so the logic is ....Confrontation.

Think about that: everytime a summon, a warrant, every time the situation will be leaving a little more the normalcy because the leaders will continue to work but "out of the box" and the logic is: it will be deepening.

[BigWheelMan]

I watched the video of Reds invading a hospital in Bangkok. The police were just standing there letting them get on with it.

It`s seems that any thug can put on a whatever coloured shirt, go on the rampage with his mates and suddenly he’s above the law.

Due to lack of actions on behalf of the authorities to clamp down and enforce the law upon these thugs, the Government with their softly, softly approach has inevitably put these terrorists and thugs above the law.

If this process continues, the thugs will take over this country ruling by fear and intimidation. If and when that happens, it`s time to get out.

[ThaiFelix]

The red shirt terrorist say they are a democratic party and if the majority of the people do not believe them, they will bomb the majority until they do.

Nice one!

The Floggings Will Continue Until Morale Improves!!

[Donnyboy]

I watched the video of Reds invading a hospital in Bangkok. The police were just standing there letting them get on with it.

It`s seems that any thug can put on a whatever coloured shirt, go on the rampage with his mates and suddenly he's above the law.

Due to lack of actions on behalf of the authorities to clamp down and enforce the law upon these thugs, the Government with their softly, softly approach has inevitably put these terrorists and thugs above the law.

If this process continues, the thugs will take over this country ruling by fear and intimidation. If and when that happens, it`s time to get out.

i tend to agree

[Teddy3943]

Everybody knows about "The Wild West", where there was just a little bit of justice and people often took the law in their own hands. It seems Thailand has developed itself into the "Wild East", where groups can hyjack a whole city centre, kidnap persons, attack persons and institutions, carry fire arms, occupy hospitals, et cetera. The sherrif /police is very reluctant to act. The army, which is equiped and trained to use force doesn't execute their duties. This behavior of the autorities and the forces makes the red-group feel like untouchables. They hunt for individuals, storm hospitals, nothing stops them. The red-shirt-group has created a state within the state where there are no Thai laws valid. So we can consider them as outlaws. What the H.... are they talking about democracy? If there is one undemocratic movement then this is surely the red-shirt movement. They are attacking the Thai democratic system and the Thai state by causing enormous damage. What would Thailand do if a neighboring country attacked Thailand or damaged Thailand's properties?

[Humungus]

IMHO, the Foreign Embassies taking into account the stubborness of both sides, the escalation in provocations, the fact that more and more leaders are outlawed pushing them toward the extreme, the absence of dialog, the police and Army obviously split, have raised the level of ban/warning for travelling to Thailand.

A major incident can inflame the Country into Civil war. We are no more in the rationale, Passions are taking over. Dr Tul has taken the wise decision avoiding a local conflict which may have degenerated into a major incident.

On the long term, we must think also to the current parliamentary system which is conducting to series of coup/crisis. The Parliamentary system is based on the Anglo/saxon model and is maybe not so well adapted for the Thai disposition. France after nearly a Century of turbulences, has decided to move to another system in 1958 because the parliamentary system is not adapted to the French disposition.

Constitutional lawyers should try to find other ways. Democracy is not only a parliamentary system; It is obvious that, respecting the Monarchy, new ways have to be explored and the current constitution will have to be reconsidered. For Anglo-saxons people who know only one system, respecting democracy can be done by other ways; for example a parliamentary system may be be balanced with direct elections. I just throw the idea on the table to open the discussion: why not a PM directly elected?

Why would a directly elected PM benefit Thailand. Let's assume that the North is a unified voting bloc, not that it is, but for arguments sake. If the PM was directly elected by popular vote it is plausible that the North could always elect the PM of their choosing. The problem in a country where the population is not balanced is that greater influence will always be held by certain provinces. The current system relies on a party gaining enough nationwide support to win the most seats in Parliament. Canada has a similar problem, the western provinces vote one way, Quebec another, but the bulk of the population live in Ontario and that is where the deciding votes come from. Whichever party wins Ontario makes the government.

If the PM was directly elected his party might not even have the seats to control parliament in which case he would be ineffective. To combat this problem the PM would have to be given more power, similar to the President in the USA. Do you think having a Thai PM that wields even more power is a good idea?

Anglo Saxons make up a broad group of countries who use a variety of democratic models. I don't know why you suggest they only use one system.

[Humungus]

Every time a party is disbanded because of individual actions and you ban the leaders (which may have not been involved in the fiddling) from politic for a long period, you push people to work outside the normalcy.

Every time you issue a warrant against a political leader, you push him to work outside the normalcy..

Or there will be an amnesty in the final agreement or we are heading to a Larger confrontation.

I am afraid the amnesty is not something acceptable by the government and will not be accepted by its supporters ...so the logic is ....Confrontation.

Think about that: everytime a summon, a warrant, every time the situation will be leaving a little more the normalcy because the leaders will continue to work but "out of the box" and the logic is: it will be deepening.

I think the 5 year ban for electoral fraud should be scrapped. It should be replaced with a 2 year prison term. Maybe then they'd let the people vote with their minds, not their wallets.

[Jerrytheyoung]

IMHO, the Foreign Embassies taking into account the stubborness of both sides, the escalation in provocations, the fact that more and more leaders are outlawed pushing them toward the extreme, the absence of dialog, the police and Army obviously split, have raised the level of ban/warning for travelling to Thailand.

A major incident can inflame the Country into Civil war. We are no more in the rationale, Passions are taking over. Dr Tul has taken the wise decision avoiding a local conflict which may have degenerated into a major incident.

On the long term, we must think also to the current parliamentary system which is conducting to series of coup/crisis. The Parliamentary system is based on the Anglo/saxon model and is maybe not so well adapted for the Thai disposition. France after nearly a Century of turbulences, has decided to move to another system in 1958 because the parliamentary system is not adapted to the French disposition.

Constitutional lawyers should try to find other ways. Democracy is not only a parliamentary system; It is obvious that, respecting the Monarchy, new ways have to be explored and the current constitution will have to be reconsidered. For Anglo-saxons people who know only one system, respecting democracy can be done by other ways; for example a parliamentary system may be be balanced with direct elections. I just throw the idea on the table to open the discussion: why not a PM directly elected?

Why would a directly elected PM benefit Thailand. Let's assume that the North is a unified voting bloc, not that it is, but for arguments sake. If the PM was directly elected by popular vote it is plausible that the North could always elect the PM of their choosing. The problem in a country where the population is not balanced is that greater influence will always be held by certain provinces. The current system relies on a party gaining enough nationwide support to win the most seats in Parliament. Canada has a similar problem, the western provinces vote one way, Quebec another, but the bulk of the population live in Ontario and that is where the deciding votes come from. Whichever party wins Ontario makes the government.

If the PM was directly elected his party might not even have the seats to control parliament in which case he would be ineffective. To combat this problem the PM would have to be given more power, similar to the President in the USA. Do you think having a Thai PM that wields even more power is a good idea?

Anglo Saxons make up a broad group of countries who use a variety of democratic models. I don't know why you suggest they only use one system.

Most of Anglo saxons systems are variant around a Parliamentary system as you demonstrate.

Yes the PM directly elected can bring more stability. it is possible to work with one executive of one side and ministers from the other side (french system- Cohabitation- Mitterand/ Chirac- Chirac/Jospin).

In any case, particularly because Monarchy has to be respected, it is to the Thai Constitutional Lawyers to find the best ways to Thailand not to us Farangs.

Edited May 1, 2010 by Jerrytheyoung

[rogerdee123]

IMHO, the Foreign Embassies taking into account the stubborness of both sides, the escalation in provocations, the fact that more and more leaders are outlawed pushing them toward the extreme, the absence of dialog, the police and Army obviously split, have raised the level of ban/warning for travelling to Thailand.

A major incident can inflame the Country into Civil war. We are no more in the rationale, Passions are taking over. Dr Tul has taken the wise decision avoiding a local conflict which may have degenerated into a major incident.

On the long term, we must think also to the current parliamentary system which is conducting to series of coup/crisis. The Parliamentary system is based on the Anglo/saxon model and is maybe not so well adapted for the Thai disposition. France after nearly a Century of turbulences, has decided to move to another system in 1958 because the parliamentary system is not adapted to the French disposition.

Constitutional lawyers should try to find other ways. Democracy is not only a parliamentary system; It is obviously that, respecting the Monarchy, new ways have to be explored and the current constitution will have to be reconsidered. For Anglo-saxons people who know only one system, respecting democracy can be done by other ways; for example a parliamentary system may be be balanced with direct elections. I just throw the idea on the table to open the discussion: why not a PM directly elected?

Excellent post Jerry.

What happened to Dr. Tul explains exactly why there can be no elections now.

Edited May 1, 2010 by rogerdee123

[givenall]

Nothing new here! The REd movement wont allow any form of opposition and that exactly why this movement is so dangerous! The Shinawatras/UDD need to be stopped before its too late.

Where the hel—l is the government in all these. They are suppose to protect every ones right.

It seems they are running away from all these problem protecting only their own individual interest only

Edited May 1, 2010 by givenall

[Humungus]

It seems that in Thai politics people are usually acting out of personal interest rather than national interest. With the amount of corruption people are always struggling to get their share. Why would anyone buy votes if there wasn't money to be made from being in office? I agree that the constitution should be fixed so that all Thais can receive good government and representation. The problem is finding people who will do it without attempting to give an advantage to their own side. I think getting red Thais and Yellow Thais in one room and expecting them to draft a neutral document is wishful thinking.

[whybother]

IMHO, the Foreign Embassies taking into account the stubborness of both sides, the escalation in provocations, the fact that more and more leaders are outlawed pushing them toward the extreme, the absence of dialog, the police and Army obviously split, have raised the level of ban/warning for travelling to Thailand.

A major incident can inflame the Country into Civil war. We are no more in the rationale, Passions are taking over. Dr Tul has taken the wise decision avoiding a local conflict which may have degenerated into a major incident.

On the long term, we must think also to the current parliamentary system which is conducting to series of coup/crisis. The Parliamentary system is based on the Anglo/saxon model and is maybe not so well adapted for the Thai disposition. France after nearly a Century of turbulences, has decided to move to another system in 1958 because the parliamentary system is not adapted to the French disposition.

Constitutional lawyers should try to find other ways. Democracy is not only a parliamentary system; It is obvious that, respecting the Monarchy, new ways have to be explored and the current constitution will have to be reconsidered. For Anglo-saxons people who know only one system, respecting democracy can be done by other ways; for example a parliamentary system may be be balanced with direct elections. I just throw the idea on the table to open the discussion: why not a PM directly elected?

The current system works well in the UK, Aus and many other countries. The people here just don't understand it yet.

Also, there is still the need to elect the people around him.

I don't think a directly elected PM would solve any problems, and would just raise new issues.

[whybother]

The red always says , " The rights to demonstration was according to Constitution of the Thai people to express themselves in a peaceful manner " So Why the multicolor leader was block this is not a fair game and I think Thai press freedom are one of the best in the world and not as the red accuse sided to one party.

RED DEMOCRACY AT WORK.

[whybother]

Every time a party is disbanded because of individual actions and you ban the leaders (which may have not been involved in the fiddling) from politic for a long period, you push people to work outside the normalcy.

Every time you issue a warrant against a political leader, you push him to work outside the normalcy..

Or there will be an amnesty in the final agreement or we are heading to a Larger confrontation.

I am afraid the amnesty is not something acceptable by the government and will not be accepted by its supporters ...so the logic is ....Confrontation.

Think about that: everytime a summon, a warrant, every time the situation will be leaving a little more the normalcy because the leaders will continue to work but "out of the box" and the logic is: it will be deepening.

A party isn't disbanded because of individual actions. It is disbanded because of executives actions.

If the leaders of the party are involved in "fiddling", the executive should banned and the party shouldn't exist. The other MPs are all free to find other parties to join.

[plachon]

I've just returned from a visit to a village in rural Sakon Nakhon. The villagers there are mostly Redshirt supporters. They are encouraged by the Headmen and quite a few local govt officials who all think the sun shone out of Thaksin's derriere. The few non-Redshirt supporters or govt sympathisers I've spoken with are afraid to speak out, as they are in the minority. However, I suspect the majority are actually silent, with no strong views one way or the other, but the Reds are loud, brash and boastful. They dominate the political space in the village, making it an intimidating atmosphere for other's to express an opinion.

Since the April 10th bloodshed in BKK, two significant events have happened. One is core Redshirt supporters have set up a community radio station that broadcasts Rednews and propaganda all through the day and late into the evening (not sure of it is 24 hours). This keeps the supporters in touch with what is happening in BKK and elsewhere in the Red Revolution, since the People's Channel was blocked. It also provides music and entertainment of the sort popular in Isaan. Secondly, dozens of VCDs have been distributed to villagers showing a totally lopsided and distorted version of events from before, during and after the April 10th violence. Naturally, the Reds are presented as the heroes and victims, while the govt is presented as the villains and sole instigators of the violence. Abhisit is singled out for particular hatred and vilification for every perceived wrong committed against the Reds. The villagers lap it up as gospel.

My main point in raising this is that given this state of affairs, there is little chance in Red villages such as this that there can be free and fair elections in the near future, as a single mob has colonised the minds of the villagers and will not allow alternative voices and points of views to be heard, which was reflected in the actions of the Redshirts in Khon Kaen yesterday and bodes ill, with all the other numerous anti-democratic incidents for the peaceful future of Thailand, Isaan especially. Functional democracy is still a distant dream, I'm afraid.

[givenall]

The red always says , " The rights to demonstration was according to Constitution of the Thai people to express themselves in a peaceful manner " So Why the multicolor leader was block this is not a fair game and I think Thai press freedom are one of the best in the world and not as the red accuse sided to one party.

RED DEMOCRACY AT WORK.

I am not sure why the RED wand election. It seem they have taken over most of the government responsibility. So why have election that you have to buy vote.

RED you win

[Jerrytheyoung]

IMHO, the Foreign Embassies taking into account the stubborness of both sides, the escalation in provocations, the fact that more and more leaders are outlawed pushing them toward the extreme, the absence of dialog, the police and Army obviously split, have raised the level of ban/warning for travelling to Thailand.

A major incident can inflame the Country into Civil war. We are no more in the rationale, Passions are taking over. Dr Tul has taken the wise decision avoiding a local conflict which may have degenerated into a major incident.

On the long term, we must think also to the current parliamentary system which is conducting to series of coup/crisis. The Parliamentary system is based on the Anglo/saxon model and is maybe not so well adapted for the Thai disposition. France after nearly a Century of turbulences, has decided to move to another system in 1958 because the parliamentary system is not adapted to the French disposition.

Constitutional lawyers should try to find other ways. Democracy is not only a parliamentary system; It is obvious that, respecting the Monarchy, new ways have to be explored and the current constitution will have to be reconsidered. For Anglo-saxons people who know only one system, respecting democracy can be done by other ways; for example a parliamentary system may be be balanced with direct elections. I just throw the idea on the table to open the discussion: why not a PM directly elected?

The current system works well in the UK, Aus and many other countries. The people here just don't understand it yet.

Also, there is still the need to elect the people around him.

I don't think a directly elected PM would solve any problems, and would just raise new issues.

You cannot think out of your box: Study the French History:

The third Republic (1871 to Second World War) and the 4th Republic (1945-1958) were parliamentary systems -very similar to your models-. and in fact it has been a succession of blockages, of non decision period particularly dramatic during some periods: French Vietnamese war: Dien Bien Phuh, for a large part, the illustration of the impossibility to take a decision by the French government. Then, we were trapped in the Algerian war, unable to get some decisions and facing a civil war, (French terrorist Organisation- OAS supported by elite Para troopers forces). De Gaulle was retired from Politics (Since 1947) because he was fed up by the parliamentary system and the immobilism generated. In April 1958, France was divided in two blocks, on the verge of a Civil War (Can you see the analogy with the current thai situation?)

Rene Coty, then President de la Republique, just an honorific position, no real power (Still a similar situation with the Invisible Hand), called De Gaulle for the sake of the Nation. De Gaulle imposed two conditions:

1- A new constitution with a reinforced executive

2- To govern until the end of the year with exceptional powers and by ordinances

De Gaulle respected the period, a New constitution has been approved by referendum and elections have followed.

The 5th Republic Constitution has proven his efficiency even through "Cohabitation periods" with the President on one side and the Ministers from the other side. France has found its own way to stability with a mixture of strong executive/ parliamentary system.

Obviously, Thailand has to find its own way which is probably different from french or anglo-saxon models

Edited May 1, 2010 by Jerrytheyoung

[way2muchcoffee]

Last I checked this thread is about a PAD spokesman who had to flee an airport that was blocked by a red caravan. This thread is not about France. This thread is not about various democratic systems. Please stick to the topic guys.

[whybother]

Last I checked this thread is about a PAD spokesman who had to flee an airport that was blocked by a red caravan. This thread is not about France. This thread is not about various democratic systems. Please stick to the topic guys.

PAD spokesman or multi-colour spokesman? I wasn't aware of his links to the PAD.

edit: sorry for going off topic

Edited May 1, 2010 by whybother

[Humungus]

This is just further proof that elections cannot be held right now. If people who do not agree with the reds are prevented from traveling the country and making speeches how can you run an election campaign? Elections should be at least six months after the protesters go home for the safety of all involved.

[Jerrytheyoung]

Last I checked this thread is about a PAD spokesman who had to flee an airport that was blocked by a red caravan. This thread is not about France. This thread is not about various democratic systems. Please stick to the topic guys.

we are on the topic;

Dr Tul has taken a wise decision because we are now in a passionate atmosphere which is spinning out of control.

More and more similar incidents, I am afraid, will occur.

The research for getting out of the current situation and solve the crisis is a higher priority for people of good will.

often it appears that the description of the incident is exagerrated: so cool down fortunately the incident is over and nobody has been hurted.

However, the fact to blow out of proportion such an incident by opening a thread and to want to stick on the track may demonstrate a propaganda operation.

Let us interpret this incident and raise up the dialog.