Statement issued by Atty. Ernesto Francisco on his filing of Motion for Reconsideration in the Manila Pen Rebellion Case against Sen. Antonio Trillanes and 16 other officers and enlisted men ( Capt. Gary C. Alejano, Ltsg. James Layug, Ltsg. Manuel G. Cabochan, Ltsg. Eugene P. Gonzalez, 2Lt. Jonnel P. Sanggalang, Ltsg. Andy G. Torrato, Ltjr. Arturo S. Pascua, Jr., Ens. Armand Pontejos, Capt. Segundino P. Orfiano, Jr., 1Lt. Billy S. Pascua, CPL. Clecarte D. Dahan, PFC. Juanito S. Jilbury, PFC. Emmanuel C. Tirador, PFC. German M. Linde, Julius J. Mesa and Cesari Yasser Gonzalez).
Atty. Francisco is handling the Nov. 29 Manila Pen rebellion case for Trillanes et al.
Today, 28 December 2007, Sen. Antonio F. Trillanes, IV and sixteen (16) other military and former military men who are accused of rebellion before the sala of Judge Elmo M. Alameda of RTC-Makati City, Branch 150, through counsel, will file a Motion for Reconsideration of the Order dated 13 December 2007 finding probable cause for the issuance of a commitment order against them.
In their Motion for Reconsideration, Sen. Trillanes and his co-accused will seek the dismissal of the rebellion charge against them on the following grounds:
1. Even assuming that they did walk out of the hearing of their criminal case before Judge Oscar B. Pimentel, and thereafter, march along the streets of Makati City going towards the Manila Pen, and thereat, hold a press conference where the administration was denounced, these acts do not constitute the crime of rebellion.
2. If at all, such acts were but legitimate exercise of the people’s right to peaceably assemble and seek redress for grievances and to free speech.
3. Based on Supreme Court decisions, it cannot be said that the crime of rebellion was committed on the occasion of the Manila Pen incident. The Manila Pen incident did not involve any “armed public uprising,” or “masses or multitudes involving crowd action,” or “a vast movement of men” or “a complex net of intrigue and plots,” or “a civil war on a bigger or lesser scale,” or “an armed public uprising by a substantial number of rebels.” Even Judge Alameda, in his Order stated that “(t)he gravemen of the crime of rebellion is an armed public uprising against the government. By its very nature, rebellion is essentially a crime of masses or multitude involving crowd action with political motive.”
4. In the Manila Pen incident, not a single gunshot was fired by any one of the eighteen (18) accused military and former military men and civilians who were alleged to have staged a rebellion inside the Manila Pen(!). Also, not one of the eighteen (18) accused military and former military men or thirty (30) civilians who were trapped inside the Manila Pen used force or firearms on any one.
5. Almost all of the eighteen (18) accused military and former military men were not armed, including their supposed leaders, accused Senator Antonio F. Trillanes, IV and Brig. Gen. Danilo P. Lim. Even assuming that a few of the military men had firearms and it was alleged that four (4) rifles and one (1) pistol were recovered at the scene, not one of them used, much less fired, his firearm. Mere possession of firearms by a handful of military men marching in the streets or joining a press conference inside a five (5)-star hotel is certainly not rebellion.
6. There was no crime being committed inside the Manila Pen, much less the crime of rebellion, and the government knew that fact. Otherwise, if the crime of rebellion or any other crime was in fact being committed by those inside the Manila Pen, the police could have just proceeded inside and effected warrantless arrests and they did not need to first secure a warrant of arrest from Judge Pimentel purportedly to effect the arrest of the fourteen (14) detention prisoners who walked out of their hearing.
7. No less than Justice Secretary Raul Gonzales, in an interview aired by ANC just a few minutes before the assault started at 4:30 o’clock in the afternoon, categorically stated that the police and military forces were at the Manila Pen to serve the said warrant issued by Judge Pimentel.
8. The police forces were supposed to enter the Manila Pen to serve the warrant of arrest on the fourteen (14) detention prisoners. Yet, what they did was to launch a massive, excessive and unnecessary police and military assault on the military and civilians alike who were trapped inside the hotel.
9. Worse, after the police and military forces launched an assault on and entered the Manila Pen purportedly to serve the warrant of arrest on the fourteen (14) detention prisoners, they effected an illegal warrantless arrest for the non-existent crime of rebellion against them and the civilians and members of the mass media who were trapped inside the hotel.
10. The mass illegal arrest which took place at the Manila Pen was not a case of a warrantless arrest under the Rules of Court. It follows, therefore, that all of those who were arrested and detained were illegally arrested and arbitrarily detained.
11. The Inquest conducted by the DOJ Panel was void. There are no complaint-affidavit and sworn statements of the complainant and his witnesses on record in violation of DOJ Department Circular No. 61 (New Rules on Inquest) aforequoted. Moreover, the police officers who executed the “Joint Affidavits of Arrest” were actually not the arresting officers. Rather, they were the investigators from the PNP-NCR Criminal Investigation & Detection Unit. The arresting officers who should have executed the required affidavits of arrest were the elements of the PNP Special Action Force and PN-Marines who conducted the assault.
12. The police investigators who executed the “Joint Affidavits of Arrest” despite the fact that they were not the arresting officers, clearly committed falsification of public documents, false testimony and perjury, and other crimes. Also, any subsequent use of the said falsified “Joint Affidavits of Arrest” will make the one using the same liable for introducing in evidence falsified documents or offering in evidence a false witness or testimony and other crimes.
13. Since the Inquest that was conducted by the DOJ Panel was void, it follows that the Information filed as a result of said invalid inquest, is also void.
14. It is clear that the administration’s line notwithstanding, the Manila Pen incident was no rebellion. Otherwise, this may be the first time in the history not only of the Philippines but of the entire world that eighteen (18) military and former military men, only four or five of them allegedly armed, staged a rebellion inside a five (5)-star hotel right in the heart of the country’s financial district. This will also be the first time in the history of the Philippines and the entire world that so-called “rebels” staged a rebellion with not a single gunshot fired.
15. The conclusions of the Honorable Court which served as basis for the finding of probable cause against the accused military and former military men are not supported by the evidence on record.
a) Even assuming that most of the accused military and former military men, almost all of whom were detention prisoners, did walk out of the hearing before Judge Pimentel, such a walkout did not constitute rebellion. The walkout of detention prisoners from a hearing of their case is definitely not rebellion;
b) When Judge Pimentel cited and found those who walked out guilty of direct contempt and sentenced them to ten (10) days imprisonment, to his mind, such walkout was merely a contumacious conduct constitutive of direct contempt and, to be sure, far from an act of rebellion;
c) The act of the accused military and former military men of marching along the streets of Makati City does not constitute rebellion. Such act of marching is no different from the usual protest rally or march along the streets which is an almost everyday occurrence in Metro Manila. In those street protest rallies or marches, not one has been charged with rebellion;
d) The prosecution’s video footages show that it was business as usual inside the Manila Pen even after the accused had gone inside. Accordingly, guests were having lunch as usual. Even Dir. Geary Barias, PNP-NCR Regional Director, when he first came in, was shaking hands, laughing and joking with those inside and making “beso-beso” with the ladies. The atmosphere only changed much later in the afternoon when the government started threatening to launch an attack and, in fact, started shooting towards the hotel purportedly to scare away imagined snipers;
e) The alleged setting up of a “command center” at the second floor of the Manila Pen was a just a figment of the imagination of the police investigators. The prosecution’s own video footages will show that there was no such “command center” at the second floor of the hotel. If at all, the reference to a so-called “command center” at the second floor of the Manila Pen is but part of the effort to prop up the government’s theory that the incident that took place on 29 November 2007 was an act of rebellion. Besides, absent any so-called “command center” inside the hotel, how could the government justify its massive use of police and military forces to launch an assault on a five (5)-star hotel in the heart of Makati City, including the use of not less than three (3) Armored Personnel Carriers and indiscriminate firing of a machine gun into the lobby of the said hotel;?
f) Even assuming that the accused did call a press conference wherein they announced their intention to overthrow the government of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, that was not rebellion under Supreme Court decisions; and,
g) The Court’s finding that no probable cause exists with respect to the civilians are also applicable to the accused military and former military men. The court failed to make clear distinctions between the civilians, on the one hand, and the military and former military men, on the other, as would justify the finding of lack of probable cause for the crime of rebellion with respect to the civilians, on the one hand, and the finding of probable cause for the said crime and the issuance of a Commitment Order with respect to the accused military and former military men, on the other.
Click here to read Trillanes motion for reconsideration.
motion-for-recon-ernesto-francisco.doc
the contingency of language…
ONLY in the Philippines? I think, not!
ellen, here is an article by Honesto General of PDI, hope it is welcomed here. thanks.
QUESTIONS OF POLICIES
Questions of Policies : Rebellion
By Honesto General
Inquirer
Posted date: December 12, 2007
“Way back in medieval times, Cardinal Richelieu, Chief Minister of France (that was before the separation of Church and State), established the principle that any rebellion against the Crown should be punished mercilessly, no matter how high the culprit’s rank, and, even at the cost of seven individual rights.
“Richelieu dealt decisively with the Huguenot rebels. He exiled the Queen Mother herself and the ambitious King’s brother for plotting against the Throne.
“In short, when a rebellion threatens the security of the State, government should act swiftly (ruthlessly, if necessary), and with all the might at its command. Quelling a rebellion must be pursued at all costs. The security of the State was primordial.
“Also, in our day of instant communications, you do not wait for a rebellion to gather steam, or for the rebels to build barricades across Ayala, or for rivers of blood to flow down the avenue, before you act. You must nip the rebellion in the bud.
“So, when Senator Trillanes and Gen. Danny Lim mounted their rebellion from the relative safety of a function room in the Peninsula hotel in Makati City, it was not necessary for the government to seek a ruling from the Supreme Court, or ask the Department of Justice for an opinion, or stage a debate at the Integrated Bar before deciding to move in on the rebels.
“It was absolutely correct for the government to quickly deploy, instead, enough of its best troops (the battle-hardened Marines, no less), with their armored personnel carriers, and commanded on the ground by some of our highest-ranking general officers, to put down the rebellion before the day was done.
“So what if shock-and-awe tactic was used? So what if it was overkill? It worked, didn’t it? This time, the end justified the means. That was all that really mattered.
“In the ensuing roundup after the surrender of Trillanes and Lim and, what was the name of the third culprit? — Oh, yes, former Vice President Teofisto Guingona — a number of media people were handcuffed and brought to camp for processing.
“Afterward, the uproar from media resulted in the dialog at the Pen between government forces headed by Interior Secretary Ronaldo Puno arrayed against such media stalwarts as Maria Ressa and Jessica Sojo.
“Nursing a bad cold, I watched the entire comedy show in my bedroom.
“Maria and Jessica, as well as the rest of the media in attendance, ranted that the arrest of reporters was an attack on press freedom.
“Besides, the reporters were just doing their job of providing information the Filipino people had the constitutional right to know. But the information the TV networks feed the Filipino people is sometimes manipulative, if not downright deceptive.
“Your TV screen will show a demonstration of as few as a dozen screaming people with placards. The small TV screen gives the impression of a large demonstration. But, what really happened was that the demonstrators (usually hired at P200 a head) are only posing for the TV camera. After the footage is taken, everybody goes home.
“The media said that the arrest of the reporters had a chilling effect on similar incidents in the future. In fact, if there was a firefight at the Pen, the reporters would have been caught in the crosshairs — and chilled.
“Maria and Jessica and everybody else there were really concerned over the ratings of their programs. The higher the ratings, the higher the advertising rates. The higher the advertising rates, the higher the net profits.
“I have nothing against profits. In our free enterprise system, everybody (including insurance brokers like myself) works for a positive bottom line.
“But, I cannot stand self-righteousness. And, on top of everything else, in quelling a rebellion, nobody, not even media people, has any rights.”
ellen, i found this article of Honesto General, hope it is welcome here. thanks
QUESTIONS OF POLICIES
Questions of Policies : Rebellion
By Honesto General
Inquirer
Posted date: December 12, 2007
Way back in medieval times, Cardinal Richelieu, Chief Minister of France (that was before the separation of Church and State), established the principle that any rebellion against the Crown should be punished mercilessly, no matter how high the culprit’s rank, and, even at the cost of seven individual rights.
Richelieu dealt decisively with the Huguenot rebels. He exiled the Queen Mother herself and the ambitious King’s brother for plotting against the Throne.
In short, when a rebellion threatens the security of the State, government should act swiftly (ruthlessly, if necessary), and with all the might at its command. Quelling a rebellion must be pursued at all costs. The security of the State was primordial.
Also, in our day of instant communications, you do not wait for a rebellion to gather steam, or for the rebels to build barricades across Ayala, or for rivers of blood to flow down the avenue, before you act. You must nip the rebellion in the bud.
So, when Senator Trillanes and Gen. Danny Lim mounted their rebellion from the relative safety of a function room in the Peninsula hotel in Makati City, it was not necessary for the government to seek a ruling from the Supreme Court, or ask the Department of Justice for an opinion, or stage a debate at the Integrated Bar before deciding to move in on the rebels.
It was absolutely correct for the government to quickly deploy, instead, enough of its best troops (the battle-hardened Marines, no less), with their armored personnel carriers, and commanded on the ground by some of our highest-ranking general officers, to put down the rebellion before the day was done.
So what if shock-and-awe tactic was used? So what if it was overkill? It worked, didn’t it? This time, the end justified the means. That was all that really mattered.
In the ensuing roundup after the surrender of Trillanes and Lim and, what was the name of the third culprit? — Oh, yes, former Vice President Teofisto Guingona — a number of media people were handcuffed and brought to camp for processing.
Afterward, the uproar from media resulted in the dialog at the Pen between government forces headed by Interior Secretary Ronaldo Puno arrayed against such media stalwarts as Maria Ressa and Jessica Sojo.
Nursing a bad cold, I watched the entire comedy show in my bedroom.
Maria and Jessica, as well as the rest of the media in attendance, ranted that the arrest of reporters was an attack on press freedom.
Besides, the reporters were just doing their job of providing information the Filipino people had the constitutional right to know. But the information the TV networks feed the Filipino people is sometimes manipulative, if not downright deceptive.
Your TV screen will show a demonstration of as few as a dozen screaming people with placards. The small TV screen gives the impression of a large demonstration. But, what really happened was that the demonstrators (usually hired at P200 a head) are only posing for the TV camera. After the footage is taken, everybody goes home.
The media said that the arrest of the reporters had a chilling effect on similar incidents in the future. In fact, if there was a firefight at the Pen, the reporters would have been caught in the crosshairs — and chilled.
Maria and Jessica and everybody else there were really concerned over the ratings of their programs. The higher the ratings, the higher the advertising rates. The higher the advertising rates, the higher the net profits.
I have nothing against profits. In our free enterprise system, everybody (including insurance brokers like myself) works for a positive bottom line.
But, I cannot stand self-righteousness. And, on top of everything else, in quelling a rebellion, nobody, not even media people, has any rights.
Paranoia was in the air. There was money offerred to the police to preempt any action Esperon might do. They knew Esperon would fail. His people had tossed the coin whether to join Trillanes or not.
ellen, i found this interesting article of Honesto General. Hope it has a space here. Thanks.
Questions of Policies : Rebellion
By Honesto General
Inquirer
For the complete article click here.
There was no rebellion, period. It was a redress of grievances, a purely democratic action. If there was any damage done, the government side is to blame. Anyone with half a brain and guts could have just entered the hotel and persuaded Sen. Trillanes et al to leave the premises, fact of the matter is, the gutless, spineless, nervous officers had to let loose their half-assed version of shock and awe. The same officers – Barias and SAF, would be cringing in a real combat situation. Honesto General is a paid hack for sure.
ellen, here a thought from atty. katrina legarda:
The narcissistic, “feigning intelligence” (words of Miriam Defensor Santiago), fake messiah struck again.
Katrina Legarda,
She was the one who said “we Filipinos should know when to give up” or something of the sort. She’s definitely a woman spurned.
i think it will not hurt us much to read other opinions on the matter discussed here. either paid or not, their arguments are informative. i would rather look into the merits of their arguments.
ellen, here’s from Asia Times. Quite long but good article for reflection. Hope you don’t mind me posting it here. Thanks.
Philippines: Academic roots of rebellion
By A Lin Neumann
For the complete article, click here.
Walang kasong rebelyon, nagreklamo lang sila which is allowed in a free country. Kaso, peke ang administrasyon ni Gloria kaya hindi masasabing malaya.
ellen, or anybody, please help me on how to post a link. The previous article of Asia Times was dated August 2, 2003 — the first rebellion of Senator Trillanes. Thanks.
ellen, promise. one last long article. It’s from Artemio Panganiban. thanks.
Why the Trillanes caper failed
By Artemio V. Panganiban,Inquirer
For the rest of the article, click here.
Corruption especially in the navy has been around even in the pre-Marcos era. It just changes hands, and in Marcos’ case (please read Closer than Brothers), he maneuvered to get a slice of the loot, after Marcos, obviously it just changed hands. Who could not forget the Pestano suicide case? A navy officer who dared expose smuggling/drug trafficking who mysteriously committed suicide after communicating his intentions.
Its high time that we seriously look at our political system, Sen. Trillanes’ and Gen. Lim’s no nonsense approach, strikes to the heart of our acceptance of patronage politics and transactional governance.
Personally, I see it as a shameful slap on our faces that these military men have to do this, this is supposed to be our job. Where are the outspoken political candidates? The time has come that we subscribe to action, put a timetable on it and work it. This government is so used to corruption and double talk that its suspicious of direct action already, some so called media personalities who are obviously left in the “pansitan” like Legarda (related to the President in some ways) don’t get it.
The military is probably the last people to react like this, they have a very high thresh hold for pain, suffering, and injustice – if they cry “foul” it is at its worst already. If the government is not serious in its mission of preserving the rule of law – THANK GOD THESE MEN ARE!
http://www.amazon.com/Closer-Than-Brothers-Philippine-Military/dp/0300077653
contingency,
If ellen allows, keep them coming. Its always wise to see the other side, we can’t win the war if we are narrow minded.
I like Panganiban’s take. Its more factual, more objective, albeit based on his perception. I met the man, small staure, friendly disposition, he even gave me a copy of his “Levelling the Playing Field” a couple of years ago.
What Sen. Trillanes and Gen. Lim did was unprecedented, they acted on their own, without consulting the otherwise suspicious interests of certain sectors. Why these people would only go for striking deals, asking for and giving concessions to shady politicians, oligarchs, leftists, rightists, civil society, and unscrupulous businessmen. All this wheeling and dealing, though an accepted norm in traditional politics may have diluted the cause, although these sectors could have lent “muscle” to the movement. This could have been the worst “means” to this end.
juggernaut, I prefer shorter comments and link the rest of the articles. You managed to link, would you care to teach me how? thanks.
what i initially intend to do was to comment on various arguments forwarded by the Trillanes-Lim lawyers in the Motion. But I see the value of pointing how other opinion-makers see the issue. So I decide to link some of them.
I find it amusing to see a full text of a Motion filed in court for the perusal of the public. Anyway, thanks to ellen.
The Asian Times correspondent was critical about the strength of the Magdalo, but provided us with a beautiful picture of its leader… now Senator Trillanes.
(juggernaut, I lost my files of the studies of Trillanes. If you know some links, I really appreciate it.)
the article of atty. legarda identified what laws the Pen rebels have broken. we can re-read her using the above Motion or vice-versa.
the article of justice panganiban is very helpful in giving us a wider perspective of the issue.
General’s article can be merited on the discussion of civil rights vis-a-vis national security. However, his conclusion is dangerous: “…in quelling a rebellion, nobody, not even media people, has any rights.”
by the way, juggernaut, i cannot use my old id: deepcaring.
contingency,
Try visiting this website, look for OPERATION GREENBASE, its connivance of the government with some industrialists to take advantage of native residents but exposed by Sen. Trillanes. Thats why the government, the oligarchs, and corrupt AFP officers want Trillanes and Lim neutralized and discredited with the help of paid media men so that they can dismiss all these as hearsay.
http://www.sundalo.bravehost.com/Front%20Page%205.htm
Sen. Trillanes and Gen. Lim are treading on dangerous waters actually, if they succeed so many entrenched powerful men will be affected. I should say they’re up against Goliath on this one…
We have read the Motion, let us listen to the selected words used by Justice Panganiban on the incident:
********************************************************
“The forceful takeover of the Manila Peninsula Hotel by Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV, Brig. Gen. Danilo Lim and their supporters ended in six hours after lawmen crashed an armored personnel carrier into the front entrance and lobbed tear gas into the foyer. General Lim said the rebels wanted to “remove Ms Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo from the presidency and form a new government.”
“Swift police-military action. Why did the caper fail? First, the police and the military acted swiftly.”
*********************************************************
The motion said that it was merely a grievance. If so, they can easily send it to ellen and other media networks. But take note on the word used by Justice Panagniban, “rebels” wanted to “remove Ms Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo from the presidency and form a new government.” The Justice was careful in his choice of words.
why did the CAPER fail? Answer: the police and the military acted swiftly. If not, then the rebellion will prosper. The case of rebellion is a continuing act. We don’t need to wait “paid or unpaid civilians” to march towards the Pen in order for us to label the act as rebellion.
Most of the arguments used in the Motion was used to dismissed the rebellion case against the civilian-supporters of Trillanes. It was a success. Let us hope and pray that the judges will appreciate the arguments of Trillanes et al.
ellen, forgive me but I have to paste it here. Beautiful, inspiring, awakening…
“Just Asking…
Why am I being investigated?
Why not investigate those officers who have been accused of taking part in the cheating that happened during the last elections?
For the rest of the article, please click to http://www.sundalo.bravehost.com
(thanks juggernaut for the link to sundalo.bravehost)
ellen, let me ask you a favor. here is the speech of joma delivered to the PMA in 1966. You can edit it and just make a link. I really don’t know the link.
(source: sundalo.bravehost)
THE MERCENARY TRADITION OF THE AFP
Jose Maria Sison
(Speech delivered before the Junior and Senior classes of the Philippine Military Academy, Fort Del Pilar, Baguio City on October 12, 1966.)
Sige, lets take the criticism head on. At issue is whether or not the State could undertake extreme measures to defend its existence. Framed this way, the obvious answer is yes, the State must protect itself because the alternative is anarchy and chaos.
The Constitution recognizes that the State is imbued with overwhelming powers. To prevent those powers from being directed towards the people, the Bill of Rights restricts the exercise of those powers. This not only prevents the people from becoming victims of the undue exercise of State power, but is also an explicit recognition that all power emanates from the people who in turn must be protected in the same manner that the State must protect itself.
If the people who have been allowed to exercise the powers of the State shut down the inherent protective mechanisms of the Constitution they have declared themselves against the very people who make up the State. To allow them to continue to use the powers to restrict the freedoms guaranteed to the people is to allow the destruction of the State.
Now, lets look at the events at the Manila Penn. While it is true that the government forces enjoy the presumptions of regularity and are presumed to be acting for the common good (eyw), it is also the same government forces who have shut down the exercise of basic freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and subverted the legal remedies available to the people to restrict the excesses of those who exercise State power. Because those freedoms were restricted, because the people have been endangered, clearly the government has acted against the people. It has turned the powers of the State against itself.
Now, between those two forces at Manila Penn, who are the destroyers and who are the defenders?
The defenders of their turf are PGMA and cohorts. Just like the territorial dogs preserving the goody that lays the golden egg. Who rocks the nest is the destroyer.
contingency aka deepcaring,
Ang haba ng posts mo, hiningal ako. This copy of Joma’s speech circa 1966 – pinanganak ka na ba nun? hehehe. If you really read the contents, its not bad at all, nga lang Joma’s the established leader of the communist rebels, Esperon would jump at any opportunity to label anything RED. So this might not be appropriate or tactical to subscribe to this.
Yup, hingal din ako. Turuan mo na kasi ako mag-link. Hehe. Sana edit na ito ni ellen (binigyan ko pa ng dagdag trabaho si ellen)
Actually, the speech seems to be written a week ago by the likes of dodong nemenzo and karl gaspar and soon to be delivered.
Well, joma has been looked upon as a malignant virus corrupting the revolutionary agenda, but i think he’s simply a realist…
Yup, hingal din ako. Sana edit na ito ni ellen at link na lang. Binigyan ko pa dagdag trabaho si ellen na busy masyado. Hehe. Turuan mo na kasi ako mag-link.
The speech seems recently written by the likes of dodong nemenzo and karl gaspar and soon to be delivered.
Of course, some of the terms used by joma have no much power than before, but his penetrating analysis and historical reading of a revolutionary movement are still relevant today.
joma has been looked upon as a malignant virus corrupting the revolutionary agenda, but i think he has becomes more a realist without ceasing to dream dreams.
Contingency, I appreciate your sharing article you find interesting but I discourage cutting and pasting whole articles here in my blog.
It distracts discussion from the main post.But you may link. I’m sorry I have to cut these article. you may post the links . I have linked Mr. General’s article as well as that of Panganiban and Lin Neumann.
To link, just copy the URL or online address of the article. then paste it here.
Langya, haba nun a. Pwede ko ba i-post yung Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines?
Madali lang mag-link. Copy and paste the whole link and remove everything before the three Ws (from h to the second /).
Deepcaring/contingency,
For all articles and studies done by Sen. Trillanes, go to the magdalo website: http://magdaloparasapagbabago.blogspot.com/
On the right side of this blog, are blog and web links. You will find “Magdalo” and “Antonio Trillanes”. Even “Nicanor Faeldon”. You may click on those words and it will lead you to their sites.
thanks ellen for making the links. Ayaw ko rin ng mahabang article sa comments. Sana turuan mo ako mag-link. Hehe.
thanks din pala sa link: http://magdaloparasapagbabago.blogspot.com/
try ko link ha…
Deepcaring, many of the articles you posted have been discussed here in past postings.
I’ve already told you how to link. Just copy the URL and paste it when you comment.
I like Panganiban’s take. Its more factual, more objective, albeit based on his perception. I met the man, small staure, friendly disposition, he even gave me a copy of his “Levelling the Playing Field” a couple of years ago.
********************
Agreed juggernaut. Small stature din sa batas. He is considered a legal lightweight. Hindi maihahambing kay Roberto Concepcion, Claudio Teehankee and Cesar Bengzon.
The other is Hilario Davide, who Edong Angara, in a talk in the US called a scholar. Scholar din daw si Edong, according to Davide.
Heck sige na nga. Scholar din yung sir raul o, si Lito Lapid, pati na rin si Nardong Putik. While you’re at it, sama niyo na rin si Manny Pacquiao.
Although I admire Panganiban for what he did in the ConAss decision, I still haven’t forgotten his role in installing Gloria Arroyo as president in 2001. Remember he said he opened the Bible and found a verse that told him to go to edsa and install arroyo even if the poresidency was not vacant?
His arguments are premised on Arroyo being a legitimate president. That’s the walang-kamatayang issue. I still maintain that Arroyo was never elected by the Filipino as president.
The Constitution states that one can only assume the presidency if he or she was elected by the people. That never happened to Arroyo. As Gen. Lim said, she is a bogus president.
Her illegitimacy as president is moot due to the doctrine of numbers and the windfalls that go with it. Not even our constitution could do anything for the opposition. She has great lawyers behind her against the inadequately schooled lawyers outside. And she has Esperon, Calderon, Razon and sprinkling of morons.
Ronald Reagan, in one of his writings compiled in the book “REAGAN In His Own Hand” (edited by Kiron K Skinner, Annelise Anderson and Martin Anderson) quoted another person thus….”Someone once said that every form of government has one characteristic peculiar to it and if that characteristic is lost, the government will fall. In a monarchy it is affection and respect for the royal family. If that is lost, the monarch is lost. In a dictatorship it is fear. If the people stop fearing the dictator, he’ll lose power. In a representative government such as ours, it is virtue. If virtue goes, the government falls.”
It is quite disheartening that we tend to focus our attention on the “rebels” rather than on the “roots of rebellion”. Rebels are a manifestation of the ills that pervade in our society today. A government that has lost all virtues and scruples produces rebels. However, we punish the rebels but do not address the cause of their dissent. This government is equally guilty of fomenting rebellion as well as those who opt for “tolerant complicity”. In the words of Gen Lim…”dissent without action is consent.” How true…how true. Have we then, as a people, lost all our virtues?
The hesitant rebels
Senator Trillanes et al are not rebels. At least that is what his Motion is telling us… categorically without any doubt at all: There was no rebellion and they are not rebels.
Indeed, they correctly assessed their motive and action as merely redressing of grievances, never a rebellion. They see themselves as military reformists – not rebels.
For the complete article, click to http://deep-caring.blogspot.com/2007/12/hesitant-rebels.html
SULBATZ,
I would hate to admit the “loss of virtues,” and vehemently disagree (realistic or wishful thinking). A great majority is probably more wrapped up in trying to survive, waking up at dawn to eke out a living for instance and working beyond the evening. Some endure the loneliness of separation from family and loved ones taking care of other people’s families and washing the proverbial behinds of those who can afford to pay someone else to do it.
So the ones who lost their virtues I believe would be in the vicinity of Gloria and her cohorts, add the women in Quezon Ave. (at night, don’t forget the massage parlors), and of course hapless vault files.
History will show us that the people will not rise up on their own, much less get behind (literally and physically) leaders coming from plebeian origins like Sen. Trillanes, Gen. Lim and the Tanay residents, take a look at what happened to Andres Bonifacio. I have no way of predicting the future, but I’m relearning how to pray lately…
In a world of oppression, the most likely to rebel are those who are oppressed.
However, we are told that oppression itself duped the oppressed and in turn they cannot revolt against the system of oppression. This has been forwarded to us by our social sciences professors. We were duped and believe them. Hence, we feel that the oppressed cannot liberate themselves. We believe that unless we “the educated people” initiate the necessary reforms, there will never be a meaningful and long lasting social transformation.
This is only half-truth. The poor can liberate themselves. And the true liberation can only be initiated by them, not us no matter how pure our hearts. Any revolution initiated by the non-poor and wantonly use the number of the people for social change has only make a role-reversal: the opposition politicians claiming to be pro-poor and effectively use their number will become the corrupt administration that we are trying to destroy.
PCP-II defines this principle on the Church of the Poor: “no one is so poor as to have nothing to give, and no one is so rich as to have nothing to receive.”
Deepcaring, kilometric comments are a turn-off. I suggest that you make your comments concise.
But if you can’s help it, divide them. Four or five paragraphs per comment. That’s easier to read.
Role-reversal:
“poor becomes rich, rich becomes poor.”
“opposition politician using the poor to gain power, is now the corrupt administrators today.”
“likewise, the corrupt president who successfully painted an image in the movie as champion of the poor, is now looked upon by the “dethroned” oppositioned politicians as their charismatic leader.”
These are the results of a revolution that we have in the Philippines.
When shall the people be awakened? We can help the awakening, but we cannot do it on their behalf. This is frustrating, and our military-reformist became impatient by the process, but this is the only path.
Our systematic and coordinated efforts should be focused on awakening the people. Education and organizing is one. Effective use of mass media sacrificing little profit like the Malaya is another. There are a lot of things to do in awakening our people, but let us not assume the messianic role. The role has been sacredly given to them.
ok ellen, thanks for the pointer.
Ellen,
” I still maintain that Arroyo was never elected by the Filipino as president.”
Agree!
ellen, can you edit it (The Hesitant Rebels) and link to my blog instead? Thanks.
Here’s the link:
http://deep-caring.blogspot.com/2007/12/hesitant-rebels.html
Hi Jug,
Re: “Corruption especially in the navy has been around even in the pre-Marcos era. It just changes hands, and in Marcos’ case”
Corruption was across the board even before Marcos — no higher or lower degree there.
The highest form of corruption in the pre, during and post Marcos years was the FMS. The CSAFP at that time and his board of generals were the recipients of the FMS largesses (and to think that FMS was supposed to be “corruption free”).
FMF was “directly” controlled by the donor nation, i.e., US, besides FMF was “little money” compared to funds used under FMS.
Many CSAFPs (who were mostly Army save for Gen Arnie Acedera and Gen Benjie Defensor who were both CGPAF) made millions in dollars out of the deals that were coursed through the FMS.
I agree with you, Adebrux. friend ka pala ni Lito Banayo. keep it up.
Thanks, John!
nandiyan ka naman sa iyong panglilito, Deepcaring. Sumasakay ka kunyari sa discussion about values and morality, trying hard to give the impression that you are against GMA and her men. Tapos babanatan mo sina Sen. trillanes at Gen. Lim (“There are a lot of things to do in awakening our people, but let us not assume the messianic role.”)
That’s the government propaganda.
Lim, Trillanes and the other Magdalo soldiers do not have messianic illusions. Their feet are rooted in the ground. They know they have to do their part if we have to remove an illegitimate and corrupt administration. Yun lang yun.
hi, gabriela, malupit ang pangalan mo.
“Lim, Trillanes and the other Magdalo soldiers do not have messianic illusions. Their feet are rooted in the ground. They know they have to do their part if we have to remove an illegitimate and corrupt administration. Yun lang yun.” Amen.
Remember, Marcos was overthrown not when Ninoy died but after a series of rallies and other forms of anti-marcos operations that culminated with EDSA 1.
We just have to be patient. Let us wait what will happen next year…
Nung una, ganun din ang view ko, gabriela. Asar ako kina Trillanes at Gen. Lim. But I realized it might have been for people in the military institution. The action and its message, that we civilians, might not fully comprehend.
the two might be planting the seeds that would later grow that would lead to the downfall of this corrupt government.
kaya deepcaring, relax lang. let us continue doing what these two gentlemen and magdalo members have been doing since 2003. Let us plant the seeds of discontent.
Happy New Year to All!!!
Especially to you ASIII! A word from someone who thinks as stupidly as Sen. Trillanes…
“Lim, Trillanes and the other Magdalo soldiers do not have messianic illusions. Their feet are rooted in the ground. They know they have to do their part if we have to remove an illegitimate and corrupt administration.”
Gabriela,
Agree! Agree! Agree!
Jug,
I like your last post here. Talaga naman!
Sorry po, di ko alam kung ano yang “messiahnic complex” na yan. Basta ang alam ko sa mga itinuro sakin ng mga magulang ko at ng mga titser ko ay masama ang MANDAYA, MAGNAKAW AT MAGSINUNGALING.
At pag may nakita akong mandaraya, magnanakaw at sinungaling ay isusumbong ko para mabigyan ng nararapat na kaparususahan para magtanda.
I think we have lost lost our sense of RIGHT or WRONG. When we see a wrong being committed, we tend to rationalize it. But when something right is being done, we immediately attach ill motives.
Lim and Trillanes are trying to correct a wrong. They have as much right as any citizen to protest the wrongs that institutions are being subjected to by this administration. Their being military officers does not diminish their ability to judge what is right or wrong. Neither do the rich nor the poor. It is when we becloud the issues that we begin to get lost in our own mire. And that is also when our sense of right or wrong disappears.
If this government cheats, continues to lie about it and steals to survive…..IS THAT RIGHT?
When Lim, Trillanes and the Tanay officers protested against the cheating, lying and stealing….IS THAT WRONG?
Are they messiahs???
Claro, Sulbatz.
When we were in UP we were exhorted by our professors to challenge everything. Challenge authority, challenge jurisprudence, challenge presumptions, keep those in charge on their toes and let them know we are watching. This is the only way to contribute to knowledge, the only way to keep the system from stagnating.
Its also too bad that in this jurisdiction we do not share the common law liability of silent co-conspirators or enablers. In most US states those who stand by and do nothing while a wrong is being perpetrated, are liable as silent co-conspirators, in cases of child abuse, the parent who, while not engaging in abusive acts, but through his or her silence allows the abuse to happen, is called an enabler and is liable to nearly the same degree as the “abusive” parent.
If we remain silent, we are guilty of allowing our government officials to commit acts of massive fraud, and we are helping them do this by keeping silent. But that is not the worse part.
The worse part is when we actually try to stop those who are challenging the government’s abusive acts. We do this either by ridicule, by refusing to participate in the dissent, or by rationalizing the government’s abusive acts. At this point we go from silent to actual conspiratorcy to commit plunder, fraud, corruption and all various offenses against the state.
As Danny Lim said, “Dissent without action is consent.”
“to actual conspiracy…” sorry about that.