By: Elena Grace Flores
Benigno Aquino Jr was assasinated in 1983 that ignited a revolution. Jovito Salonga corrected that he did not die as a hero. Edsa participants did not even reach 10% of the Philippine population. He certainly died for his ambition to replace Marcos in the presidency. Ninoy has not done anything for the country except to talk; Salaonga said as Ninoy was noted to use his media influence to ruin Marcos through media propaganda.
Whereas former President Ferdinand E. Marcos died in exile at St. Francis Medical Center after a long battle with heart, lung and kidney ailments on September 28, 1989. Imelda, former first lady was at his bedside during the time of his death. He died without facing trial on United States criminal charges that he plundered the Philippine Treasury of more than $100 million in his 20 years in power.
Now, just looking at the images of their deaths, which family do you think are users of circumstances for their own gain and who respects their dead more by at least giving them the kind of burial they deserve? Aquino or Marcos?
By: Elena Grace Flores
This is written in Inquirer’s content online: President-elect Rodrigo Duterte said Tuesday that corrupt journalists were legitimate targets of assassination; this is true but why is the title like this?: Duterte endorses killing corrupt journalists; which is false since he was only commenting that corrupt journalists can be targets of killings but definitely did not endorse their killings.
The 174 murders after the administration of former President Ferdinand E. Marcos was toppled, can clearly signify that there ae many factions that are condemning media corruption. In fairness, the journalists are merely following the platforms of their media or else, their work will not be published or released into their channels.
This statement is also true: Duterte also said freedom of expression provisions in the constitution did not necessarily protect a person from violent repercussions for defamation.
“That can’t be just freedom of speech. The constitution can no longer help you if you disrespect a person,” he said. Anger can lead to evil doings so provoking a person can trigger someon to kill another. Is this not the reality?
If this line will be highlighted without the introduction why Duterte said this, then this can be easily misinterpreted: Journalist ‘deserved to die’ – when he meant that those corrupt journalists who would do everything to destroy a person for personal interests, deserves to die – but he did not mentioned to be killed. Give it the benefit of a doubt that corrupt press people can also have an untimely death as a punishment.
In response to: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/788543/duterte-endorses-killing-corrupt-journalists
By: Elena Grace Flores
Journalists are people – and so they also react same as the majority of the public. We have to accept that we now have a President who speaks his mind and a brutally frank one. Although he cannot say one thing and mean another, journalists must be extra talented to really understand what he really means.
Some press groups are actually over-reacting. The President did not agree with the killings but he simply said that media propaganda materializes because of corrupt journalists – thus assasination can happen. It might be appaling the way he said it – but definitely not endorsing the killings.
Another misunderstanding is the word “corrupt’ like in the reaction of a Manila journalist’s widow killed last week – that he only had 200 pesos in him when he died. I think, Duterte was only narrating how a journalist can twist titles or put more weignt on one side or worst, promoting lies just to make their sponsors look good. A one-sided title is not wrong if it is true – and not misleading people. It’s called “compelling” title.
Journalists must listen to Duterte when he said that if a journalist have not done something wrong, then he or she won’t be killed. He is merely emphasizing his take to warn corrupt journalists to do their job properly or else, they will be punished.
By: Elena Grace Flores
In response to this online article from Global Research: http://www.globalresearch.ca/philippines-malaysia-conflict-drop-the-sabah-claim-focus-on-the-bangsamoro-agreement/5527954
which is a reaction to President-Elect Rodrigo Duterte’s staking a fresh claim on Sabah – and his recognition of Sabah as a Sulu Sultanate of the Philippines territory, this is my take as an International Filipino Writer involved in its painstakingly long investigation.
Up to this date, the Malaysian government through it’s embassy in the Philippines are still offering the Sultanate of Sulu to continue the rent of Sabah – after it was stopped by Sultan Jamalul Kiram when he ran as Senator under former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo with the promise that she will not drop the Sabah claim. Hard evidences of the lease are still kept in the Sultanate of Sulu’s Headquarters in Zamboanga City from the time the British North Borneo Company rented it in 1878. I am a witness of that when I visited the humble HQ in 2005 after working in the United Nations Conference Center in Bangkok, Thailand where discussions over the claim were discussed by peers after Sultan Kiram submitted his plea to the UN tribunal – in which the UN already recognized Sabah as a Philippine property urging Malaysia to settle the dispute in a diplomatic manner based on the documentary evidence.
The very significant situation seen among the citizens of Sabah is that – despite having the Malaysian citizenship, their origin can be traced back to their Filipino ancestors since the 60’s. Most of them just did not have the choice to retain their Filipino citizenship after Malaysia forcibly took the ownership from the Sultanate of Sulu. The Sabah claim has been kept alive not just for political reasons but just waiting for the right time and alliances. During the time of then President Diosdado Macapagal and Ferdinand E. Marcos, there’s no stopping the Philippines from claiming back Sabah – but media propaganda paved its way into the presidency of Marcos when Ninoy Aquino then Senator connive with the Malaysians to block Marcos’s agenda in claiming it.
Now President Duterte, who is very vocal that his ancestors are pro-Marcos, still retains the strong alliance with the Marcoses and even displayed his loyalty to the son, Bongbong Marcos who just lost his Vice Presidential bid to a Liberal Party bet, Leni Robredo amidst fraud protests. She belongs to the same party of the Philippine traitor, Ninoy Aquino – and she is not getting a cabinet position under Duterte’s reign. She would probably end up as a “door mat” Vice President.
Better yet, Duterte vowed that if he cannot do his promises within 3 to 6 months time, he will turn over the presidency to Bongbong Marcos. Marcos also will redraft the Bangsamoro Law after finding out that many points in there are unconstitutional and some are to the Malaysians’s favor only. Now, if you are someone who doen’t know the real history well enough, it would be unfair to urge president Duterte – that
instead of pursuing the Sabah claim, he should push for the realization of the Comprehensive Agreement on Bangsamoro by the Philippine Congress. The peace Agreement signed between the Government of the Philippines and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) on the 27th of March 2014 in Manila that paved the way for the creation of a new Muslim autonomous entity, the Bangsamoro, in the southern island of Mindanao is not a guarantee that there will be peace.
Duterte might be adopting the Bangsamoro law under Federalism but only after the approval of the new draft by Senator Bongbong Marcos. Most Filipinos have Muslim origin as per history of the 10 Bornean datus and not only Duterte. Filipinos will never let Sabah go just like that. Blood may be shed and lives will be lost – but if fighting for your sovereign land, it’s worth dying for. Peace and progress will come to the land and to ASEAN after the disputes will be sorted out – peaceful or not!
In response to: http://www.globalresearch.ca/philippines-malaysia-conflict-drop-the-sabah-claim-focus-on-the-bangsamoro-agreement/5527954
By: Elena Grace Flores
Senator Sergio Osmeña III affirmed the ehistleblowers accompanied by Pastor Boy Saycon into the Senate – and he was not even surprised with the Liberal government official allegedly involved in the said fiasco. There is a great possibility that the suspect will immediately go into hiding and revealing him this early will not help the senate probe on the mass fraudulent activities reported by various groups.
Osmeña was one of those personalities being approached by the three whistleblowers in the Senate seeking security and refuge. A bigger manipulaton scheme of the votes will likely to come out of this confessions but there is a long process to go through in doing this.
The move to look into this matter is supported by Senators Vicente Sotto and Cynthia Villar. There’s no way that Smartmatic will have the say on who the election winners are in future elections; he said.