Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hindi naman issue kung entitled o hindi sa opinion...given naman na lahat ay entitled. Ang totoong issue sino ang mas kapanipaniwala? Sino ang may credibilidad? Si LKY na respetado ng mundo o ang isang Nathan Gamble na ... Sino nga ba siya?

 

Anyway eto ang isang pagkukumpara kay Macoy at LKY...

 

From :“Political Virtue and Economic Leadership: A Southeast Asian Paradox” written by Hilton L. Root and was published by Milken Institute on November 13, 2000:

 

“Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew (1959-90) and Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines (1965-86) coexisted under similar geo-political pressures and were known to share similar political and social philosophies. Yet Lee Kuan Yew established a political party that derived its credibility from a reputation for corruption-free governance, sobriety and growth while Ferdinand Marcos became famous for larceny on a grand scale, stealing the people’s foreign aid and putting it into private bank accounts and property throughout the world.”

 

“Reflecting upon his success in Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew often boasted that he would have been able to create immense wealth for his citizens if he had only had a larger, more resource-rich country to manage. Few believed that Singapore, an island of 214 square miles and 1.8 million inhabitants, could be a viable country after separating from Malaya in 1964. Lee himself worked tirelessly from 1959 to 1964 to keep Singapore and Malaya together, writing in his memoirs, “We had said that an independent Singapore was simply not viable.” Lee argued, “It is the hinterland that produces the rubber and tin that keep our shop-window economy going. It is the base that made Singapore the capital city. Without this economic base, Singapore would not survive. Without merger, without a reunification of our two governments and an integration of our two economies, our economic position will slowly and steadily get worse.”

 

“By contrast, the nearby Philippines, with a population of 26.6 million, was considered to be a much more promising developing country. The world’s second largest producer of gold, the Philippines was endowed with a relatively well-educated population, a large resource base and, by the standards of the time, a well-developed infrastructure. With a potentially large resource base to pay back loans and extremely articulate leader it became one of the largest recipients of World Bank assistance during the tenure of Ferdinand Marcos. Yet the Philippines became the sick man of Asia, while Singaporeans now enjoy the second highest per capita income in the region after Japan.”

Link to comment

Sandali... kanino ba may utang ang Pinas sa Fed ba o sa IMF at World Bank?

 

Kung sakaling hindi naman pala sa Fed umutang ...kasi sa alam ko tumatayo itong CB ng America at lender lang nga daw ito of the last resort, ano ang kinalaman ng pagtaas nito ng rate sa pinas?

 

Isa pa, at uulitin ko ...obligado bang umutang ang Pinas? Parang ganito lang yun e ... Si Nathan pumunta sa bangko umutang pambili ng bahay. Sumunod umutang uli pambili ng kotse. Tapos umutang uli pangtravel. E humina ang kita, sinabayan pa na nagtaas ng interest ang bangko, nalintikan na at kinapos na sa pambayan ng interest (wala pang principal yun ha) tapos sisisihin mo ang bangko sa pagdefault mo?

Edited by rooster69ph
Link to comment

Una inutil ang PCGG at ang mga naghahabol kila marcos. Pangalawa, malamang me sabwatan na sila. Eitherway, pagkukulang pa din ito ng gobyerno.

 

 

 

 

I agree on both. Magagaling ang mga lawyers ng mga Marcoses. Estelito Mendoza was one of the brightest lawyers we ever had. Kaya nga pati si Lucio Tan hindi rin natatalo sa kahit anong tax cases because of him.

Also want to add, after lifting the Martial Law, sana bumitiw na sa pwesto si Marcos since his health is failing by that time. Baka siguro si Ninoy hindi napatay and KBL is still running the govt.

Link to comment

 

I agree on both. Magagaling ang mga lawyers ng mga Marcoses. Estelito Mendoza was one of the brightest lawyers we ever had. Kaya nga pati si Lucio Tan hindi rin natatalo sa kahit anong tax cases because of him.

Also want to add, after lifting the Martial Law, sana bumitiw na sa pwesto si Marcos since his health is failing by that time. Baka siguro si Ninoy hindi napatay and KBL is still running the govt.

 

Ito lang ang alam ko, kung yung pumalit sana ginawa dapat para sulusyunan yung maraming problema iniwan ng Marcos administration, kung sana umunlad talaga tayo. Kung sana nakulong nga ang mga marcos at iba pang plunderer sa Pilipinas, Kung binigyan lang tayo ng totoong demokrasya, sana ang publiko ngayon hindi magtatanong ng "Di kaya mas umaasenso pa tayo kay Apo?"

 

Democracy is more than having "rights". Its a system of government where the greater interest of the people is prioritized. Ang meron tayo sistema na ang priority interest ng political families at mayayaman.

Link to comment

 

I agree on both. Magagaling ang mga lawyers ng mga Marcoses. Estelito Mendoza was one of the brightest lawyers we ever had. Kaya nga pati si Lucio Tan hindi rin natatalo sa kahit anong tax cases because of him.

Also want to add, after lifting the Martial Law, sana bumitiw na sa pwesto si Marcos since his health is failing by that time. Baka siguro si Ninoy hindi napatay and KBL is still running the govt.

 

Unang una, nun buhay pa si Makoy laging dinadahilan na may sakit ito at hindi makaharap sa korte. At nun namatay na ito siyempre pwede mo bang ma-convict ang isang patay na?

 

Siyempre may pagkukulang din ang mga nagdaang administration. May napabalitang sablay ang pinaggagawa ng PCGG. Hindi natin alam kung sinadya o talagang inutil kaya natalo sa technicality. Si Imelda na na convict nun 1993 binaligtad ang conviction nun 1998 ... kauupo pa lang ni Erap nun. Alam naman natin gaano kalapit si Erap sa mga Marcos. Hindi po ba inendorso ni Meldy si Erap sa last minute nun 1998. Ngayong tatakbong vice is BBM hindi ba nangunguna si Erap sa nagtaas ng kamay nito. At may administration din nakipagcompromise deal na lang imbes na ipagpatuloy ang kaso. Kahit si BBM inamin/sinabi na "they will continue to do so"

Link to comment

Yeah sure, publications, articles, short stories, or you can even throw in novels. They don't change the fact that Marcos never got convicted.

 

He did convited of murder. Na reverse lang ng Supreme Court just because nanghihinayang sila sa tao since they saw Marcos has a great future ahead of him.

Link to comment

why is it we seem to expect perfection from our presidents? marcos left the country with humongous debts and problems that an ordinary leader would not be able to solve in one term. and Cory was not the greatest president so let us stop blaming her. her legacy is bringing back our rights to speak and act freely. for that, she is way way better than any Marcos combined.

 

I blame those who keep supporting the obviously evil and corrupt. it is because these corrupt politicians are still very popular that we are always forced to settle. Erap was still popular so we settled for PNoy. And since Binay & Bongbong are also popular we will most probably be forced to settle again.

 

for those who seem to have seething hatred for PNoy, I say it is better to have seething hatred for corruption, lying, hypocrisy and thievery. palpak si PNoy. let me emphasize that. but I will take the incremental improvements that our country has experienced with PNoy anytime than a return to a corrupt system that has kept us as a slow, underachieving country.

Link to comment

Yet the Philippines became the sick man of Asia, while Singaporeans now enjoy the second highest per capita income in the region after Japan.”

 

Singapore citizens follow even the smallest rule of law..in the Philippines you still need to remind them!

 

the Philippines current state is not entirely Marcos fault...

 

yes he's part of it but why still more filipinos think Marcos is the better than the past and present President.

 

were angry because Marcos proclaim Martial Law. but we still vote Ramos and Enrile.

Link to comment

How sure are you he would have been convicted had he lived long enough?

 

The same as to how sure you would be to his acquittal had he lived long enough.

 

Arguing whether or not he would have been convicted if he lived long enough is pure speculation at this point. Considering the fact that he died, the better question to ask is if you can you convict a dead person??? :lol:

 

Bottomline, arguing that he was not convicted to prove his innocence does not hold ground since he was neither acquitted right? In fact was he even "healthy" enough to attend trial?

Edited by rooster69ph
Link to comment

can you convict a dead man??? :huh:

 

Actually andyan pa si Imelda at mga pamilya nya. Ang daming kaso sinampa sa kanya pero ni isa man lang dun hindi sya mapakulogn. Ano na ba nagawa ng PCGG? Bakit ni isa sa mga sinasabing swiss accounts hindi naman mabawi?

 

 

 

Yet the Philippines became the sick man of Asia, while Singaporeans now enjoy the second highest per capita income in the region after Japan.”

 

Singapore citizens follow even the smallest rule of law..in the Philippines you still need to remind them!

 

the Philippines current state is not entirely Marcos fault...

 

yes he's part of it but why still more filipinos think Marcos is the better than the past and present President.

 

were angry because Marcos proclaim Martial Law. but we still vote Ramos and Enrile.

 

I agree, the problems we have today were caused more by the leaders that replaced APO, than APO himself. Marcos is a convenient bad guy. Is is an escape goat. Lahat na lang ng kapalpakan ng kasalukuyan na ayusin mga problema ng bansa laging kelangan isisi kay Marcos. 50 years daw kasi aantayin para ma-undo damage ng ginawa ng diktador. Ganun din ba katagal bumangon ang Spain pagkatapos ni Franco? Ang Italy pagkatapos ni Mouslini? Tignan natin sabi ang indonesia. Naghirap din naman husto bansang yun dahil kay Suharto. Mas nauna pa tayo lumaya sa kanila, pero ngayon magkakaroon na sila ng bullet train

Link to comment

 

Actually andyan pa si Imelda at mga pamilya nya. Ang daming kaso sinampa sa kanya pero ni isa man lang dun hindi sya mapakulogn. Ano na ba nagawa ng PCGG? Bakit ni isa sa mga sinasabing swiss accounts hindi naman mabawi?

 

 

 

 

Well ako kasi ang tingin ko sino ba ang nasaposisyon na nagnakaw at ang pangunahing kinasuhan? SI Ferdie yun pero patay na...

 

 

As to the other family members, well depende kung ano ang kasong naisampa. Pero sa aking pagkakaalam na convict na si meldy nun 1993 if i remember it correctly. Pero binaligtad nun 1998 ilang buwan matapos naupo sa pwesto si Erap. Hindi naman ako nagtataka kung bakit ...while tumakbo si Meldy nun 1998, last minute inendorso niya si Erap. At saka, ano ba ang connection ni Erap sa mga Marcos? Etong nagannounce si BBM na tatakbo bilang VP sino ba ang nasa tabi niya at nagtaas ng kamay? I guess you can deduce kung ano ang nangyari in between. As I told you earlier, hindi mo pwedeng sabihin walang naganap na krimen at suicide ang dahilan ng pagkamatay ng isang tao na may 3 tama ng bala sa ulo kahit na walang nakakita kung sino ang gumawa ng krimen at higit sa lahat walang na convict.

 

As to the issue na walang nabawi ang PCGG, again, you may want to check your facts. Meron pong nabawing nakaw na yaman although it is not as much as expected. Why? Various factors ... hindi ko alam kung dahil purely incompetent, dahil may napabalitang na dismiss yun kaso sa technicality dahil sa pinaggagawa ng PCGG. Dahil magaling ang pagtatago ng yaman kaya mahina ang kaso o di kaya nasusuhulan ang mga nakaupo kaya in the end masabing may nagawa lang ayun compromise agreement pumapayag na. For the record, BBM has been quotedas as saying they have been negotiating for compromise agreement and will continue to do so.

Edited by rooster69ph
Link to comment

 

Actually andyan pa si Imelda at mga pamilya nya. Ang daming kaso sinampa sa kanya pero ni isa man lang dun hindi sya mapakulogn. Ano na ba nagawa ng PCGG? Bakit ni isa sa mga sinasabing swiss accounts hindi naman mabawi?

 

 

Mahirap talagang bawiin ang mga Swiss Acct.s, hindi dahil may kapangyarihan pa si Marcos kundi yun ang mahigpit na policy ng mga Swiss Banks. kaya nga sila sikat dahil sa kanilang bank secrecy law. If those swiss banks gave those accts. to the Phil. govt., many depositors will react to their policy and may result to mass withrawal of accounts.

Link to comment

Then why ask the question in the first place when you're not even sure if he was gonna be convicted had he lived? :blink:

 

Because you said he was never convicted hence the question ... I don't speculate and deal only with the fact that he's dead and there was no acquittal during his lifetime. Bakit pwede bang ma convict ang isang patay? :P Kung buhay siya, then na acquit then that's the time you tell me he was never convicted. ;)

 

tell me .. ano ang hindi mo naintindihan dito sa sinabi ko? "Bottomline, arguing that he was not convicted to prove his innocence does not hold ground since he was neither acquitted right? In fact was he even "healthy" enough to attend trial?" :lol:

Edited by rooster69ph
Link to comment

Inumpisahan mo yung statement mo ng in fact. There shouldn't even be the phrase "in fact" when asking a question. So, do you even understand the word "imply"?

 

 

OK ka lang? gusto mong maglabas ako ng proof na healthy siya to attend trial e yun health issues nga niya ni-raise ko thus the question " was he even healthy enough to attend trial?"

Link to comment

Yes, he was never convicted. So? Your question, "can you convict a dead person?" implies that you believe that he would have been convicted had he lived. Do you understand the meaning of the word "imply"? :wacko: Do you have proof that he was healthy enough to attend the trial?

 

Nope I never implied that ...

 

The argument is plain and simple as I have explained earlier in the same post ... "Bottomline, arguing that he was not convicted to prove his innocence does not hold ground since he was neither acquitted right?

 

 

 

So uulitin ko ano ang hindi mo naintindihan sa sinabi ko?

Link to comment

Ok. So Marcos was sick. Again, no one would really know, unless that person was a clairvoyant, that Marcos would have been convicted or not. Your question "can you convict a dead man" is an implication that you believe that he would have been convicted had he lived.

 

Ayun naman pala e ... he was sick. Did he attend trials? Was there a conviction nor acquital? Wala ... Hence sabi ko nga "Bottomline, arguing that he was not convicted to prove his innocence does not hold ground since he was neither acquitted right?

 

Did I imply anything other than what I've said? I don't think so ... maybe ...jyou have problems with your comprehension. As a matter of FACT, ayun o hinihingan mo ako ng proof na healthy siya to attend trials when hindi naman yun ang sinasabi ko.

 

Wag kang pauso para maka-score.

Link to comment

 

Because you said he was never convicted hence the question ... I don't speculate and deal only with the fact that he's dead and there was no acquittal during his lifetime. Bakit pwede bang ma convict ang isang patay? :P Kung buhay siya, then na acquit then that's the time you tell me he was never convicted. ;)

 

tell me .. ano ang hindi mo naintindihan dito sa sinabi ko? "Bottomline, arguing that he was not convicted to prove his innocence does not hold ground since he was neither acquitted right? In fact was he even "healthy" enough to attend trial?" :lol:

 

 

Really? The fact that you asked that question "can you convict a dead man?" is an implication that you believe that Marcos would have been convicted had he lived. I understood every word you said. Did you understand your own question? If you understood your question, why ask the question in the first place?

 

 

sinagot na kita earlier ...paikot-ikot ka lang.

Link to comment

Hahaha...spin doctor in the house! Paulit ulit ...sorry ka na lang i've said my piece and yun na yun. Final answer!

 

On the flip-side, can you contradict the fact that marcos was neither acquitted?

 

Stop using the he was never convicted trump card ... It does not prove his innocence of the crime during his lifetime.

 

Only dumbass would think so ...bato bato sa langit ang tamaan wag magagalit :)

Link to comment

 

Mods, lest I be accused of attacking this poster, check out the statement in bold. Hindi ako nauna. I was asking him why he asked the question in the first place if he didn't know that Marcos would be convicted.

 

Am just stating the fact ... I have proof as shown by our conversation below which can be found above.

 

This is what i said : "Bottomline, arguing that he was not convicted to prove his innocence does not hold ground since he was neither acquitted right? In fact was he even "healthy" enough to attend trial?"

 

 

And you replied : "Do you have proof that he was healthy enough to attend the trial? "

 

 

Dito pa lang kitang kita na iba ang interpretasyon mo sa sinabi ko. Ibang iba ang ibig sabihin ng "was he even healthy enough to attend trial" sa he "was healthy enough to attend trial" which you were insinuating.

 

Kaya nag post ako ng "OK ka lang? gusto mong maglabas ako ng proof na healthy siya to attend trial e yun health issues nga niya ni-raise ko thus the question was he even healthy enough to attend trial?"

 

After which you finally came to your senses and said "Ok. So Marcos was sick."

 

Anu ba yan ...masyadong pusong mamon. Kahit naman nasa harapan na yang pruweba aba'y sabi ko nga "maybe" you have problems with your comprehension para hindi nga makasakit.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...