Jump to content


Photo

Apo Marcos : Facts And Myths

President Ferdinand Marcos Marcoses Philippine History Martial Law

  • Please log in to reply
627 replies to this topic

#41 rooster69ph

rooster69ph

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:May langaw na papansin ...

Posted 05 November 2015 - 06:11 PM

 Do you have proof that he was healthy enough to attend the trial? 

 

Hindi ba ang tanong ko  was he even healthy enough to attend trial?


Edited by rooster69ph, 05 November 2015 - 06:11 PM.


#42 rooster69ph

rooster69ph

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:May langaw na papansin ...

Posted 05 November 2015 - 06:21 PM

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?"



#43 rooster69ph

rooster69ph

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:May langaw na papansin ...

Posted 05 November 2015 - 06:25 PM

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?



#44 rooster69ph

rooster69ph

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:May langaw na papansin ...

Posted 05 November 2015 - 06:31 PM

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. 



#45 rooster69ph

rooster69ph

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:May langaw na papansin ...

Posted 05 November 2015 - 06:34 PM

 

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.  



#46 rooster69ph

rooster69ph

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:May langaw na papansin ...

Posted 05 November 2015 - 06:43 PM

Nope. You never answered why you asked that question. 


 

 

So answering in a way not to your liking is tantamount to not answering your question  :rolleyes:



#47 rooster69ph

rooster69ph

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:May langaw na papansin ...

Posted 05 November 2015 - 09:08 PM

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 :)

#48 rooster69ph

rooster69ph

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:May langaw na papansin ...

Posted 05 November 2015 - 09:56 PM

 
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.

#49 rooster69ph

rooster69ph

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:May langaw na papansin ...

Posted 05 November 2015 - 10:00 PM

The fact still remains: he was never convicted.


And neither was he acquitted :)

Thus the fact remains ...his non conviction is not a proof of innocence to the crime he was charged of.

No bearing ika nga

#50 rooster69ph

rooster69ph

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:May langaw na papansin ...

Posted 05 November 2015 - 10:21 PM

First of all, did Marcos appear in court and enter a plea of "not guilty"? 


And what is now pleasure of this gentleman as to the relevance of this post in response to what i've posted earlier?

#51 swynd

swynd

    Lover

  • (06) Chronic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1107 posts

Posted 05 November 2015 - 10:50 PM

Sigh... as asked by a poster earlier... does the bad outweigh the good?

 

The pro Marcos camp has endlessly trumpeted the infrastructure and apparent economic gains.  To which I often reply... at what cost?  Marcos was brilliant, and did a lot of good.  That cannot be denied.  Why is it so hard to understand that he can be an amazing president, yet also be complicit to the torture and slaughter of our countrymen?  It's not mutually exclusive.

 

To dismiss all anti Marcos arguments as propaganda and hearsay is absurd.  Who's to say the pro Marcos argument isn't propaganda or hearsay either?  Or are we to conclude that even the International Courts that declared the Marcos assets as ill gotten were wrong or was swayed by falsehoods?  

 

One interesting parallel I like to compare this to... Holocaust Revisionism.  Sure, there are people who will fight tooth and nail to prove that the Holocaust never happened.  That it was all a Jewish conspiracy to paint them as victims and gain the political upper hand.... It's all propaganda. Myth.

 

...Or you know... Occam's Razor....



#52 rooster69ph

rooster69ph

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:May langaw na papansin ...

Posted 06 November 2015 - 08:44 AM

To young Filipinos who never knew martial law and dictatorship

 

 

or in those early months and years, middle class and upper class families welcomed Marcos’s version of  “peace and order,” the orderly queues and the empty streets where activists once voiced their opposition to corruption and injustice. But behind the scenes, unknown to many, the stealing, the torture, the killing had begun.

 It had grown quiet all of sudden, because those who had the guts to speak out had been silenced. Imprisoned. Tortured. Co-opted. Murdered.

Actually, back then, the term Marcos’s goons used was “salvage.” Yes, salvage, as in “to save” or “to rescue.” For that was how Marcos and his allies imposed “peace and order.” They saved the regime’s critics and opponents – by killing them.

 

 

“Peace and order? Ah, that actually means, ‘I want a piece of this. I want a piece of that. And that’s an order.’”

 

 

 

Then there’s the argument that goes like this: ‘What was the point of getting rid of Marcos? Look at how there’s still so much corruption and injustice in Philippine society after all these years.’

Good point.

But one thing you need to remember, and perhaps we need to remind ourselves about this too, those of us who joined the uprising to get rid of Marcos — We didn’t march thinking we would suddenly live in paradise. We didn’t face riot police and the security forces thinking that the country’s problems– the corruption, the poverty, the abuse of power — would suddenly disappear.

We joined the fight to get rid of a tyrant. And guess what – we won. And you won.

I know it’s hard to believe, especially given all the news of corruption and abuse and of people dying and disappearing.

But trust me: it was much, much worse back then. It was a much scarier, more violent time, when even the mildest criticism of government, of Marcos, of Imelda, could land you in jail or even get you killed.

Look at it this way. Some of you don’t like the current president. And you probably even joined the fad of Noynoying, making fun of the guy, calling him all sorts of names. You know what would have happened to you if you had tried a stunt like that during the Marcos years?

Marcos’s allies want you to forget that. They want you to see the long struggle against dictatorship, and the uprising that finally brought it down as wasted effort.

Which is really an absurd view if you think about it. It’s like telling our heroes and those who waged past struggles in our history that everything that happened, everything they did was a waste.

It’s like telling Jose Rizal, “You know those novels and essays and poems you wrote, including that last one you composed shortly before you were shot to death by the Spaniards, all that was a waste of time. For look at how messed up the country is right now.”

It’s like telling my own father, “Papa, joining the guerrillas was a stupid idea, given how the country whose freedom you defended against the Japanese has turned out.”

Fighting Marcos was worth it. For we took on a bully and we won.

 


 

Edited by rooster69ph, 06 November 2015 - 08:55 AM.


#53 Edmund Dantes

Edmund Dantes

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3878 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 November 2015 - 09:00 AM

 

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.  

 

O kung meron naman pala, bakit hangang ngayon di nila kaya ipakulong si Marcos at ang mga pamilya at kaibigan nila?

 

Mauuna pa magreuninon si Imelda at Ferdie bago maipakulong ang kahit na sino. And you wonder why these days people wanna ask "teka, masama ba talaga si Marcos?". Kaya huwag isisi sa tao kung gusto nila isipin na baka hindi naman ganun kasama ang mga marcos

 

 

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.

 

So ayun, kung totoo man na merong mga swiss accounts na yan, ano mangyayari sa mga yan? Kasi mukha naman di nawiwidthraw ng mga marcos mataga na. Tumutubo lang ng interes. Sayang naman lol.

 

Sabi ko hangang hindi talaga tayo nagkakaroon ng totoong demokrasya, hangang hindi napaparusahan ang mga Marcos, mananatiling may question mark yun stigma sa kanila. In time, it may even fade.

 

Sabi ko din, easily Marcos wins in both categories of being the worst and the best president ever. Inamin naman ni Bongbong na me masamang naidulot ang martial law. Nga lang, kung tatanungin, mas maigi ba na di na lang natin naging presidente si Marcos? hmmmm Hirap sagutin nyan. Kasi sa nakikita ko sa ngayon, malamang maraming probinsya ang wala pa din kuryente at tubig kung di naging presidente si Marcos



#54 rooster69ph

rooster69ph

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:May langaw na papansin ...

Posted 06 November 2015 - 09:03 AM

Bust_of_Ferdinand_Marcos%2C_near_the_tow

 

 

Magkano ba ang ginastos ni Makoy dito na galing sa kaban ng bayan at ano ba ang naging silbi nito sa mga Pilipino?


  • idecris likes this

#55 Mr.Monday

Mr.Monday

    MOD MALANTOD

  • Moderator
  • 10141 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pasig
  • Interests:Kung sino man papatol sakin. Di ako choosy. bwuahahaha

Posted 06 November 2015 - 09:06 AM

MOD NOTE:

 

Just a reminder my dear GMs.

I like the healthy debate going on here, pero tama na ang laitan. Personal attacks will not be tolerated and comments will be deleted. Resorting to name calling are so juvenile don't yah think? We're all adults here.

 

 

13. General Behavior

Having fun is good. We like fun. Please keep it positive and polite. We may take action against posts and/or topics that could cause unrest in the community beyond a civil and polite disagreement.

You may not make personal attacks on other users or staff members either in public forums or private messages.

At all times please respect the other members. Kindly refrain from making lewd suggestions or indecent proposals to the other members in the public forums. Violation of this rule will merit a two day suspension of posting privileges.

We reserve the right to ban any member who violates our guidelines or disrupts our community. We will be fair and provide warning in most cases.

There will be no racial, ethnic, gender based insults or any other personal discrimination.

 

 

Please... Let's leave the definition of terms sa dictionary. Let's present facts and arguments. Hindi yung "level of understanding" ng isa't isa. We can agree to disagree.


Edited by Alex Corvis, 06 November 2015 - 09:11 AM.


#56 rooster69ph

rooster69ph

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:May langaw na papansin ...

Posted 06 November 2015 - 09:07 AM

 

O kung meron naman pala, bakit hangang ngayon di nila kaya ipakulong si Marcos at ang mga pamilya at kaibigan nila?

 

Mauuna pa magreuninon si Imelda at Ferdie bago maipakulong ang kahit na sino. And you wonder why these days people wanna ask "teka, masama ba talaga si Marcos?". Kaya huwag isisi sa tao kung gusto nila isipin na baka hindi naman ganun kasama ang mga marcos

 

 

I think nagbigay na ako ng aking pananaw kung bakit wala pang naikulong ... yan din ang tanong mo na siyang sinagot ko.  Umiikot lang tayo.

 

Kung sakaling mauna pa magreunion si Meldy at Ferdie ... e di good riddance.  :lol:



#57 darksoulriver

darksoulriver

    God of Lust

  • (11) Wyld
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5478 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pasay

Posted 06 November 2015 - 09:31 AM

Magkano ba ang ginastos ni Makoy dito na galing sa kaban ng bayan at ano ba ang naging silbi nito sa mga Pilipino?

 

pwede nman mging tourist spot tulad ng sa US may gnyan din why not khit b galing yan sa kaban ng bayan d mo maaalis ang contribution ni Marcos sa Pilipinas...

 

pero ano ginawa winasak lng.. yung mali lng nagawa nya binibigyan ntin ng sobrang focus..



#58 Edmund Dantes

Edmund Dantes

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3878 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 November 2015 - 09:57 AM

 

I think nagbigay na ako ng aking pananaw kung bakit wala pang naikulong ... yan din ang tanong mo na siyang sinagot ko.  Umiikot lang tayo.

 

Kung sakaling mauna pa magreunion si Meldy at Ferdie ... e di good riddance.  :lol:

 

Ang punto ko dito, dahil sa failure ng PCGG na parusahan mga marcos sa mga naging kasalanan daw nila, pinagdududahan na ng tao kung totoo ba yung stigma na binibigay sa kanila. Kaya nga, nagtataka kayo kung bakit me ilan na sinasabing mas umaasenso pa yata tayo kay Marcos?

 

Tsaka anong good riddance pinagsasabi mo? Eh sabi mo me kasalanan sila! SO kung namatay sya ng di pinarurusahan, what does that make the PCGG? The courts? Our Government? Worst of all, baka kinalaunan magbago na tuluyan opinion ng publiko sa kanila. Kung si Erap nga naging manila mayor pa ulit


Edited by Edmund Dantes, 06 November 2015 - 09:59 AM.


#59 haroots2

haroots2

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3811 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 November 2015 - 09:59 AM

 

pwede nman mging tourist spot tulad ng sa US may gnyan din why not khit b galing yan sa kaban ng bayan d mo maaalis ang contribution ni Marcos sa Pilipinas...

 

pero ano ginawa winasak lng.. yung mali lng nagawa nya binibigyan ntin ng sobrang focus..

 

If it will be a tourist spot what would the tourist guide tell about APO to the tourist. It will be another never ending debate. :D



#60 haroots2

haroots2

    Philanderer

  • (09) Manic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3811 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 November 2015 - 10:05 AM

RA 10368 is the “Human Rights Victims Reparation and Recognition Act of 2013.” Through this law, the State;

a) Recognizes the heroism and sacrifices of human rights violations victims (HRVVs) during the regime of former President Ferdinand E. Marcos covering the period from September 21, 1972 to February 25, 1986; and

B) Acknowledges its moral and legal obligation to recognize and provide reparation to the victims.

The Human Rights Victims’ Claims Board (HRVCB), a quasi-judicial body, was created to receive, evaluate and process all claims, award reparation, and recognize the victims by enshrining their names in the Roll of Human Rights Violations Victims.

 

 

If you or your family are victims during martial law, would you still defend Marcos on his economic and infrastructure accomplishments?







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: President, Ferdinand Marcos, Marcoses, Philippine History, Martial Law

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users