Apo Marcos : Facts And Myths

[rooster69ph]

The yellow trolls are probably livid that Madame Meldy was granted bail.

 

masyadong obvious na ang inaasahang mangyayari...para umasang hindi siya papayagang makapagpiyansa.

 

only the dumb or yun mga hibang sa katotohanan would opined such

 

Sinong niloloko mo? Everybody knows Swiss accounts (known for their secrecy) are the favorite venue for crooks to hide their money and not, as you claim, for investment purposes.

there seems to be a common denominator between the marcoses loyalist and their idols...yun panlolokopara makapag-justify. Edited November 16, 2018 by rooster69ph

[will robie]

 

 

masyadong obvious na ang inaasahang mangyayari...para umasang hindi siya papayagang makapagpiyansa.

 

only the dumb or yun mga hibang sa katotohanan would opined such

Like I said they are.

Edited November 16, 2018 by will robie

[will robie]

Ganda naman ng picture sa taas: Governor Imee, Mayor Sara, Former First Lady Meldy, Solgen Calida, Senator JPE and President Arroyo. Idols!

Edited November 17, 2018 by will robie

[camiar]

 

 

Sinong niloloko mo? Everybody knows Swiss accounts (known for their secrecy) are the favorite venue for crooks to hide their money and not, as you claim, for investment purposes.

Doesn't prove anything. Among the millions of bank clients of Swiss banks, how many of them are crooks?

 

You think in line of what "everybody knows" but in fact, these "everybody" you that talk about don't know real reasons why funds are deposited in Swiss banks in the first place.

 

Only financial illiterates will leave their money in Swiss banks offering very low interest rates (sometimes under 1%).

 

That is why the majority of Swiss bank clients, i.e. large corporations and wealth managers, only "park" their excess funds there to avoid paying taxes in their own respective countries.

 

Yes, Swiss bank secrecy law also forbids bankers to disclose the existence of your account or any other information about it without your consent but with the EXCEPTION of transactions where the sources of funds are from criminal activities such as drug trafficking, insider trading, organized crime, or stolen funds.

 

It's hardly the crooks' favorite place to hide their money. You may have confused the Swiss banks with shell companies in the British Virgin Islands and Cayman Islands, Bermudas or in China, Dubai, etc... where real crooks hide and launder their money.

Edited November 18, 2018 by camiar

[rooster69ph]

Doesn't prove anything. Among the millions of bank clients of Swiss banks, how many of them are crooks?

 

You think in line of what "everybody knows" but in fact, these "everybody" you that talk about don't know real reasons why funds are deposited in Swiss banks in the first place.

 

Only financial illiterates will leave their money in Swiss banks offering very low interest rates (sometimes under 1%).

 

That is why the majority of Swiss bank clients, i.e. large corporations and wealth managers, only "park" their excess funds there to avoid paying taxes in their own respective countries.

 

Yes, Swiss bank secrecy law also forbids bankers to disclose the existence of your account or any other information about it without your consent but with the EXCEPTION of transactions where the sources of funds are from criminal activities such as drug trafficking, insider trading, organized crime, or stolen funds.

 

It's hardly the crooks' favorite place to hide their money. You may have confused the Swiss banks with shell companies in the British Virgin Islands and Cayman Islands, Bermudas or in China, Dubai, etc... where real crooks hide and launder their money.

well eniugh of these crap ...

 

to follow your argument to me either way “it does not prove anything” and yet do you assume their wealth came in clean???

 

so ano ba ang legit sources nun perang dineposito sa swiss account na yan?

[camiar]

well eniugh of these crap ...

 

to follow your argument to me either way “it does not prove anything” and yet do you assume their wealth came in clean???

 

so ano ba ang legit sources nun perang dineposito sa swiss account na yan?

 

It's not up to you to say "enough of this crap". Nakikisawsaw ka lang. Unless, ikaw din si Juan T?

 

I debunked Juan's assertion that Mrs. Marcos must have stolen money, based on his stupid premise that "Swiss accounts are the favorite venue for crooks to hide their money..." I doesn't necessarily follow that having a Swiss account makes you a crook. Even if you're a crook, it doesn't necessarily mean that the money you deposit into it is not legit. Debunked on both counts.

 

The Marcoses have claimed that the money they deposited in Swiss accounts are from legitimate sources and nobody has proven it otherwise.

 

So what's your problem? Bakit ka napipikon?

Edited November 19, 2018 by camiar

[rooster69ph]

It's not up to you to say "enough of this crap". Nakikisawsaw ka lang. Unless, ikaw din si Juan T?

 

I debunked Juan's assertion that Mrs. Marcos must have stolen money, based on his stupid premise that "Swiss accounts are the favorite venue for crooks to hide their money..." I doesn't necessarily follow that having a Swiss account makes you a crook. Even if you're a crook, it doesn't necessarily mean that the money you deposit into it is not legit. Debunked on both counts.

 

The Marcoses have claimed that the money they deposited in Swiss accounts are from legitimate sources and nobody has proven it otherwise.

 

So what's your problem? Bakit ka napipikon?

ang galing namantalaga...magpauso.

 

the fact of the matter is you have not debunked anything.

 

sure, money deposited under a swiss account may not necessarily mean it was ill gotten but it does not automatically mean it is not just because nobody has proven it to be so.

 

the marcoses have been repeatedly asked this question...how were they able to legitimately amass those wealth. i have as well asked you the same question...you cant seem to provide an answer. using your logic it seems i have also debunked your position on the said matter.

 

you may want to read this para matapos na ang kahibangan mo since the supreme court had ruled on the said issue in the past.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/jul2003/152154.htm

Edited November 19, 2018 by rooster69ph

[juan t]

 

It's not up to you to say "enough of this crap". Nakikisawsaw ka lang. Unless, ikaw din si Juan T?

 

I debunked Juan's assertion that Mrs. Marcos must have stolen money, based on his stupid premise that "Swiss accounts are the favorite venue for crooks to hide their money..." I doesn't necessarily follow that having a Swiss account makes you a crook. Even if you're a crook, it doesn't necessarily mean that the money you deposit into it is not legit. Debunked on both counts.

 

Debunked daw. Sagutin mo nga tong mga tanong ko:

 

1. If the Swiss accounts were not illegal, why did the Marcoses have to change the name on their accounts and make aliases?

2. Were did the millions they deposited come from in the first place? Ano ang source of income nila?

 

 

The Marcoses have claimed that the money they deposited in Swiss accounts are from legitimate sources and nobody has proven it otherwise.

 

May amnesia ka ba? The Swiss supreme court proved this a long time ago.

 

So what's your problem? Bakit ka napipikon?

[will robie]

meldy was indisposed not because she was sick but because she had to party that night.

 

hahaha...the marcoses are not only thieves, they are f#&king liars as well. sabagay may kasabihan nga na ang sinungaling ay kapatid ng magnanakaw.

 

kaya hindi na rin ako magtataka na yun mga umiidolo at loyalista sa mga ito ay ganito rin dahil ito ang kanilang kinagisnan at sa kanila normal lang yan.

Thieves? From whom did they steal from exactly?

[rooster69ph]

Thieves? From whom did they steal from exactly?

 

why are you asking ... is it because you don’t know or because you can’t accept what you already know?

 

To satisfy your query i suggest you either do your research and/or more likely the need to remove your blinders.

 

at bago mo pa muling depensahan yang mga magnanakaw na marcoses at kung saan dalhin ang usapan alamin at sabihin mo muna how they were able to amass all their wealth legitimately.

[will robie]

why are you asking ... is it because you dont know or because you cant accept what you already know?

To satisfy your query i suggest you either do your research and/or more likely the need to remove your blinders.

at bago mo pa muling depensahan yang mga magnanakaw na marcoses at kung saan dalhin ang usapan alamin at sabihin mo muna how they were able to amass all their wealth legitimately.

Haha! If you really knew what you posted about and that is that the Marcoses are thieves, you can answer it in a sentence and not this manure of a post. Edited November 21, 2018 by will robie

[rooster69ph]

Haha! If you really knew what you posted about and that is that the Marcoses are thieves, you can answer it in a sentence and not this manure of a post.

Why am i obligated to spoon-feed you??? You wish. Lol...

 

Besides basang basa ko na yang takbo ng utak mo. It would be just a waste of time to engage in a non-sensible argument with you when you can't even debunked my claim by providing how your idol was able to legitimately amass all their assets.

 

Pag nasagot mo na saka na natin ituloy ang balitaktakan sa kahibangan mo.

 

Hahaha

Edited November 21, 2018 by rooster69ph

[will robie]

Why am i obligated to spoon-feed you??? You wish. Lol...

Besides basang basa ko na yang takbo ng utak mo. It would be just a waste of time to engage in a non-sensible argument with you when you can't even debunked my claim by providing how your idol was able to legitimately amass all their assets.

Pag nasagot mo na saka na natin ituloy ang balitaktakan sa kahibangan mo.

Hahaha

I was asking you who did Marcos steal from exactly. I never said anything about Marcos legitimately amassing his wealth. Haha! Dont confuse your argument with someone else to what i asked you. Haha! Spoonfeed? Haha! Answering a question is not spoonfeeding. As usual, using a term you are clueless about. Another manure of a post that does not answer my question. It is now painfully obvious that your calling Marcos a thief is an imbecilic conjecture. I cant get enough of discrediting your dumb posts. Edited November 21, 2018 by will robie

[rooster69ph]

Haha! If you really knew what you posted about and that is that the Marcoses are thieves, you can answer it in a sentence and not this manure of a post.

I was asking you who did Marcos steal from exactly. I never said anything about Marcos legitimately amassing his wealth. Haha! Dont confuse your argument with someone else to what i asked you. Haha! Spoonfeed? Haha! Answering a question is not spoonfeeding. As usual, using a term you are clueless about. Another manure of a post that does not answer my question. It is now painfully obvious that your calling Marcos a thief is an imbecilic conjecture. I cant get enough of discrediting your dumb posts.

Ano kamo? Wag mong paikutin usapan.

 

Yun sinagot ko is obviously referring to your first post quoted above. That if i know what i was talking about pertaining to marcos are theives.

 

Nun sinagot kita iibahin mo reference. Hahaha pwned

 

 

 

If marcos did not acquire his wealth legally then obviously he is a thief. And since you can debunked this then he obviously is.

 

As to who exactly he stole from...as i said do your research and at the same time remove your blinders. Baka sakali makita mo sagot sa tinatanong mo.

 

Hahaha

Edited November 21, 2018 by rooster69ph

[will robie]

Ano kamo? Wag mong paikutin usapan.

This is coming from someone who could not answer a simple question. If the Marcoses are thieves, from who did they steal? Not answering my simple question proves that your post that the Marcoses are thieves is a moronic conjecture.

Yun sinagot ko is obviously referring to your first post quoted above. That if i know what i was talking about pertaining to marcos are theives.

Where is your answer to my simple question? All I see are three birdbrained posts that vitiated your assertion that the Marcoses are thieves.

Edited November 21, 2018 by will robie

[will robie]

Nun sinagot kita iibahin mo reference. Hahaha pwned

If it will make you sleep better at night, sige na lang.

[will robie]

If marcos did not acquire his wealth legally then obviously he is a thief. And since you can debunked this then he obviously is.

 

Again, from who did he steal? I won't hold my breath because you don't have an answer to my question. You're way too easy.

[will robie]

As to who exactly he stole from...as i said do your research and at the same time remove your blinders. Baka sakali makita mo sagot sa tinatanong mo.

 

Hahaha

Your post has already been discredited when you made a ridiculous reply after I asked you where the Marcoses stole from since you said that they were thieves. No need to belabor your vacuousness.

Edited November 21, 2018 by will robie

[will robie]

 

https://www.manilatimes.net/colossal-propaganda-lies-over-sandiganbayans-imelda-decision/471060/?fbclid=IwAR2N3gQCMOPkluaq14iwq7usSVCRTqEnPJT8bvujB0VklMlujSWWynghibM

 

How in the world could Imelda be convicted in 2018 for charges filed in 1991 to 1993, for alleged crimes committed from 1968 to 1970 (when the foundations were organized) based on a provision in the 1973 Constitution, that was deleted in the present 1987 Constitution that is the fundamental law of the land? Note that the 1960 Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act has a 10-year prescription period.

 

What is so suspicious is why the Sandiganbayan decision did not address at all this obviously significant argument against the charges against Imelda, which was one of the most important defenses her lawyers brought up.

Edited November 21, 2018 by will robie

[mamipokodiapers]

Marcos magnanakaw. Forever and ever. Imelda shuld be in a selda.

[camiar]

Marcos magnanakaw. Forever and ever. Imelda shuld be in a selda.

 

Most of the replies to our questions asking to prove Marcos really stole from government coffers is that "...we don't need to prove anything... because we know in our hearts na magnanakaw si Marcos..."

[will robie]

Marcos magnanakaw. Forever and ever. Imelda shuld be in a selda.

Fatchubs, is that you?

[rooster69ph]

Most of the replies to our questions asking to prove Marcos really stole from government coffers is that "...we don't need to prove anything... because we know in our hearts na magnanakaw si Marcos..."

WRONG...the fact of the matter is it has been proven.

 

How? The mere fact that they claim to own all these assets but can’t prove how they were able to amass this legitimately. the court has decided on such basis.

 

i wonder, if the marcoses can’t, can any marostard loyalist prove it? lol.

[camiar]

WRONG...the fact of the matter is it has been proven.

 

How? The mere fact that they claim to own all these assets but can’t prove how they were able to amass this legitimately. the court has decided on such basis.

 

i wonder, if the marcoses can’t, can any marostard loyalist prove it? lol.

So, tell me, where was it proven that anything was stolen by Marcos from government coffers?

 

People in power can create wealth without having to steal taxpayers' money.

 

You can't prove that they stole money. All you can offer are ad hominems.

[moneyball]

So, tell me, where was it proven that anything was stolen by Marcos from government coffers?

 

People in power can create wealth without having to steal taxpayers' money.

 

You can't prove that they stole money. All you can offer are ad hominems.

 

I can, with Imelda's recent conviction at the Sandiganbayan. That should more than suffice. Unless you're being you. HELLOOOOOO, EARTH TO CAMIAR.