sandy51 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 When I read the postings here, my impression is that majority think Pinoy is incompetent. If this is so, why was he elected? Surely there is no doubt that he really won. Because the "masa" voted for him? The "masa" are only interested in getting a job that does not require work and are only swayed by what they hear from supposedly intelligent people. So why did these supposedly intelligent people push for Pinoy when they knew he had no managerial experience whatsoever? He is just a rich kid who could survive for the rest of his life without having to face the pressures of work, so why push for him? Because, his battle cry was hang Gloria (although the more appropriate term, I think, is burn at the stake because that is what is done to witches)? But being intelligent, they should know that a President has no power over the courts and it is only the courts that can hang (or burn) her. And they would also know that the Philippine Courts is not exactly a model of rightheousness. So why? Because of so much hatred thatd they are/were willing to gamble the future of the country just so they can get even with the evil Gloria? Suppose it were really possible to burn her tomorrow, what do we do now that the raison d'etre is gone? Or could the reason for support be precisely because of his perceived incompetence, it would be easy to manipulate him? But is that reasoning really not being selfish and is it something that will be good for the country? I pressume they would also know that there will be so many of them, manipulators, each, having their own idea which may be in conflict with the other. Wouldn't that be chaos? Dolphy was once being encouraged to run but his reply was that winning is something he can be confident about but his problem is what to do after that. I'm sure Pinoy must have known about his shortcomings too, so why did he accept? But what is done s done. What to do now? Another revolution? Haven't we learned our lessons yet from the two EDSAs? "Better a devil we know than an angel we don't". So "love the one you're with". If we feel that we are suffering now, then we just have to pay for our mistake. C'est la vie. Sorry for us. We only get what we deserve. Quote Link to comment
wolfwhistler Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 no, the ombudsman is not a court. its the prosecuting arm of the government against people who committed corrupt practices during their tenure as public officers. at best, the ombudsman can only make administrative sanctions against some officials. but of course, there can be no administrative sanction against GMA. the court where the ombudsman file cases is the sandiganbayan. nagkakalokohan na yata tayo eh...komo lawyer ka...dinadaan mo na lang ako sa semantics...8 years kang nag aral ng law...marami dito sa amin, nag-re-rely sa binabasa namin... kung puwede...lang sana...paki explain nga ng sinasabi sa mga pahayagan...when they say that 5 plunder cases has been filed or...'yet another case has been filed'...pag sinabi bang kinasuhan si ganun or si ganire...tama bang i-assume na the case isprogressing ?...that eventually...it will reach the proper courts ? alam mo pareho lamang naman tayong naniniwala sa presumption of innocence...parehong lang naman ang brand demokrasya na pinaniniwalaan natin...alam ko galit ka sa trial by publicity...pero as i have mentioned before...hindi kapuwedeng mamili ng isang aspeto lang ng demokrasya...you have to take the whole thing...hook, line and sinker...one of the things that i do NOT like sa mga ginagawa ng mga arroyois they are STONEWALLING and doing everything within their power (money) to evade ang mga tanongng mga FILIPINO...so, bakit ?...bakit kelangang bayaran ang mga congressman para hindi matuloy ang impeachment process?...bakit kelangan si IGGY ang sumalo ng kaso ni JOSE PIDAL...tapos ngayon, si IGGY na naman ang nag-lease ng mga helicopter...mabuti pa nga si MIKEY at asawa niya......mas matapang they submittted themselves to the BIR ... bakit kailangan ni Bunye na mag-i have 2 discs...tapos, yung 'i'm sorry' ni GMA ?...ang daming tanong...pero walang sagot...ang laging sagot..."magkita nalang tayo sa korte"... eh alam naman natin sa korte, ang ebidensiya laging nakaturo sa mga small time nacrooks na binayaran...like what happened dun sa palawan...those in power, those who have money....they know how to get around the law...with high paid lawyers, the rich and powerful use the law to their advantage....di ba sabi mo nga...nagbayad ng 10 million yung kliyente mo para hindi matawagsa senate hearing - that's one way of getting around the law... ..if there's anything that we could agree on...totoong marami ang incompetent sa administrasyon ni Pnoy...pero that'san improvement sa panahon ni GMA...talamak ang incompetent at corrupt sa panahon ni Gloria... Quote Link to comment
wolfwhistler Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 i agree. in fact, the attack dogs are so desperate in their fishing expedition for evidence they have to detain the poor ex-bookeeper of LTA so she would sing the tune they want to hear. the Pnoy administration is worsening by the day. let's put this thing in its proper context...shall we ?and so apparently, this is what happened....and i quote mr bondoc... "But when confronted with a bank document the $500,000-wire transfer by LTA Inc. to Robinson in December 2003 the accountant in Rowena had to give. Yes, it was authentic, she said but quickly added that it was an advance payment for the lease. She stuck to her story, although Robinson only manufactures and never leases helicopters. The senators knew she was lying, and cited and detained her for contempt. Aside from conspiracy with Mike, she would be charged with perjury." Wouldnt you feel insulted, when you know someone is lying to you ? Quote Link to comment
jopoc Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 nagkakalokohan na yata tayo eh...komo lawyer ka...dinadaan mo na lang ako sa semantics...8 years kang nag aral ng law...marami dito sa amin, nag-re-rely sa binabasa namin... kung puwede...lang sana...paki explain nga ng sinasabi sa mga pahayagan...when they say that 5 plunder cases has been filed or...'yet another case has been filed'...pag sinabi bang kinasuhan si ganun or si ganire...tama bang i-assume na the case isprogressing ?...that eventually...it will reach the proper courts ? no semantics here. the ombudsman and DOJ merely make PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS, meaning, they will study/investigate whether or not the case should be filed in court. normally, the DOJ, or the public prosecutors aka fiscals, will file cases in regular courts while the Ombudsman will file the case in the sandiganbayan. its is the regular court (rtc or mtc) and the Sandiganbayan that is actually a court, not the ombudsman or doj. my point is simple. kung may malakas na ebidensya ang doj or ombudsman, hindi dapat tumatagal ang investigation. they should have filed it in court already. so ask yourself, WHY THE DELAY???? ps. on a personal note, i did not study law for 8 years. 5 years lang (had to extend 1 year for not being the brightest in class. hehe) let's put this thing in its proper context...shall we ?and so apparently, this is what happened....and i quote mr bondoc... "But when confronted with a bank document the $500,000-wire transfer by LTA Inc. to Robinson in December 2003 the accountant in Rowena had to give. Yes, it was authentic, she said but quickly added that it was an advance payment for the lease. She stuck to her story, although Robinson only manufactures and never leases helicopters. The senators knew she was lying, and cited and detained her for contempt. Aside from conspiracy with Mike, she would be charged with perjury." Wouldnt you feel insulted, when you know someone is lying to you ? a. so, what is the lie here? she merely admitted that the bank document is authentic. remember that rowena is a mere bookeeper. utusan lang sya. hindi naman sya ang magsasabi kung lease payment o hindi and whether or not it was an advance payment for the lease. she was merely relying on what she knows. saan ka nakakita ng bookeeper na nakikialam kung papaano magbabayad ang mga boss nya? b. rowena made it clear that her boss is iggy. the records are clear that mike is not a shareholder of LTA in 2001-2010, so how can mike be her boss in 2004? c. if someone lies to me, i file the proper case, i will not take the law in my hands. if rowena suddenly recants her statement, do you think its still believable? would you not say she was doing it out of duress and coercion? d. bondoc is an attack dog of the pnoy administration. look at his previous articles. he has always been the one taking a first crack against FG. Quote Link to comment
sandy51 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 nagkakalokohan na yata tayo eh...komo lawyer ka...dinadaan mo na lang ako sa semantics...8 years kang nag aral ng law...marami dito sa amin, nag-re-rely sa binabasa namin... kung puwede...lang sana...paki explain nga ng sinasabi sa mga pahayagan...when they say that 5 plunder cases has been filed or...'yet another case has been filed'...pag sinabi bang kinasuhan si ganun or si ganire...tama bang i-assume na the case isprogressing ?...that eventually...it will reach the proper courts ? alam mo pareho lamang naman tayong naniniwala sa presumption of innocence...parehong lang naman ang brand demokrasya na pinaniniwalaan natin...alam ko galit ka sa trial by publicity...pero as i have mentioned before...hindi kapuwedeng mamili ng isang aspeto lang ng demokrasya...you have to take the whole thing...hook, line and sinker...one of the things that i do NOT like sa mga ginagawa ng mga arroyois they are STONEWALLING and doing everything within their power (money) to evade ang mga tanongng mga FILIPINO...so, bakit ?...bakit kelangang bayaran ang mga congressman para hindi matuloy ang impeachment process?...bakit kelangan si IGGY ang sumalo ng kaso ni JOSE PIDAL...tapos ngayon, si IGGY na naman ang nag-lease ng mga helicopter...mabuti pa nga si MIKEY at asawa niya......mas matapang they submittted themselves to the BIR ... bakit kailangan ni Bunye na mag-i have 2 discs...tapos, yung 'i'm sorry' ni GMA ?...ang daming tanong...pero walang sagot...ang laging sagot..."magkita nalang tayo sa korte"... eh alam naman natin sa korte, ang ebidensiya laging nakaturo sa mga small time nacrooks na binayaran...like what happened dun sa palawan...those in power, those who have money....they know how to get around the law...with high paid lawyers, the rich and powerful use the law to their advantage....di ba sabi mo nga...nagbayad ng 10 million yung kliyente mo para hindi matawagsa senate hearing - that's one way of getting around the law... ..if there's anything that we could agree on...totoong marami ang incompetent sa administrasyon ni Pnoy...pero that'san improvement sa panahon ni GMA...talamak ang incompetent at corrupt sa panahon ni Gloria... And the improvements are what again? Economic improvement? These are brought about by fiscal and legislative policies that do not bear fruit overnight. O, baka naman improvement in the way we sanctioned those involved in the hostage crisis? Quote Link to comment
jopoc Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 alam mo pareho lamang naman tayong naniniwala sa presumption of innocence...parehong lang naman ang brand demokrasya na pinaniniwalaan natin...alam ko galit ka sa trial by publicity...pero as i have mentioned before...hindi kapuwedeng mamili ng isang aspeto lang ng demokrasya...you have to take the whole thing...hook, line and sinker...one of the things that i do NOT like sa mga ginagawa ng mga arroyois they are STONEWALLING and doing everything within their power (money) to evade ang mga tanongng mga FILIPINO...so, bakit ?...bakit kelangang bayaran ang mga congressman para hindi matuloy ang impeachment process?...bakit kelangan si IGGY ang sumalo ng kaso ni JOSE PIDAL...tapos ngayon, si IGGY na naman ang nag-lease ng mga helicopter...mabuti pa nga si MIKEY at asawa niya......mas matapang they submittted themselves to the BIR ... bakit kailangan ni Bunye na mag-i have 2 discs...tapos, yung 'i'm sorry' ni GMA ?...ang daming tanong...pero walang sagot...ang laging sagot..."magkita nalang tayo sa korte"... eh alam naman natin sa korte, ang ebidensiya laging nakaturo sa mga small time nacrooks na binayaran...like what happened dun sa palawan...those in power, those who have money....they know how to get around the law...with high paid lawyers, the rich and powerful use the law to their advantage....di ba sabi mo nga...nagbayad ng 10 million yung kliyente mo para hindi matawagsa senate hearing - that's one way of getting around the law... ..if there's anything that we could agree on...totoong marami ang incompetent sa administrasyon ni Pnoy...pero that'san improvement sa panahon ni GMA...talamak ang incompetent at corrupt sa panahon ni Gloria... if you believe in the presumption of innocence, then you should believe that GMA, MIKE and IGGY have nothing to explain as long as the case has not been filed in COURT. remember that only courts can determine guilt of a person. so if they dont want to answer, let it be, let us still presume that they are innocent. as to small time crooks na binayaran, as far as i am concerned, if they voluntarily allowed themselves to be the fall guys for the big time crooks, that is their look out. Quote Link to comment
wolfwhistler Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 no semantics here. the ombudsman and DOJ merely make PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS, meaning, they will study/investigate whether or not the case should be filed in court. normally, the DOJ, or the public prosecutors aka fiscals, will file cases in regular courts while the Ombudsman will file the case in the sandiganbayan. its is the regular court (rtc or mtc) and the Sandiganbayan that is actually a court, not the ombudsman or doj. my point is simple. kung may malakas na ebidensya ang doj or ombudsman, hindi dapat tumatagal ang investigation. they should have filed it in court already. so ask yourself, WHY THE DELAY???? ps. on a personal note, i did not study law for 8 years. 5 years lang (had to extend 1 year for not being the brightest in class. hehe) a. so, what is the lie here? she merely admitted that the bank document is authentic. remember that rowena is a mere bookeeper. utusan lang sya. hindi naman sya ang magsasabi kung lease payment o hindi and whether or not it was an advance payment for the lease. she was merely relying on what she knows. saan ka nakakita ng bookeeper na nakikialam kung papaano magbabayad ang mga boss nya? b. rowena made it clear that her boss is iggy. the records are clear that mike is not a shareholder of LTA in 2001-2010, so how can mike be her boss in 2004? c. if someone lies to me, i file the proper case, i will not take the law in my hands. if rowena suddenly recants her statement, do you think its still believable? would you not say she was doing it out of duress and coercion? d. bondoc is an attack dog of the pnoy administration. look at his previous articles. he has always been the one taking a first crack against FG. i cannot be envious of you at all for belonging to a much maligned group of individuals...but thank you for enlightening me about how the legal process start and how it progresses... "why the delay"?...i think, as i have mentioned previously, we need better prosecutors...'fiscals' sabi mo nga...and with the change of administration, i'm hoping there will be changesin the mindsets of quite a few of our kababayans...perhaps, in 2 or 3 years...a more responsiblecitizenry would emerge ... it took gloria 9 years to turn us into what we are now...i am hoping thatin half the time, we could turn 180 degrees... who knows ? baka mawala na ang 'utang na loob' sa kultura natin?...maybe rowena,might NOT even consider to be a board member of PAG-IBIG next time..i think YOU are more qualified than her... Quote Link to comment
jopoc Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 "why the delay"?...i think, as i have mentioned previously, we need better prosecutors...'fiscals' sabi mo nga...and with the change of administration, i'm hoping there will be changesin the mindsets of quite a few of our kababayans...perhaps, in 2 or 3 years...a more responsiblecitizenry would emerge ... it took gloria 9 years to turn us into what we are now...i am hoping thatin half the time, we could turn 180 degrees... who knows ? baka mawala na ang 'utang na loob' sa kultura natin?...maybe rowena,might NOT even consider to be a board member of PAG-IBIG next time..i think YOU are more qualified than her... better prosecutors? look, the DOJ secretary and the Ombudsman are both Pnoy appointees. so what utang na loob are you looking for? rowena's best qualification in pag-ibig is basically the best qualification Puno, Torres, alvarez all have...... TRUST AND CONFIDENCE OF THE PRESIDENT. Quote Link to comment
sandy51 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 better prosecutors? look, the DOJ secretary and the Ombudsman are both Pnoy appointees. so what utang na loob are you looking for? rowena's best qualification in pag-ibig is basically the best qualification Puno, Torres, alvarez all have...... TRUST AND CONFIDENCE OF THE PRESIDENT. Hindi ko magetz disagreement ninyo ni Sir Wolfwhistler. Mukhang nasa parehong runway naman kayo. Yung isa nga lang nsa zero six while yung isa nsa two four. He he. Seriously, I think the problem of justice here in the Philippines is that the interpretation is most often subjective, yet the legal people always say dura lex sed lex. If only they could really mean what they say, no matter how repulsive it is, then maybe the Philippines can be better. Take the case of Imelda. If Imelda were innocent, hindi ba injustice to her? If guilty, however, hindi ba injustice to the Filipino people? If guilty nga but mahina naman evidence, masakit man tangapin pero dapat acquitted. c'est la vie. Sir jopoc, paki tingin naman tanong ko sa topic "(IN)Justice in the RP". TIA Quote Link to comment
wolfwhistler Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 if you'd ask me, i love to see cases filed against GMA and her minions in court, not in the senate. ask yourself, how many cases has this administration filed in court against GMA? Here's a sample of evidence . Except, as you said, because of the Anti-wire tapping law, the evidence is considered illegal. But everybody knows about the Garci Tapes ! And there are those who will close their eyes and minds and say that this conversation never happened and say "there is NO evidence". Those who know better...know better... "GMA: So nagmamatch?" "Garcillano: Oho. Sa Basilan, alam nyo naman ang mga military dun eh hindi masyadong marunong kasi silang gumawa eh. Katulad ho dun sa Sulu, sa General Habacon. Pero hindi naman ho, kinausap ko na 'yung Chairman ng Board sa Sulu. Ang akin patataguin ko na muna yung EO ng Pangutaran na para hindi siya maka-testigo ho." In the last sentence, GMA even condoned as you lawyers put it, "obstruction of justice"... Quote Link to comment
KillTheDEVIL Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Pls protect the whistleblowers. Quote Link to comment
jopoc Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Hindi ko magetz disagreement ninyo ni Sir Wolfwhistler. Mukhang nasa parehong runway naman kayo. Yung isa nga lang nsa zero six while yung isa nsa two four. He he. Seriously, I think the problem of justice here in the Philippines is that the interpretation is most often subjective, yet the legal people always say dura lex sed lex. If only they could really mean what they say, no matter how repulsive it is, then maybe the Philippines can be better. Take the case of Imelda. If Imelda were innocent, hindi ba injustice to her? If guilty, however, hindi ba injustice to the Filipino people? If guilty nga but mahina naman evidence, masakit man tangapin pero dapat acquitted. c'est la vie. Sir jopoc, paki tingin naman tanong ko sa topic "(IN)Justice in the RP". TIA sabi nga, there is always the presumption of innocence. that rule applies not only to GMA, but to every filipino citizen. mabigat ang burden of proof sa criminal cases. so kung wala o mahina ang ebidensya, wag sasama ang loob. ganyan talaga ang batas. isipin nyo na lang kung kayo ang kinakasuhan, tapos nasa iyo pa ang responsibilidad na patunayan na hindi ka guilty. ok lang ba yun sa iyo???? Here's a sample of evidence . Except, as you said, because of the Anti-wire tapping law, the evidence is considered illegal. But everybody knows about the Garci Tapes ! And there are those who will close their eyes and minds and say that this conversation never happened and say "there is NO evidence". Those who know better...know better... "GMA: So nagmamatch?" "Garcillano: Oho. Sa Basilan, alam nyo naman ang mga military dun eh hindi masyadong marunong kasi silang gumawa eh. Katulad ho dun sa Sulu, sa General Habacon. Pero hindi naman ho, kinausap ko na 'yung Chairman ng Board sa Sulu. Ang akin patataguin ko na muna yung EO ng Pangutaran na para hindi siya maka-testigo ho." In the last sentence, GMA even condoned as you lawyers put it, "obstruction of justice"... you said it, the recording is inadmissible in court. in legal parlance, it is called fruit of the poisonous tree. so, in a trial by publicity, guilty nga sya, pero in court, malabong pareho ang hatol. Pls protect the whistleblowers. do you know most of the whistleblowers are extortionists? or at least, they have their own vested interest in being a whistleblower? Quote Link to comment
sandy51 Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 sabi nga, there is always the presumption of innocence. that rule applies not only to GMA, but to every filipino citizen. mabigat ang burden of proof sa criminal cases. so kung wala o mahina ang ebidensya, wag sasama ang loob. ganyan talaga ang batas. isipin nyo na lang kung kayo ang kinakasuhan, tapos nasa iyo pa ang responsibilidad na patunayan na hindi ka guilty. ok lang ba yun sa iyo???? Exactly sir jopoc. Hindi ba dapat naman talaga na kung sino nag bintang, sya ang magpatunay? you said it, the recording is inadmissible in court. in legal parlance, it is called fruit of the poisonous tree. so, in a trial by publicity, guilty nga sya, pero in court, malabong pareho ang hatol. do you know most of the whistleblowers are extortionists? or at least, they have their own vested interest in being a whistleblower? Mayron pa nga sumbong kuno, pero ang totoo is para hindi sya masama sa kaso. Kaya yung mga sinumbung nya nakuha ang property pero yung kanya safe - e magkasama naman sila. Hero pa labas nya. Oh my! Paano kaya madala sa 21st Century ang pagiisip nang Pilipino Quote Link to comment
jopoc Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 remember that whistleblowers BENEFITTED from the crime (if there was any). so questionable agad ang motive nila, as the supreme court held, the testimonies of whistleblowers came from "Polluted source". Quote Link to comment
KillTheDEVIL Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 Pls prioritize crime prevention Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.