Quantcast
Channel: CNN iReporter marioradical

Courage and Defiance: The Philippines’ act of standing up against China Part II

0
0
Now, the ultimate question is: “And what is the ultimate purpose of the thick memo?”

I overwhelmingly concur with the Philippine Foreign Secretary, Alberto Del Rosario that the contents of the memorial is in defense of the Philippines’ “national interest…[the memorial is about] defending what is legitimately ours; it is about securing our children’s future. It is about guaranteeing freedom of navigation for all nations.”

Further it is also “about guaranteeing freedom of navigation for all nations, it is about helping to preserve regional peace, security and stability.”

Hence to China and their officials may I remind you of the words of your dear leader, Deng Xiaoping as quoted by a noted Filipino jurist!

According to a local magistrate of the Philippine Supreme Court, Justice Antonio Carpio:

“The world should now remind China of Deng Xiaoping’s solemn commitment to the world when he declared in his speech before the United Nations General Assembly on April 10, 1974:

A superpower is an imperialist country which everywhere subjects other countries to its aggression, interference, control, subversion or plunder and strives for world hegemony. If one day China should change her color and turn into a superpower, if she too would play the tyrant in the world, and everywhere subject others to her bullying, aggression and exploitation, the people of the world should identify her as social-imperialist, expose it, oppose it and work with the Chinese people to overthrow it.”

Hence, you must thank us the Filipino people so as the Vietnamese for standing up against you and telling you to return to your leader’s words of wisdom.

You all have to thank us for reminding you that you have strayed your ways and forgotten your promise to the world!

The world no longer needs an empire or another imperialist bloc. Be happy on what you have and leave us alone!

For justice and reason’s sake: GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WEST PHILIPPINE SEA!!!

If not, then we shall shout and scream at you that we will use all the means at our disposal reasonably. We are declaring that we will proceed against you using legal and peaceful methods where it is still possible and if it needs be we will resist you by force of arms, by iron and by blood, when it is necessary.

For the million and one time, you have been warned!!!


Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy lecturer
College of Liberal Arts
Department of Social Science
Technological University of the Philippines


Marx Contra Zizek: On the Question of the Question and the Necessity of Acting on those Questions Part I

0
0

I refer to Professor Zizek’s video, Think Big, “The Purpose of Philosophy is to Ask the Right Questions”, May 28, 2013.

 

Here’s what the unphilosophical megalomaniac has stated on the opening salvo of his discourse:

 

“I’m not saying -- I’m not a philosophical megalomaniac -- that philosophy can provide answers, but it can do something which maybe is even more important, you know? As important as providing answers and a condition for it, maybe even the condition, is to ask the right question.”

 

Though I agree to a certain extent to the contention of the said professor that philosophy can provide all the answers, yet promptly I would like to ask: if it cannot, then what can provide us?

 

Here the professor’s reply is illustrative:

 

You see, this would be one example, not to mention ecology. Now, ecology may be the ruin of us all -- it’s a terrible crisis, but the way we formulate it, either as a pure technological problem or in this New Age way – we, humanity, are too arrogant, we are raping the mother earth, whatever, it’s already the way we perceive the question that mystifies the problem. Here philosophy enters correcting the question, enabling us to ask the right question.

 

Further, the professor stated that:

 

There are not only wrong answers. There are also wrong questions. There are questions which deal with a certain real problem but the way they are formulated they effectively obfuscate, mystify, confuse the problem. For example, my eternal example, we have to fight of course today sexism, racism and so on. But did you notice how almost automatically we tend to translate issues of sexism, racism or ethnic violence, whatever, into the terms of tolerance? This, for me, doesn't go by itself. This presupposes already a certain horizon where you naturalize the order. We have different cultures. What can we do? We can only tolerate each other. And to give you a proof how this is not self-evident: download speeches by Martin Luther King and put on search words precisely like tolerance and so on. . . . Never, he never uses them. For him -- and he was right -- it would have been an obscenity to say white people should learn to tolerate us more, or whatever.

 

If philosophy cannot provide all the answers and its only purpose is for people engage in philosophy or in philosophizing is/are merely to ask the correct questions or to pose the right query, then what kind of purpose or use is that?

 

I can detect a certain degree of contradiction to the contention of the said professor. To restate: if philosophy cannot provide all the answers and its purpose is only to reduce those people engage in philosophy to ask the right questions, then how the hell those ‘philosophers’ arrive at the right questions if they did not subjected themselves to a vigorous philosophical reflections and rigid mental exercises?
What intellectual method or ideological vehicle did those philosopher’s use to arrive at the correct questions?

 

In saying that philosophy cannot provide all the answers, is that not a philosophical assertion in itself? In saying what he said, did he not engage in a philosophical exercise himself before he reached that position?

 

On the Question of the Question

 

Assuming arguendo that the only role or purpose of philosophy is to ask the right question, then, after asking and posing and raising those correct questions that affect mankind and humanity: what’s next?

 

After we demystify, settled the obfuscation and cleared the confusion with regard to the colossal problem and burden of humanity, then what’s next?

 

After we cleared all the mental rubbishes that darkens our minds and perception, after we destroyed the walls that separates us from each other and after we hurdles all our barriers of our conditions, then what’s next?

 

What is to be done?

 

It is my firm and considered view that simply to raise the correct questions is not enough for a true philosopher.

 

Asking the right questions in my view is merely to be on the level of theory. That theory no matter how correct or even perfect is nothing without subjecting it to the furnace of practice.

 

Example, to ask that (I believe it is a correct question) question: “What is the best form of universal human solidarity?”

 

In my view that question is lifeless without acting on that question by practicing it on actual life and circumstances.

 

Theory and practice are inseparable. The former without the latter is dead!

 

Theory without acting on it is a mere academic enterprise. It has no social or human value whatsoever, except perhaps on the four corners of the bloody classroom.

 

Consider Lenin’s mindset in narrating a conversation he had with a comrade during the Second Congress (1903) of the Russian Social- Democratic Labor Party:

 

I cannot help recalling in this connection a conversation I happened to have at the Congress with one of the “Centre” delegates. “How oppressive the atmosphere is at our Congress!” he complained.
“This bitter fighting, this agitation one against the other, this biting controversy, this uncomradely attitude! . . .”
“What a splendid thing our Congress is!”
I replied. “A free and open struggle. Opinions have been stated. The shades have been revealed. The groups have taken shape. Hands have been raised. A decision has been taken. A stage has been passed. Forward! That’s the stuff for me! That’s life! That’s not like the endless, tedious word-chopping of your intellectuals, which stops not because the question has been settled, but because they are too tired to talk anymore....” (One Step Forward, Two Steps Back (THE CRISIS IN OUR PARTY), 1904)

 

Marx on the Question of Practice/Activity/Action/Struggle

 

To Marx, the word struggle occupied almost a central aspect --- both in his philosophy and in his personal life. In general, the principle refers to the activist element in the Marxian practice motivating Marx and his disciples.

 

The specific facet of the principles refers to Marx’s philosophy --- the principle of activity being that concept, which underlies the entire system. Marx, that is, not only theorizes about activity but also illustrates his theory in (his) life. Marx’s own life was also a great struggle!
Hence, we find the principle of activity, action and struggle both in his writing and in his doings.

 

Marx most often used the words Action, Tatigkeit or Praxis to refer to the principle of activity, of action and relentless struggle. No major philosopher has fully dealt with the concept of action and practice as Marx did.

 

Norman Livergood (1967) stated that:

 

With Marx philosophy descended from the cloudy towers of mere speculation to the arena of practice. Certainly Hegel’s transformation of traditional logic marked the first step in the direction of unifying theory and practice since it protested against the divorce of truth reality. But Marx’s system represents the full development of philosophy as practical.

 

Marx develops this idea of philosophy as practical as early as his Doctoral; Dissertation, The Difference Between Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature. This led G. Voegelin (1950) to state that:

 

The dissertation shows Marx dissatisfied with the semi-action of the contemporary intellectuals. He demands a transition from speculative philosophy o a “radical” critique, which can be no less than an embodiment of the idea in reality through revolutionary action.

Marx Contra Zizek: On the Question of the Question and the Necessity of Acting on those Questions Part II

0
0
Marx saw his mission as the transposition into practice of the whole order of things, which Aristotle and Hegel had reserved to the theoretical intellect. The theoretical, as opposed to the practical mind, when free (as after Aristotle and Hegel), is transformed into practical energy, practical force --- and turns to act upon material reality. Just as the post-Aristotelian period that emphasized practical, ethical self-determination (which Marx would continue), so Marx desired to rescue man from the post-Hegelian impasse by reclaiming the world in practice (not in pure thought as he thought and he pitilessly criticized Hegel on this score).

For Marx, philosophy is an instrument of change!

Ludwig Feuerbach who conceived philosophy as a social activity influenced Marx on this matter. Without a doubt, Marx recognized the importance of theory, but he did not stop there, because his interest and goal was for philosophy to be more than mere theory.

Theory must be united to practice --- so that it can become a tool, a force of cure and radical transformation. It is on this undeniable sense that philosophy in Marx’s system is not destroyed but completely transformed, because Marx was desirous of destroying the limited conception of philosophy as a mere theoretical activity. To Marx, theory without practice is dead!

That is precisely the reason behind his violent denunciation and radical stinging criticism of (limited) philosophy and of the contention of his contemporary philosophers, moralists and intellectuals.

He relentlessly criticized and vehemently attacked ravenously German thinkers because they had done nothing more than to theorize. They talked and talked, but they did not act, they seem to know everything but they did nothing on what they appear to know or claim to know.

Below is the testimony of F. Copleston’s (1994) reading on Marx’s position that philosophy or theory without practice is worthless:

We cannot change society by philosophizing about it. Thought must issue in action, that is, in social revolution. For philosophical criticism raises problems which can be solved only in this way. In Marx’s language, philosophy must be overcome, this overcoming being also the realization of philosophy. It must leave the plane of theory and penetrate to the masses. And when it does so, it is no longer philosophy but takes the form of a social revolution, which must be the work of the most oppressed class, namely the proletariat. By abolishing private property consciously and explicitly the proletariat will emancipate itself, and, together with itself, the whole of society. For egoism and social injustices are bound up with the institution of private property. (My italics)

Below is an example of Marx’s typical, forceful and scathing criticism of those bloody idiots who called themselves as “philosophers”

In direct contrast to German philosophy which descends from heaven to earth, here we ascend from earth to heaven. That is to say, we do not set out from what men say, imagine, conceive, nor from men as narrated, thought of, imagined, conceived, in order to arrive at men in the flesh. We set out from real, active men, and on the basis of their real life-process we demonstrate the development of the ideological reflexes and echoes of this life-process. The phantoms formed in the human brain are also, necessarily, sublimates of their material life-process, which is empirically verifiable and bound to material premises. Morality, religion, metaphysics, all the rest of ideology and their corresponding forms of consciousness, thus no longer retain the semblance of independence. They have no history, no development; but men, developing their material production and their material intercourse, alter, along with this their real existence, their thinking and the products of their thinking. Life is not determined by consciousness, but consciousness by life. (The German Ideology, 1845, written with Engels)

Does it mean that Marx hates and/or distrusted ‘philosophy’?

Let us quote Leon Trotsky (1927) to explain the answer:

Marx once said that philosophers had sufficiently interpreted the world, and that the task now was to turn it upside down. In these words there was by no means a lack of respect for philosophy. Marx was himself one of the most powerful philosophers of all time. His words simply meant that the further development of philosophy, and of culture as a whole, both material and spiritual, demands a revolution in social relations. And therefore Marx appealed from philosophy to the proletarian revolution, – not against philosophy, but for it.

Wherever Marx spoke of philosophy so as to disparage it tremendously and to mercilessly criticize it, he was attacking that kind of philosophy, which merely theorized, which simply described existing problems and conditions without finding concrete solutions that will lead eventually to a realization and ultimate transformation.

Philosophy for Marx is both a social and universal philosophy of action. It is necessarily the study of man’s social relationships since these are his very nature, his essence (Theses on Feuerbach, no. VI, 1845). Man is a social animal; his being is constituted by his relations to other beings. Also, philosophy for Marx does not immediately become active in the transformation of society and the world. It has to be tested, developed and practiced.

Philosophy leads to action; but philosophy is not action per se… in a way, we can say that to Marx, words are nothing and empty, without the corresponding action to test them; in order to prove them.

This is precisely because when Marxist revolutionaries speak of the “unity of thought and action”, it does not intend to imply that thoughts and actions are one and the same thing. It does mean however, that thoughts and actions are inseparably united.

For Marx, socialism (on to communism) is not just the goal or end of the movement or party committed to realizing it. Socialism is also the very struggle itself, and to be a socialist, or for that matter, a Marxist revolutionary, is not merely to be committed to a belief in the virtues of equality, solidarity and the like, but to take the side of the oppressed and the exploited in their struggles.

This is a morally and personally demanding version of what socialism involves; but it is also, without the slightest iota of doubt, in an utterly important ways, a more realistic and hopeful one, because instead of relegating socialism to a distant and perhaps unattainable future, it firmly stresses that victories for the oppressed and the exploited, and hence, for socialism can be achieved here and now, in the real and imperfect world of the present!

This is the ultimate difference of Marx to those so-called ‘philosophers’ who merely posed and raises the questions without doing anything about it.

For Marx does not simply raises the questions of Mankind and calling the world’s attention in his brutal, extensive and exhaustive depiction the burden of Humanity, he does not stop there, rather he went all the way to transcend the questions by acting and working on it at the forefront of the Struggle!

Marx is not merely a philosopher who raised the correct questions, but precisely a revolutionary philosopher that stood, fought and struggled to change the world – all throughout his life --- until the very end!


Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy/Social Science lecturer
College of Liberal Arts
Department of Social Science
Technological University of the Philippines


The Thai Conflict: In Defense of the Red Shirts and the need for an insurrection

0
0
I refer to the Strait Times Editorial, “Thailand stumbles again”, May 10th with regard to the on-going political conflict in Thailand.

I wholly concur with the said piece, especially on that part that clearly stipulated that:

Ms Yingluck's removal is but a scene in a play whose denouement is unknown. Thailand's political impasse dramatises the limitations of democracy as a political stage when the actors cannot agree on their roles. Thaksin demonstrated convincingly the hold of his charismatic populism on the agrarian poor and the urban working class. Arrayed against the numerical superiority of these groups is the institutional power of the entrenched Bangkok elite, old money, the royalist establishment, and the urban middle class. These groups would have sought a compromise in a working democracy. But that has proved impossible in the embittered political climate of Thailand, leading to the paralysis evident today. The more than six months of unrest that preceded the court ruling are a part of the eight-year struggle for the political soul of the country, a contestation which does not appear to have a definitive conclusion, let alone an imminent one.

Comment:

The author of the said article has clearly shown what is the problem of Thai society and that is: the limitation of their democracy by virtue of the fact that some of the political actors, personalities and social classes of the whole divide cannot agree and cannot accept their social, political and economic roles.

On one side are the monarchists, the national bourgeoisie, the middle class rich, the businessmen, the Bangkok elite, etc.

While on the other side are the poor farmer from the North and Northeast, the poor people of Bangkok and the working class or Thailand’s own proletariat.

The former controls the economy of the country; the stupid military, the bastard courts, the idiotic election commission and they have the blessings of the good for nothing king of nothing and his so-called “royal” parasitic family.

While the latter enjoys the number and the power that they derived through their unity and solidarity!

The problem of Thailand is that their bourgeoisie cannot accept a leader and a party that supports the aspiration and champion the needs of the poor and its working classes.

Since 2001, all the Yellowist have done has been to disrupt the duly constituted authorities that won a legitimate election, that is because of their extreme hatred and shall I say, jealousy of Thaksin and his political associates.

This vicious cycle must stop!

The paralysis that is now being experience by Thailand can no longer be settled or answered by any democratic means by virtue of the fact that their bourgeoisie will never ever respect the will of the majority of the Thai people by reason of their class interest.

It is on this great sense that I disagree with one Red Shirt leader, Kwanchai Pripana when he told AFP (“Thai 'Red Shirts' rally to defend wounded government”, May 10th) that:

"We are ready to fight… We will not use violence but we will use the power of the masses to fight for democracy."

I applaud them for their resolve, I salute them for their enthusiasm to the continuing struggle, to fight for what is right and to remain firm in their conviction, but I am sorry to tell them that the very democracy that they are fighting for is the same ‘democracy’ that is being bastardize to the core and being prostituted to the maximum by the powers that be, Bangkok elite and their nefarious various evil cohorts.

Therefore, it does not matter even if they, the Red Shirts, shall win (which is a certain and a given) the next election to be held this coming July, because those bastard Yellowists will only destabilize once again (this is also certain and a given) the duly elected government and tries to seize power from the said government through force and violence.

That is because they know and they are certain that they, the bastard Yellowists will never win in a democratic and legitimate election. They do have the money, but they do not have the numbers. They want power, but they are powerless!

Why?

Because the power lies in the hands of the people, in the hands of the Red Shirts themselves!

Who are they?

The Red Shirts in my view are not what those stupid Yellowists always tagged as merely Thaksin’s supporters. They are not only the agrarian poor from the North and the Northeastern part of the country or the urban working class, because they represent the very people of Thailand, they are its proletariat.

Let us quote from the report of Rachel Harvey (“The staying power of Thailand’s red shirts”, BBC Report, April 24, 2010) that accurately depicts the true nature and composition of the Red Shirts:

“On several evenings, on my way home, I've shared a train carriage with some of those same protesters.

“I remember one woman, who was wearing the uniform of the office worker - smart skirt, high heels and make-up - but in her open shoulder bag, a neatly folded red T-shirt revealed her true allegiance.

“That has been a striking feature of the red-shirt movement - the variety of people it has attracted.

“For months, the government and much of the media portrayed the red-shirts as simple country folk, deluded in their loyalty to Thaksin Shinawatra, the former prime minister, who had been accused of corruption.

“One newspaper cartoon depicted the demonstrators as water buffalo - a highly derogatory comparison implying rural ignorance.

“But the thing about water buffalo, as any South East Asian farmer will tell you, is that they have huge amounts of stamina.

“So it's proved with the red-shirts.”

The Red Shirts are the people themselves and the Yellowists are the enemies of the people by virtue of the inescapable fact and the undeniable truth that they cannot accept nor respect the will of the people.

Now, Thailand is again repeating the cycle of political imbroglio and fiasco.

To restate, this conflict will not be settle by any democratic means, except by arms and force.

My humble suggestion to the Thai people, the Red Shirts is to go all the way in their struggle. They should not stop at nothing. If it means civil war, then so be it!

Now is the time for the Thai poor to settle the score against the Thai rich and their entire class entourage.

The time for election is over, it is already dead and gone; now is the time for an insurrection that must lead ultimately to a full-blown revolution!

Let it be! Let it come! So be it!

How about the bastard ‘king’?

I do not know about the Thai people’s mindset. They are the one who will eventually decide everything, but nonetheless to quote from the immortal words of Maximilien de Robespierre during the heights of the French Revolution:

“The king must die so that the country can live.”

Down with the Yellowists! Kill ‘em all!!!

LONG LIVE THE RED SHIRTS!


Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy/Social Science lecturer

College of Liberal Arts
Social Science Department
Technological University of the Philippines




Brunei’s sharia law: Barbaric laws of the Stone Age

0
0
I refer to Maureen Callahan’s “The sex-obsessed world of Brunei”, The New York Post, May 10th with regard to the so-called sultan of Brunei, Hassanal Bolkiah’s sudden, out of nowhere, truly out of this world and undeniably ridiculous decision of implementing sharia law to his nation.

I condemn on behalf of Humanity the barbarism and primitivism of the so-called sultan of Brunei’s institution of sharia law into his nation.

Though the so-called sultan is the leader of his nation, I doubt if he and his cohorts can simply enact laws just like that and some more, arbitrarily.

Stoning to death? Wow! Are you kidding me? Mr. so-called sultan, it is already the new millennium, welcome to 2014! You want your mediaeval and barbaric laws of the lost primitive world, then, do apply it to yourself and your so-called “royal” family, especially your maniac and lecherous brothers and leave the people of Brunei alone!

Question of Due Notice and Procedure of Public
Consultation

Does it mean that because he is the so-called sultan, he does not need to consult his people and get their consent with regard to these draconian barbaric laws?

Does Brunei have a Constitution or not? If no, does it mean that the so-called sultan is only the source of political power on the said land?

If yes, does the act of the so-called sultan in accordance with the fundamental law?

Does the Quran allows a leader unlimited powers to the prejudice of his people?

I do not know whether the so-called sultan is drunk or under the influence of drugs, but did he forget that his nation is member of the Association of the Southeast Asian Nation (ASEAN) in this region in particular and the international community in general?

Does the so-called sultan forgotten that his nation as a member of the ASEAN has adopted on November of 2012 the Human Rights Accord?

Didn’t he know that his outrageous and preposterous sharia law is a grave violation of the said ASEAN Human Rights Accord?

Didn’t he also know that his stupid and idiotic sharia law is a fatal, brutal and extreme violation of the International Declaration of Human Rights approved and sanctioned as an International Law by the United Nations?

How about the various Convention and Agreements, such as the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women? Convention Against Torture, etc?

How would that moronic so-called sultan reconcile those international laws, agreements, convention to that of their local laws to that of his super barbaric sharia law?

I am wondering did he not put into consideration what would be the reaction of the world with regard to his utterly sweeping modification of his nation’s laws and statutes?

Didn’t the so-called sultan realized that majority of the civilized world today did not approve of his primitive, barbaric and undeniably inhumane laws?

If that so-called abnormal sultan will proceed with his implementation of sharia law, then the international community and the world in general will condemn him, as a pervert and as a bigot idiot and his poor country as a failed, bastard and a pariah state!

As lucidly narrated by the report:

“Under Sharia law, the following is considered criminal behavior, punishable by fines, jail, amputation of limbs, public flogging or death by stoning: absence from Friday prayer services; becoming pregnant out of wedlock; wearing indecent clothing, and for women, refusal to wear a hijab; employing a non-Muslim babysitter; the use of the word “Allah” by Christians and the discussion of faith by any non-Muslims; publicly eating or drinking during Ramadan; theft; homosexuality; and adultery.”

Question:

What is the moral authority or ethical ascendancy of the so-called sultan to implement sharia law when in fact and in truth the whole world perfectly knows that he and his brothers are bastard sexual predators, drunkards, adulterers and maniacs of the lowest order?

Do I need to list here all of their transgressions and animalistic behavior --- through the years?

The so-called sultan and his lecherous evil cohorts in view are the greatest hypocrites and bastards of all time.

Consider the words of justification of that maniac so-called sultan with regard to his version of sharia:

“Theory states that Allah’s law is cruel and unfair, but Allah himself has said that his law is indeed fair.”

Comment:

That is bloody stupid and extremely preposterous! The so-called sultan is trapped into an extreme impertinent contradiction!

If the theory states that the law is cruel, then logic will tell you, if you are a normal and reasonable person, that the practice or execution or implementation of the said law will also be cruel and unfair.

Now, if both theory and practice are both cruel and unjust; then why on earth and why the hell is has to be instituted or implemented?

It will definitely lead us to the thought or conclusion that the one who called for the institution and ordered the implementation of the said law is an incontestably an immoral and idiotic leader by virtue of his cruelty and unfairness to his people!

On the second aspect of the so-called sultan’s justification, that idiot also stated maliciously that: allegedly Allah has said that his law is indeed fair.

I am wondering where the hell does Allah said those words purportedly claimed by the so-called Sultan that Allah himself have stated?

I do not know, but it seems to me that that so-called sultan is engaging in blasphemy. If so, then he should be the first one to be put to death by stoning!

But on the more important matter, which is the secular element of this case, my other central question is: how could a law that is perceived to be cruel and unfair be fair?

I am wondering, what kind of justice that that so-called sultan is subscribing and practicing?

Is it justice on the harem?

A Call to the People of Brunei

The Brunayan people must wake up and do something about this fiasco; if not, then their bastard immoral so-called leader will carry them to even greater imbroglio and lead the entire country into the abyss of moral death, shame and humiliation!

People of Brunei you all must act now before your bastard so-called sultan make your beautiful nation into another Taliban haven!


Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy/Social Science lecturer

College of Liberal Arts
Social Science Department
Technological University of the Philippines





To Love is Beyond Religion Part I

0
0
I refer to BBC News Africa report, “Sudan woman faces death for apostasy”, May 15th regard to the case of a woman who has been sentenced by a Sudanese court by hanging to death for apostasy.

She was adjudged to have abandoned her religious faith, “after she married a Christian man.”

I overwhelmingly concur to the condemnation of the sentence by Amnesty International which was “handed down by a judge in Khartoum”, as "appalling and abhorrent".

Nonetheless, I would like to state that the said “judgment” by that Sudanese court is not only appalling and abhorrent, but also preposterous and undeniably barbaric!

It is also my firm view that that Khartoum judge is not only ridiculous, but super stupid!

The “ruling” is appalling and abhorrent by virtue of the fact that the so-called court has invaded the private domain of the personal feelings of the woman. What is the right of that stupid judge to decide who that woman should love and marry?

Who the devil is he? And what on earth is the legal basis of their "law"?

To love and to cherish another fellow human being is an utterly private matter and the bloody state (whatever or whoever it is) has no right to control the heart and the mind and the soul of an individual!

To marry someone and to decide who you want to spend the rest of your life is beyond religion!

I don’t give a damn, even if “Sudan has a majority Muslim population, which is governed by Islamic law.”

First point: the majority must respect the right of the minority. The government must respect all citizens regardless of who they are and irrespective of their stations and background sin life!

Second point: their so-called Islamic law must not be used to violate the right of those people who does not belong to them or even those people who already wishes not to practice the dominant religion or faith. Further, that ‘law’ must also respect those people who decided not to have any religion at all!

Third point: the individual is the sole master of his or herself and the government (whatever the hell is its type or form) have no right to control or to dictate or to intervene how the hell that individual wishes to live his or her personal and emotional life.

Fourth point: Sudan must be aware that whatever the hell it does will reflect to the world community.

Hence, base on the following reasons, it is also my considered view and so held that the said “judgment” of that stupid so-called court is preposterous and incontestably barbaric.

Consider the very words of that bastard judge which was quoted by the AFP reports:

"We gave you three days to recant but you insist on not returning to Islam. I sentence you to be hanged to death…"

Question:

Is it because the woman does not want to return to Islam, she deserves to die by hanging?

How about her right to choose what to believe or not to believe? Does it mean that under Sudan’s Islamic law --- there is no such thing as the right to choose? How about the right to live?

What Sudan did is a grave violation of International Law. According to Wikipedia:

“The United Nations Commission on Human Rights, considers the recanting of a person's religion a human right legally protected by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights:

“The Committee observes that the freedom to 'have or to adopt' a religion or belief necessarily entails the freedom to choose a religion or belief, including the right to replace one's current religion or belief with another or to adopt atheistic views ... Article 18.2 bars coercion that would impair the right to have or adopt a religion or belief, including the use of threat of physical force or penal sanctions to compel believers or non-believers to adhere to their religious beliefs and congregations, to recant their religion or belief or to convert.”

Not content with the death sentence, the stupid judge also “sentenced the woman to 100 lashes after convicting her of adultery - because her marriage to a Christian man was not valid under Islamic law.”

Comment:

First, it was apostasy, now it is adultery.

This is confusing and truly mind-boggling! How the hell could the woman be guilty of adultery when she only loved her husband?

Adultery in its basic definition means having an extra-marital affair. Nowhere it is stated in the facts of the case that such is the case, hence, how could the woman be convicted of the said crime?

There you have it! This outrageous case has clearly shown the inhumanity of Sudan’s law and the extreme stupidity of the judge.

Her conviction of “adultery” stems on the ground that her marriage to a Christian man from South Sudan was void under Sudan's version of Islamic law, which specifically says that Muslim women cannot marry non-Muslims.

So to Sudan, "adultery" is violating their religious prohibition.

What an invention of idiotic proportion! Such a super idiotic definition and moronic concept! What a shame!

According further to the report:

“Earlier in the hearing, an Islamic cleric spoke with her in a caged dock for about 30 minutes…

“Then she calmly told the judge: "I am a Christian and I never committed apostasy."”

According to Amnesty International the said the woman, Meriam Yehya Ibrahim Ishag, “was raised as an Orthodox Christian, her mother's religion, because her father, a Muslim, was reportedly absent during her childhood.”

The sole issue of this case can be sum up as: the right of an individual to choose any religion or not to choose at all!

The debate on apostasy

The report lucidly narrated the “long-running debate in Islam over whether apostasy is a crime.”

There is no shadow of doubt that they, the so-called “faithful” are divided among themselves and have a perennial problem with regard to the interpretation of their book that governs their law.

Why?

For it is beyond dispute that some liberal scholars hold the view that apostasy is not a crime and they “back up their argument by citing the Koranic verse which states: "There shall be no compulsion in religion."”

However, “others say apostasy is tantamount to treason - and refer to what Prophet Muhammad said: "It is not permissible to spill the blood of a Muslim except in three [instances]: A life for a life; a married person who commits adultery; and one who forsakes his religion and separates from the community."”

The pertinent and relevant question here is, who if ever among these two opposing and contradictory views is correct? What view must govern?

It is my firm view that the conflict must be resolve by liberally construing the provision of the ‘law’ in favor of the woman.

The court should have rule in favor of toleration, of love, respect and humanity!

I concur with the contention of Manar Idriss of Amnesty's Sudan researcher in condemning the punishments when she stated that “apostasy and adultery should not be considered crimes.”

Indeed, as she categorically maintained:

"The fact that a woman has been sentenced to death for her religious choice, and to flogging for being married to a man of an allegedly different religion is appalling and abhorrent…"

I applaud the collective act of the “embassies of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands” in issuing a joint statement that clearly expressed "deep concern" about the case of the said woman and urged Sudan “to respect the right to freedom of religion.”

To Love is Beyond Religion Part II

0
0
The report also highlighted Amnesty’s claim that “the woman was arrested and charged with adultery in August 2013, and the court added the charge of apostasy in February 2014 when she said she was a Christian and not a Muslim.”

Comment:

The woman was originally charged by “adultery”, yet I am wondering: what is the power of the court to add another charge against her?

Does it mean that, if she will eat pork in her jail or if she will pray using the rosary; will she be indicted again the third time for another charge?

This is utterly laughable and ridiculous to the maximum!

I joined the international humanistic community in calling for her immediate release.

Again to restate my vehement view, to love is beyond religion and the bloody state have no right whatsoever to interfere and/or control her heart, mind and soul!

Your religion is yours, and my heart is mine and it is mine alone….


Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy and Social Science lecturer

College of Liberal Arts
Social Science Department
Technological University of the Philippines

The Barbarism and Primitivism of Pakistan’s Stone Age ‘laws'

0
0
I refer to Mubasher Bukhari’s “Pakistan woman stoned to death by family for marrying man she loved”, Reuters, May 27th.

I am writing to bring to the attention of the international community a grave injustice that happened, (which, sad but true is still happening discriminately and in an alarming rate) in Lahore, Pakistan.

It is a tragic story about a woman who was stoned to death by her own family by reason of her defiance: she follows her heart and she died for it!

What is that? Allow me to repeat the horrible facts of this harrowing saga of a tragic love story!

The woman was put to death dastardly, treacherously and in an extremely violent manner, in broad day light, ironically outside the bloody ‘court,’ sad but true, by her own family, because she married a man that she loves and her bastard relatives does not approved of her choice.

She was killed for falling in love, for following her heart and for defying the backwardness of her family and their stupid and utterly barbaric cultural beliefs! For this, she was killed! So bloody disgusting!

And what is that belief? Believe or not, but according to the abnormal and sick mindset of some people in Pakistan, “a woman marrying her own choice brings dishonor on the family.”

What the fuck is that?

It is already 2014, but I was shocked to learn that up until today, there are still some bastard bloody creatures who, are still living at the Stone Age! What a shame!

This is outrageous, barbaric and undeniably ridiculous to the core!

To quote directly from the said Reuters report:

“A 25-year-old woman was stoned to death by her family outside one of Pakistan's top courts on Tuesday in a so-called "honor" killing for marrying the man she loved, police said.

“Farzana Iqbal was waiting for the High Court in the eastern city of Lahore to open when a group of around dozen men began attacking her with bricks, said Umer Cheema, a senior police officer.

“Her father, two brothers, and former fiance were among the attackers, he said. Iqbal suffered severe head injuries and was pronounced dead in hospital, police said.

“All the suspects except her father escaped. He admitted killing his daughter, Cheema said, and explained it was a matter of honor.”

I am heavily wondering, what “honor” does that despicable creature Cheema is talking about?

It is my firm view that that bastard is a sick wacko and a mentally deranged criminal. In fact, I will argue that his whole bloody family is a bunch of abnormal freaks! They are not humans, but animals of the lowest order albeit in an artificial ‘human’ form.

I condemn on behalf of Humanity the barbarism, heartlessness and backwardness of Pakistan’s subscription to the so-called “honor killing” and carrying it out through death by stoning.

My humanity is revolting and I am truly in rage reading this super inhumane horrible news!

In the immortal words of Emile Zola:

“I have but one passion: to enlighten those who have been kept in the dark, in the name of humanity which has suffered so much and is entitled to happiness. My fiery protest is simply the cry of my very soul.”

As I’ve stated then in my article, “Stoning to Death and Honor Killing is a Crime against Humanity, Human Rights Online Philippines”, October 10, 2013:

Stoning to death, in my view is a bloody stain in the history of civilization.

This barbaric practice is a shame to the whole of mankind!

I concur with Naureen Shameem, the representative for women’s rights group Women Living Under Muslim Laws, when says “that stoning is used against women in particular as a way to control them.”

Shameem stated that:

“Stoning is a cruel and hideous punishment. It is a form of torturing someone to death. It is one of the most brutal forms of violence perpetrated against women in order to control and punish their sexuality and basic freedoms.”

Indeed, as the Asian Human Rights Commission explained the act of stoning against women in a recent press release:

“Stoning to death is a barbaric act from a primitive society. Society is sent the message that violence is the way to deal with women and other vulnerable groups. Women’s rights are negated through the use of these forms of punishment…”

Indeed, Pakistani society has degenerated to the point that, for a woman, who defied her family in following her heart, has become a serious crime. This is barbarism at its lowest form!

When does it happen or where does it occurred, that falling in-love and marrying the person that you love became a crime in a civilized universe?

To love is free and it can never ever be controlled or contained, for love is the strongest ‘virus’ ever known to man.

To quote from another article of mine(“it’s about a young Saudi woman who followed her lover, defied her family, left her land and crossed the boundary illegally to Yemen to give in and fulfill the wishes and dictates of her heart.”), “Love knows no boundary: The Power of Love, Human Rights Online Philippines, December 6, 2013:

That said woman, Huda Abdullah Al Niran, who were dubbed by the press as “Saudi Juliet” has shown once again to the universe the unstoppable and undeniable power of love. That love, true love will defy all odds, will crossed all borders and will not cease from following the commands of one’s heart — to the point of standing up against the whole world and even death would not be enough to stop its march.

The so-called “honor killings”

Another idiotic issue that I wish to highlight and condemn is the so-called barbaric practice of “honor killing”.

The Human Rights Watch defines “honor killings” as follows:

“Honor killings are acts of vengeance, usually death, committed by male family members against female family members, who are held to have brought dishonor upon the family. A woman can be targeted by (individuals within) her family for a variety of reasons, including: refusing to enter into an arranged marriage, being the victim of a sexual assault, seeking a divorce—even from an abusive husband—or (allegedly) committing adultery. The mere perception that a woman has behaved in a way that “dishonors” her family is sufficient to trigger an attack on her life.”

There is no iota of doubt that these two idiotic issues are evil in origin and irrefutably barbaric to the maximum.
These preposterous practices and nefarious acts grossly and grimly violated the United Nation Universal Declaration of Human Rights that clearly stipulates that:
“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”

Clearly, stoning to death and honor killing are undeniably a blatant negation, a sheer derogation and a complete denial of the people, especially of women and other vulnerable minority groups of their human rights and the guarantee and protection of a civil, reasonable and secular law as mandated by international law and sanctioned by universal convention and statutes!

To deny the individual, a group or type of people their inherent and natural right to their human rights is to challenge their very humanity and reduce their dignity. This is a shame!

To impose on them a backward, preposterous and Jurassic law is to deny their humanity. This is a shame!

Incontestably, stoning to death and honor killing’s only aim is depriving people of their humanity and dehumanizing them. This is the heights of stupidity, shame and absurdity!

Henceforth, I forged solidarity and joined all relevant rights groups and humanistic international organizations who are “currently petitioning the United Nations to enact a worldwide ban on stoning” to death and criminalize the barbaric practice of so-called honor killing”.

This twin evil practices and acts of madmen and barbarians must come to an end.

The whole world must condemn Pakistan and all barbaric countries that practiced so-called “honor killing” and stoning to death!

They have no right to exist in any civilized and reasonable world order!

For Humanity, Equality and Justice!



The Barbarism and Primitivism of Pakistan’s Stone Age ‘laws'

0
0
I refer to Mubasher Bukhari’s “Pakistan woman stoned to death by family for marrying man she loved”, Reuters, May 27th.

I am writing to bring to the attention of the international community a grave injustice that happened, (which, sad but true is still happening discriminately and in an alarming rate) in Lahore, Pakistan.

It is a tragic story about a woman who was stoned to death by her own family by reason of her defiance: she follows her heart and she died for it!

What is that? Allow me to repeat the horrible facts of this harrowing saga of a tragic love story!

The woman was put to death dastardly, treacherously and in an extremely violent manner, in broad day light, ironically outside the bloody ‘court,’ sad but true, by her own family, because she married a man that she loves and her bastard relatives does not approved of her choice.

She was killed for falling in love, for following her heart and for defying the backwardness of her family and their stupid and utterly barbaric cultural beliefs! For this, she was killed! So bloody disgusting!

And what is that belief? Believe or not, but according to the abnormal and sick mindset of some people in Pakistan, “a woman marrying her own choice brings dishonor on the family.”

What the fuck is that?

It is already 2014, but I was shocked to learn that up until today, there are still some bastard bloody creatures who, are still living at the Stone Age! What a shame!

This is outrageous, barbaric and undeniably ridiculous to the core!

To quote directly from the said Reuters report:

“A 25-year-old woman was stoned to death by her family outside one of Pakistan's top courts on Tuesday in a so-called "honor" killing for marrying the man she loved, police said.

“Farzana Iqbal was waiting for the High Court in the eastern city of Lahore to open when a group of around dozen men began attacking her with bricks, said Umer Cheema, a senior police officer.

“Her father, two brothers, and former fiance were among the attackers, he said. Iqbal suffered severe head injuries and was pronounced dead in hospital, police said.

“All the suspects except her father escaped. He admitted killing his daughter, Cheema said, and explained it was a matter of honor.”

I am heavily wondering, what “honor” does that despicable creature Cheema is talking about?

It is my firm view that that bastard is a sick wacko and a mentally deranged criminal. In fact, I will argue that his whole bloody family is a bunch of abnormal freaks! They are not humans, but animals of the lowest order albeit in an artificial ‘human’ form.

I condemn on behalf of Humanity the barbarism, heartlessness and backwardness of Pakistan’s subscription to the so-called “honor killing” and carrying it out through death by stoning.

My humanity is revolting and I am truly in rage reading this super inhumane horrible news!

In the immortal words of Emile Zola:

“I have but one passion: to enlighten those who have been kept in the dark, in the name of humanity which has suffered so much and is entitled to happiness. My fiery protest is simply the cry of my very soul.”

As I’ve stated then in my article, “Stoning to Death and Honor Killing is a Crime against Humanity, Human Rights Online Philippines”, October 10, 2013:

Stoning to death, in my view is a bloody stain in the history of civilization.

This barbaric practice is a shame to the whole of mankind!

I concur with Naureen Shameem, the representative for women’s rights group Women Living Under Muslim Laws, when says “that stoning is used against women in particular as a way to control them.”

Shameem stated that:

“Stoning is a cruel and hideous punishment. It is a form of torturing someone to death. It is one of the most brutal forms of violence perpetrated against women in order to control and punish their sexuality and basic freedoms.”

Indeed, as the Asian Human Rights Commission explained the act of stoning against women in a recent press release:

“Stoning to death is a barbaric act from a primitive society. Society is sent the message that violence is the way to deal with women and other vulnerable groups. Women’s rights are negated through the use of these forms of punishment…”

Indeed, Pakistani society has degenerated to the point that, for a woman, who defied her family in following her heart, has become a serious crime. This is barbarism at its lowest form!

When does it happen or where does it occurred, that falling in-love and marrying the person that you love became a crime in a civilized universe?

To love is free and it can never ever be controlled or contained, for love is the strongest ‘virus’ ever known to man.

To quote from another article of mine(“it’s about a young Saudi woman who followed her lover, defied her family, left her land and crossed the boundary illegally to Yemen to give in and fulfill the wishes and dictates of her heart.”), “Love knows no boundary: The Power of Love, Human Rights Online Philippines, December 6, 2013:

That said woman, Huda Abdullah Al Niran, who were dubbed by the press as “Saudi Juliet” has shown once again to the universe the unstoppable and undeniable power of love. That love, true love will defy all odds, will crossed all borders and will not cease from following the commands of one’s heart — to the point of standing up against the whole world and even death would not be enough to stop its march.

The so-called “honor killings”

Another idiotic issue that I wish to highlight and condemn is the so-called barbaric practice of “honor killing”.

The Human Rights Watch defines “honor killings” as follows:

“Honor killings are acts of vengeance, usually death, committed by male family members against female family members, who are held to have brought dishonor upon the family. A woman can be targeted by (individuals within) her family for a variety of reasons, including: refusing to enter into an arranged marriage, being the victim of a sexual assault, seeking a divorce—even from an abusive husband—or (allegedly) committing adultery. The mere perception that a woman has behaved in a way that “dishonors” her family is sufficient to trigger an attack on her life.”

There is no iota of doubt that these two idiotic issues are evil in origin and irrefutably barbaric to the maximum.

These preposterous practices and nefarious acts grossly and grimly violated the United Nation Universal Declaration of Human Rights that clearly stipulates that:

“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”

Clearly, stoning to death and honor killing are undeniably a blatant negation, a sheer derogation and a complete denial of the people, especially of women and other vulnerable minority groups of their human rights and the guarantee and protection of a civil, reasonable and secular law as mandated by international law and sanctioned by universal convention and statutes!

To deny the individual, a group or type of people their inherent and natural right to their human rights is to challenge their very humanity and reduce their dignity.
This is a shame!

To impose on them a backward, preposterous and Jurassic law is to deny their humanity. This is a shame!

Incontestably, stoning to death and honor killing’s only aim is depriving people of their humanity and dehumanizing them. This is the heights of stupidity, shame and absurdity!

Henceforth, I forged solidarity and joined all relevant rights groups and humanistic international organizations who are “currently petitioning the United Nations to enact a worldwide ban on stoning” to death and criminalize the barbaric practice of so-called honor killing”.

This twin evil practices and acts of madmen and barbarians must come to an end.

The whole world must condemn Pakistan and all barbaric countries that practiced so-called “honor killing” and stoning to death!

They have no right to exist in any civilized and reasonable world order!

For Humanity, Equality and Justice!


Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

The Class War in Thailand

0
0
History keep on teaching us and it has relentlessly shown that insurrection and revolution does not happened all of a sudden!

It is not a scheme or a program that just pop out of the open or a seemingly magical event that burst out of the surface like mushrooms!

There is the need and there must be the reason! This is precisely the reason why revolution is not a mere event, but a continuing process! It is the very product of the irreconcilable socio-political and socio-economic relations of the various class forces which are the different social classes themselves engaged in a bitter life and death confrontation.

Alan Wood stated that the Russian revolutionary, Leon Trotsky “defines a revolution as the moment when the masses, that is to say, the millions of ordinary men and women, begin to participate in politics, to take their lives and destinies into their own hands. Revolution stirs up society to the bottom, and mobilises layers that were previously inert and "non-political””.

The very act of the Red Shirts, that is in participating in elections and winning the same regularly ever since 2001, in a sense is ‘a revolutionary act’, base on their specific and peculiar circumstances, except that every time that they will win, the forces of counterrevolution and reaction will do everything to take power away from them through all illegal means.

When will the vicious bullshit cycle ends?

This is how the forces of the counterrevolution and reactionaries in Thailand have been playing the game of politics in a habitual prostituted manner:

The stupid military intervenes (first by coup and then by Martial Law), then those bastard freaks shall rule for a while! Thereupon, following their bourgeoisie script: They will give and hand power to the equally stupid bastard Yellowists! Then (as if they are conscious of the condemnation of the international community), they will call for an election!

As usual, the Red Shirts shall win that election! Then, those bastard Yellowists will immediately destabilize the legitimate and duly constituted authorities overwhelmingly voted into office by the people of Thailand! Then, the fucking court (with the connivance of the fucking so-called election commission, with the bastard monarchial freaks, the royalists, the Bangkok elite, the rich and the businessmen, etc.) will rule against the Red Shirts, then "violence" will erupt, then the fucking military will enter the bloody scene again to "restore so-called order" as they been doing since time immemorial!

As of the moment, Thailand is still under Martial Law!

WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS?

I reiterate my suggestion to the people of Thailand as represented by the Red Shirts: to end this preposterous bullshit vicious cycle, they must proceed with their Struggle into a full-blown insurrection!

The revolution of the ballots must now proceed to the revolution of the bullets!

The only way to stop the bastard military from habitually bastardizing and prostituting the political system is for the Thai proletariat and poor farmers of the North and Northeast is to proceed with their class war and to stop at nothing…

In the words of Leon Trotsky:

“People do not make revolution eagerly any more than they do war. There is this difference, however, that in war compulsion plays the decisive role, in revolution there is no compulsion except that of circumstances. A revolution takes place only when there is no other way out. And the insurrection, which rises above a revolution like a peak in the mountain chain of its events, can no more be evoked at will than the revolution as a whole. The masses advance and retreat several times before they make up their minds to the final assault.”

For the greatest protagonist of the Revolution are the masses themselves. History kept on showing us that “it is the revolutionary people itself, those countless unknown and unsung heroes and heroines who were the mainspring of the entire process” that truly makes the necessary transformation of the whole society!

Nonetheless, the people’s leaders from the Red Shirts must teach the masses why it is necessary to struggle seriously and in a determined manner! The duty of the revolutionary leader is to bring clarity to the mind of the masses. They must explain in an educative manner why the conflict is inevitable. They should demonstrate that that freedom, rights, dignity, humanity, etc. is only ever preserved, and desired change could be engineered, by force.

History has shown repeatedly that the masses, has no choice, but to use the same means used by the ruling elite in revolutionary reconstructing society!

For there is no other road, there is no other way and there is no other course!

The monarchy must be overthrown pitilessly to give way to a people’s republic and the so-called king, together with his so-called royal cohorts must all die, in order for the country to live!

Insurrection is the primary solution! Hence, revolution should be the order of the day! For that is the only way! The poor must settle the score with the bloody rich!
Their insurrection must lead into a brutal class war!!!

DOWN WITH THE MONARCHY! DOWN WITH THE FUCKING king! DOWN WITH ALL THE ROYALTY! DOWN WITH THE BLOODY RICH! DOWN WITH THE FUCKING BANGKOK ELITE! DOWN WITH THE FUCKING COURTS! DOWN WITH THE SUPER STUPID SO-CALLED ELECTION COMMISSION! DOWN WITH THE THAI MILITARY WHICH IN MY VIEW IS ONE OF THE MOST STUPIDEST ARMY IN THE ENTIRE WORLD!!!

LONG LIVE THE RED SHIRTS!!!

LONG LIVE THE THAI MASSES!!!



Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

The RadicaL

The Indian Rape Mentality: Barbarity and Inhumanity of the lowest order Part I

0
0
I refer to Reuter’s “Ally of India’s Modi says rape “sometimes right, sometimes wrong””, June 5th concerning the gruesome and horrible case of two young cousins who were gang rape, strangled to death and then consequently hanged to a mango tree by those bastard animals.

I joined the international community in condemning to the highest possible extent this act of madness, barbarism and pure evil which can only be committed not merely by “young boys” but undeniably of demons of the most satanic order!

Those sexual predators are not humans, they are worst than the animals! It is not an exaggeration to state that they are the perfect physical manifestation of evil on this planet!

They don’t deserve to live in any civilize society, because they belong to the barbaric past by virtue of their animality and depravity.

If truly India is a civilized society then the government must do everything within its powers to bring those criminals to the bar of justice to answer for their despicable and heinous crimes.

The people of India must unite to show themselves and to the whole world that they are not tolerating discrimination and that they are detesting and condemning to the utmost, this utterly loathsome and abhorrent inhumanity.

According to report of the Human Rights Observers, “India: Teen sisters allegedly gang-raped, hanged to death in Uttar Pradesh; Cops suspected”, May 29th:

“Hundreds of angry villagers spent the rest of Wednesday in silent protest over alleged police inaction in the case. Indian TV channels showed video of the villagers sitting under the girls’ bodies as they swung in the wind, preventing authorities from taking them down from the tree until the suspects were arrested.”

These angry villagers are demanding justice and action from the authorities, but the bastard police instead of doing its job “took the side of the culprits”. That is not only a travesty of justice and mockery, but the heights of indescribable shame!

Again to quote from another report of the Human Rights Observers, “Indian teen girls gang-rape: families allege police shielding attackers”, May 31st:

“The victims’ families allege that local police were shielding the attackers as they refused to take action when the girls were first reported missing. It was only after angry villagers found the hanging corpses and took the bodies to a nearby highway and blocked it in protest, say the families, that police registered a case of rape and murder.”

It is clear from the facts of the case, that there is a conspiracy! Those policemen that shielded and protected those rapists and murderers must not only be suspended but should also be prosecuted for the crimes of rape and murder.

Why?

It is a universally accepted principle of law that in a case involving conspiracy: the act of one is the act of all! Further, those bastard policemen must be prosecuted from negligence and acts prejudicial to the interest of the public. They have no right to be members of the police force for showing their bias, discrimination and incompetence. They are good for nothing! They are the one that should be hanged to death!

Adding insult to injury “a lawmaker from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ruling party has described rape as a social crime, saying “sometimes it’s right, sometimes it’s wrong”, in the latest controversial remarks by an Indian politician about rape.”

That dirty pronouncement of that bastard son-of-a-bitch is not only detestable, disgusting, but utterly both idiotic and discriminatory.

I condemn the act of the state government involved in this case in trying to bribe the fathers of the victim and I commend one of the fathers for refusing the said “blood money”.

If India will not do something about this latest abominable and undeniably repulsive rape case, then they are on their way to become the Rape Capital of the World!

A regional politician from Modi’s own party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), said on Thursday that the crime of rape can only be considered to have been committed if it is reported to police.

Comment:

I do not know whether that bastard idiot is drunk or under the influence of drugs, yet the facts of this case is clear: the parents of the victims had tried to report that their daughters are missing yet the bastard police turned them away.

So, following the super idiotic “definition” of that hyper moronic politician, every time a rape complaint is file but so long as the police will not record it, then there is no case and there is no crime?

Bloody hell! This creature is one of the most idiotic freaks that I have encountered in my entire conscious life!

Point two: It does not mean that because a case of rape was not reported, it means that a crime does not occur. Rape is rape and a crime is a crime!

Below are the heinous and odious words of the home minister of Madhya Pradesh, Mr. Babula Gaur:

“This is a social crime which depends on men and women. Sometimes it’s right, sometimes it’s wrong…

“Until there’s a complaint, nothing can happen…”

This is a shame!

That bastard freak as home minister is responsible for law and order in the said state. How will that idiot enforced the law if he himself is violating the law? How will that bastard execute peace and order, if he himself does not have an orderly and sound mind?

Commentaries:

Mr. so-called home minister, could you please tell us, when is rape right and when it is wrong!

What if I rape and fuck your daughter inside your house; is it right?

What if I rape and fuck again your daughter the following day, but this time in an open space, in an open air, in full view of the public; is it wrong?

Mr. so-called home minister, you also stated that: “Until there’s a complaint, nothing can happen."

Again, it is clear from the facts of the case and from the various and numerous reports that “the father and uncle of one of the victims said they tried to report the crime to local police but had been turned away.”

Question:

How could the case of rape be recorded if some of your fucking bastard policemen are siding with those demonic rapists?

How could the case of rape be recorded if some of your policemen are not doing their job?

As of the moment, three bastard criminals have been arrested over the killings.

What the hell are we going to do with these animals?

Then, “two policemen were held on suspicion of trying to cover up the crime.”

Again, what the fuck are we going to do with these good for nothing so-called law enforcers?

It is incontestably sickening and disgusting to note that “a rape is reported in India every 21 minutes on average, law enforcement failures mean that such crimes – a symptom of pervasive sexual and caste oppression – are often not reported or properly investigated, human rights groups say. More sex crimes have come to light in recent days.”

Not to be outdone, another bastard so-called home minister from another state has issued another equally super preposterous and utterly ridiculous statement: “rapes happen accidentally”!

The Indian Rape Mentality: Barbarity and Inhumanity of the lowest order Part II

0
0
As reported by the AFP, “Indian minister says rapes happen 'accidentally'”, June 8th:

“A minister from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's ruling party has said rapes happen "accidentally" in the latest controversial remarks by a politician amid renewed anger over attacks against women.

“Ramsevak Paikra, the home minister of central Chhattisgarh state who is responsible for law and order, said late on Saturday that rapes did not happen on purpose.”

This is exactly what that bastard told the reporters as recorded by the media:

"Such incidents (rapes) do not happen deliberately. These kind of incidents happen accidentally…"

Comment:

How the hell could a crime of rape which is a crime that is always associated with violence, force and viciousness be accidental?

How could the crime of rape which is so hideous, repulsive, revolting, disgusting and utterly distasteful happened not in an arbitrary manner and deliberate method?

It is a shame that Paikra, also of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) which also rules at the national level could come out with such preposterous ideas, worst, that creature have the guts and galls to issue such a super stupid and incontestably idiotic pronouncement!

Shame to both Babula Gaur and Ramsevak Paikra!

A Call to Mr. Modi

Sir, if you and your government truly represent the will of the people, then the right thing to do is for you to castigate your men and ask them to apologize! Failure to do so on the part of these animals, you have no choice but to sack them from your party!

Show to the people that your party truly represents all the Indian people! Let the hammer fall and let it fall heavily!

On The Question of Pervasive Sexual Violence, Caste Oppression and Discrimination Against Minority

Besides the rampant sexual assaults, constant rapes and everyday molestations barbarically and habitually committed against women now happening in India, said society must also admit the brutal truth and that is: it is not true that their Constitution abolished the caste system.

Bapu called the dalits, the “untouchables” as harijans or children of god, but sad but true, the free and liberated India that he aspired and fought for against the colonizers has only ironically replaced the British in oppressing, abusing, dehumanizing and violating these people, which ironically are their fellow Indians.

I am wondering if Gandhi is alive today, what will he say to these lecherous creatures, these bastard policemen, good for nothing and discriminatory so-called home ministers?!

Shame! Super Shame!

Now, look at this, while this case is still raging and making an outrage all over India, another woman was victimized!

According to the reports:

“A woman in a nearby district of Uttar Pradesh was gang-raped, forced to drink acid and strangled to death. Another was shot dead in northeast India while resisting attackers.”

Finally, I overwhelmingly concur with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon when has said that he was “especially appalled” by “the rape and murder of the two girls.”

As he said in a statement:

“We say no to the dismissive, destructive attitude of, ‘Boys will be boys’…”

The world must come together to make sure that India is protecting its woman and carrying out the laws and legislation that protect women’s rights and welfare!



Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy and Social Science lecturer
General Education Department
Unibersidad de Manila

The French government and the so-called “European Court of Human Rights” has no right to tell women how the hell are they going to dress up Part I

0
0
I refer to the AP report, “French Face Veil Ban Upheld By European Court”, July 1 with regard to the decision of the so-called European Court of Human Rights which has recently “upheld France’s law banning face-covering Muslim veils from the streets”.

Said case which is the first of its kind was “brought by a woman who claimed” that “her freedom of religion was violated”.

As narrated lucidly by the said report:

“The ruling by the Strasbourg-based court was the first of its kind since France passed a law in 2010 that forbids anyone to hide his or her face in an array of places, including the street. The law went into effect in 2011.

“The court's Grand Chamber rejected the arguments of the French woman in her mid-20s, a practicing Muslim not identified by name. She said she doesn't hide her face at all times, but when she does it is to be at peace with her faith, her culture and convictions. She stressed in her complaint that no one, including her husband, forced her to conceal her face — something of particular concern to French authorities.

“The court ruled that the law's bid to promote harmony in a diverse population is legitimate and doesn't breach the European Convention on Human Rights.”

Commentaries:

I perfectly understand the real reason of the French government in promulgating this law three years ago: that is for security (the threat of militants and terrorists) and for diversity (French culture and assimilation, etc.) yet, having said that, I question the propriety and wisdom of the court in arriving at their judgment.

The state has the right to defend itself from harm and injury. There is no debate on that. The government has the power to lay down rules, regulations and stipulations that the citizens must obey. The same is true most especially to the foreigners and immigrants who must comply and abide to the said laws in order for them to legally stay to the said society that are living in.
Nonetheless, I regretted that France (especially that so-called “court”), who’s culture, sense of civilization, judicial system and way of life which is being admired by the international community had made a big mistake with regard to this specific case.

They failed miserably to forge a sense of equilibrium and moderation in balancing the public interest (the right of the state to protect itself) from that of the right of the citizen (the right to choose and to decide willfully).

As reported, “under the law, women who cover their faces can be fined up to 150 Euros ($205) or be obliged to attend a citizenship class, or both.”

Further, “when enacted, the law was seen as a security measure, with veiled women considered fundamentalists and potential candidates for extremist views. Another concern was respect for the French model of integration in which people of different origins are expected to assimilate.”

Commentaries:

The two primary reasons behind the law is contradictory and in direct opposition to one another. The first one is aimed “at potential candidates for extremist views”, while the other is for integration and assimilation.

Question:

How the hell could France integrate people of different origin for purposes of assimilation if the said law behind the said aims is zeroing and/or targeting some people who are profiled or stereotyped or tagged or considered or suspected of fundamentalism and extremism?

I have no problem with the French authorities asking some women or people to take away their veil or head scarf or headdress on the ground of investigation, identification, verification and for purposes of documentation, but to give authority and power to those powers that be to arrest and accost and harass people and women who are wearing their veil, scarf and/or headdress on the street on their way to their places of religious worship in my view is a grave violation of their constitutional and international right to religious freedom.

In a truly democratic society, people are penalized, punished and condemned for the wrong acts that they committed, not for what they think and believe, because the right to think, the right to believe and the right to act on those beliefs are beyond state regulation and no government has the right to invade those rights!

Consider the idiotic conclusion reached by that so-called court. They justified their ruling by saying that the ban is a “choice of society”.

Commentaries:

Can there be a society without its inhabitants?

Does the bloody court have forgotten that no society can exist without its people and citizens?

Did they forget also that society is a mere collection of individuals that agreed to bond themselves?

When they speak of the choice of society, do they speak on behalf of the said society or are they speaking for that society?

To do or not to do

My view on this whole controversy is: those women (whether they are Muslim, Sikh, Christian, Jew, etc.) want to wear that veil (or whatever headdress), then let them do so, so long as no one is forcing them to do so!
In the same vein, those women do not want to wear that (whatever headdress is that), then so be it. Again, so long, as long it is their will and no one is forcing or compelling them not to do so!

It is my firm belief that the government has no right to legislate and regulate how the hell should or must women dress up!

The government does not own them, but rather they owned the government and so as their bodies!

France and that so-called “court” in my view had indeed violated the right to religion of that woman petitioner and so as all the women being prejudiced by their “law”.

It is on this sense that I concur with the critics of the said ban, which includes human rights defenders and overwhelmingly agree with their contention that the law “targets Muslims and stigmatizes Islam”.

Said ban in my view is not only stupid but undeniably preposterous and sadly France has deviated from its glorious reputation and history from this ridiculous ruling of this impertinent court.

Louise Roug writing for Mashable, “Why France's Ban on Face Veils Is Bad News for Women”, July 3rd has brilliantly argued that:

“The ban is also likely to further stigmatize Muslim women — some of whom do choose to wear the veil.

““The argument that the law protects women has no foundation,” said Geneviève Garrigos, president of Amnesty International France, according to France24.
“Many [Muslim] women wear veils of their own free will," she said, adding: “The state does not exist to tell people how they should dress. Rather, it should allow them to make their own choices.” (Amnesty International supported the appeal by the woman who brought the case before the European Court of Human Rights.)

“In addition to the argument that the veil is degrading to women, French officials have asserted that the veil is an affront to French secular traditions. But that is clearly a slippery slope. For one thing, it negates the idea that different cultures and religions can live side by side. Plus, it raises questions about who gets to determine what are the right and proper cultural norms. Finally, there is a specious argument about terrorism and security: that the veil hides people's identities. But so do certain hats, scarves and beards.”

The French government and the so-called “European Court of Human Rights” has no right to tell women how the hell are they going to dress up Part II

0
0
What’s to be done?

Unfortunately, “the judgment cannot be appealed since it was handed down by the Grand Chamber of the European Court.” Nonetheless, it is my take that the matter is not yet over. The said woman, “a 24-year-old French woman of Pakistani origin had brought the case before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, arguing that the original 2011 French ban on face-covering veils, intended to protect her against oppression, instead violated her rights to freedom of religion, expression and assembly, and was discriminatory” can bring this issue of humanistic and universal importance to the United Nations.

Article 18 of the United Nations INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON
CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS expressly provides that:

1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.

2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.

3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.

4. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.

Therefore, anyone who is aggrieved by the stupid and preposterous French law banning the wearing the veil can invoke this international law and sue France before the United Nations.

To France, shame on you and quote the words of Louise Roug: “So much for Liberté, Égalité and Fraternité.”



Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy and Social Science lecturer
Polytechnic University of the Philippines and Unibersidad de Manila






The Naked Violence, Barbarism, Terrorism and Nazism of Zionism: In defense and solidarity to the Palestinian People Part I

0
0
The Zionist argument to justify Israel’s present occupation of Arab Palestine has no intelligent or legal basis in history… not even on their religion. --- Malcolm X

Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. --- Mahatma Bapu Gandhi

It would be my greatest sadness to see Zionists (Jews) do to Palestinian Arabs much of what Nazis did to Jews. --- Albert Einstein


I am writing to express to the highest possible degree my gravest condemnation and categorical renunciation of the continuing military operation being conducted by the Zionist army against the occupied people of the Gaza Strip!

It is my firm contention without the slightest iota of doubt that the so-called state of Israel (which is a fake one and a misnomer) is the number one terrorist ‘state’ in the entire world next to the US and the UK.

Their evil concerted act of stealing the lands of the Palestinians is the greatest robbery in the contemporary history of mankind.

Their satanic act of oppressing, exploiting and killing massively to the point of eradication the people of Gaza and the West Bank is the gravest crime against humanity!

To quote the words of Lilian Rosengarten of the Al-Awda New York: The Palestinian Right to Return Coalition Jews for Palestinian Right of Return:

“I was born in Frankfurt, I too am a refugee from Nazi Germany, and I am a Jew who must say no to apartheid, occupation, check points, stolen lands, racism and a desire for Jewish state only obtained through the suffering and bloods of Palestinians.”

Now, the devilish Zionist ‘state’ of Israel is once again bombing to the ground, round the clock the Palestinian people, specifically Gaza. It is beyond dispute that what they are doing is to wipe out the Palestinians from the face of the earth.

Hence, in a word, what they are carrying out right now is: genocide!

To quote the incisive and sharp analysis of the eminent radical professor, Noam Chomsky:

“Israel uses sophisticated jets and naval vessels to bomb densely-crowded refugee camps, schools, apartment blocks, mosques and slums to attack a population that has no air force, no air defense, no navy, no heavy weapons, no artillery, no mechanized armor, no command in control, no army and calls it a war.

“It is not war, it is murder.”

Just want to update the great professor that bastard Israel has now also bombed hospitals (See, “Israeli tank strikes Gaza hospital kill 4, scores injured – medics”, RT Question More, July 21st).

It’s been weeks now since the evil Zionist ‘state’ of Israel has unleashed their genocidal act.

According to the latest media report, the Palestinian death toll has already exceeded that of the 2012 ground invasion.

What breaks my heart is to see that majority of the fatalities and victims of this sophisticated carnage are women and mostly children, in a word: civilians!

I am heavily wondering how could this fucking world that calls itself civilized and humane could stand the sight of those dead young children of Gaza?

How could this fucking world which has created and legislated, a lot of so-called humanistic and international human rights laws tolerates the barbarism, evilness, madness, paranoia and unexplainable inhumanity of bullshit Israel against the people of Palestine?

Why?

What kind of fucking world is this?

Where the hell is the international condemnation of the people of the West?

Where the fuck is the supposed world-wide renunciation from the people of Europe and America?

It is on this sense that I am condemning to the utmost the uselessness and worthlessness of the so-called UN, which in my view must be called not as the so-called “united nations”, but the UNITED NOTHING!

Why? Because they are good for nothing! Palestinian children are being killed and butchered and massacred everyday and what they are doing? Meetings! Meetings! Meetings!

Bloody bastards, enough of your fucking meetings, do something!

The so-called sec-gen of this stupid organization is an idiot of the highest order! A couple of days ago, he offered his condolences to the Israeli government for their casualties (40), but this bastard idiot, did not offer the same to the Palestinian fatalities (it has reached 1,000)! (See “UN chief expresses condolences to Israeli regime”, PressTV, July 22nd and “Gaza Health Ministry: Palestinian Death Toll Tops 1,000”, by Nidal al-Mughrabi and Maayan Lubell of Reuters, July 26th).

What a fucking concept and/or gesture of “justice” and “fairness” is that?

Shame on him and shame on his fucking organization!

The sad fact that they cannot do anything to stop the on-going massive violence being committed by Israel has clearly shown their being an inutile, their bias and good for nothingness!

The so-called UN (United of Nothing) is a shame! If they still have some decency left with them, then the right thing to do is for them to move for the dissolution and/or abolition of the said organization, because they cannot carry out or discharge their primordial function which is to ensure world peace which is primarily the very reason for the establishment and/or constitution in the first place.

It is my contention and I am deliberately saying this that on the issue of Israel’s animosity and terrorism against the Palestinian people, the so-called UN (United of Nothing) is a curse and a shame!!!

Sad but true!

Needless to state, I am also condemning the US as the no. 1 protector of the no. 1 terrorist ‘state’ in the entire world which is no other than bullshit Zionist Israel! (See, John Heilprin’s “UN Rights Chief Warns of Possible Gaza War Crimes”, Associate Press, July 23. Said report states that: “Only the United States voted against the resolution championed by Arab nations. Another 17 of the Human Rights Council's 47 member-states abstained.”)

Bullshit Israel is acting the way it is acting because bastard America with the acquiescence of UK is tolerating and allowing their on-going violence and continuing genocide.

Shame to all of them!!!

Nonetheless, I would like to highlight that everything is not lost for humanity! I commend and applaud those few countries, governments and organization would come out into the open to rebuke and condemn Israel.

Bravo to those South American countries such as Brazil, Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador for their solidarity to Palestine! (See, “‘Stop the genocide!’ S. American leaders condemn Israeli operation in Gaza”, RT Question More, July 20th)

Bravo also to the African National Congress (ANC) for comparing the Zionist to the Nazism! To quote a portion of their official statement:

“The rest of the world, including South Africa, will have no further trust in the methods they are using in the name of Jewish liberation.”

I am also equally condemning the so-called Muslim countries and Arab nations for their deafening silence and for their unforgivable betrayal and abandonment of the cause and struggle of the Palestinian people.

Shame to all of them!!!

I am specifically condemning Egypt for acting like a puppet, worst like a fucking dog of bastard US and criminal Israel in further isolating Palestine from the outside world!

Egypt has no right, whatsoever to say that they are Muslim or that they are Arabic! For the truth is that they are nothing but pimps and prostitutes of American imperialism and Israeli Neo-Nazism!

Shame to Egypt! They have no sense whatsoever of Humanity and Morality!

The Naked Violence, Barbarism, Terrorism and Nazism of Zionism: In defense and solidarity to the Palestinian People Part II

0
0
To quote from my article, “In defence of Palestinian Statehood”, The Malay Mail and the Sun Daily Malaysia, September 28, 2011:

“A few days ago, I completely lost all trust, respect and confidence with President Obama. I welcome his winning the presidency in 2008. I thought that by his victory, he would renounce his country’s aggression and imperialism! I was wrong!

“He was already eaten by the American system. That is why when he addressed the General Assembly of the United Nations to speak about the Palestinian question… though he did not uttered the word veto, it is clear from his statement that the Palestinian people would not get his support for their cause.

“I am wondering, why it took him six months to finally issue the condemnation. Further, while he condemned Syria for its brutality, he is not condemning the Israeli government for its brutalities being committed to the Palestinian people. Is this a case of selective justice? Or, perhaps double standards of the highest order?

“Other guilty parties in this issue are those so-called “brothers and sister countries” of Palestine.

“Who are they? They are those so-called Arab nations and Muslim countries. Yes, they are helping Palestine in its struggle. No question about it, so many economic aids has been given and countless humanitarian missions had been sent.

“However if I may I ask: how many of these countries and nations have recognised Palestine as an independent state? All they do is condemn Israel’s barbarism and militarism, US interference and UK’s inutility. The most substantive and utterly important thing to do is to recognise Palestine as a State and not merely as it is, a mere governing body.”

Nonetheless, it is but just that I must also commend and applaud the few Muslim countries that openly throw its lot to the Palestinian cause.

Bravo to Turkey, Malaysia and Chechnya!

I am also equally condemning to the fullest the various international main stream media, such as CNN, BBC and FOX News and others for their prostitution, their lies, their bias and favoritism.

The way they present and report the ‘news’ is not only a perversion of the truth but a mockery of the real thing that is happening.

Shame to all of them!

In the same vein, I would like to commend and applaud the few trustworthy media that are reporting the on-going genocide in an objective manner!

Bravo to Democracy Now, PressTV, RT and other small, but independent media outlet!

Lastly, I would like to commend and applaud all the people of the world who are protesting in the capital of their countries, from Paris to London to Karachi to Manila up to Nigeria to register their point to their bullshit governments and to show their solidarity to the Palestinian people!

For it is written, “you don’t need to be a Muslim to stand up for Gaza. You just need to be human”, because in the end, “it is not about religion”, for the undeniable truth is that: “it’s all about Humanity.”

In the immortal words of a great man, comrade Nelson Madiba Mandela:

“We know too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians.”

Henceforth, the world must unite and stand as One for Gaza and the Palestinian people!

For Humanity!!!


Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy and Social Science lecturer
Polytechnic University of the Philippines and Unibersidad de Manila

The Shooting down of MH17 is a Terrorist Act and a Crime Against Humanity: The bastard Americans must back off from the on-going international investigation Part I

0
0
I am writing with regard to the catastrophic event that happened to MH17 concerning the horrible fate of the said ill-fated flight and the gruesome and horrendous deaths suffered by its 298 passengers.

It was sudden, totally unexpected and horrific way to die, to say the least!

I condemned, on behalf of humanity to the highest possible extent the evil and heartless perpetrators of these unmistakably demonic and dastardly acts of inhumanity and utter barbarism.

What they did, whoever the hell they are without the slightest shadow of doubt is an act of terror and incontestably a crime against humanity.

I am holding all of those bastard murderers responsible for this despicable and utterly disgusting international felony of universal scale.

The reports are pointing the blame to the so-called pro-Russian rebels who are fighting Ukraine in order for them to secede from the latter and eventually rejoin Russia.

Other reports are claiming that Russia is responsible by virtue of the fact that they are supporting those rebels and they are the one who had supplied them of sophisticated weapons.

While Russia is saying that it is not them or those rebels but Ukraine who carried out the attack. They even stated that it was carried out by Ukraine in order for the said act to be blame on them.

The US and its Western allies are specifically pointing to Moscow as the ultimate brains behind this horrible event. They even offered some satellite map to back up their allegation. However, a Russian general from the Defense department categorically stated that the said map was a hoax.

Now, in the absence of clear, credible and convincing evidences, it is my view that we cannot jump the gun so to speak and immediately draw our conclusions.

It is on this great sense that I am supporting the call of both the Dutch government and the Malaysian authorities for an international, impartial and independent investigation to ferret out the whole truth with regard to this matter.

Said inquiry will collate all the pertinent data, relevant information and necessary and indispensable evidences that shall reconstruct the whole truth and reveal eventually who the real perpetrators are.

If after the said investigation, it will be validated that it was indeed those rebels, then the whole worlds must condemn them and hold them responsible.

The same is true, if the culprit is no other than Russia. They must answer for their murderous act.

Yet, if I may ask, what would be the reaction of the world if it turns out that it was Ukraine who fired that fatal shot, bomb or missile?

Will the world condemn Ukraine and hold them responsible?

What if the evidence further revealed that it was not only Ukraine, but they did their evil act with the help and/or connivance of USA, will the world condemn America and hold it responsible?

Barely 24 hours after the said tragedy, the Americans with their allies, are already telling the world that they have proof that it was the rebels who committed the said despicable act with the active participation of Russia.

Question:

How certain are they that their allegation is correct, accurate and indisputable?

May I remind the world of George Bush’s Mother of All Lies with regard to the so-called Weapons of Mass Destruction allegedly being hidden by Saddam!

Does the bloody world still remember?

Bastard America with its allies, the so-called “Coalition of the Willing” (murderers and killers) begun the so-called War on Terror base on a lie!

That lie plunged the Middle East and in a great part, the world into chaos, division, mistrust, distrust and hate!
We are still reeling from the said fiasco!

A warning to the international community and the whole world

Never again believe directly, on the spot and point blank range what the Americans are saying, because history will clearly shows that they have a consistent history of lies and calumny to justify their act of going to war. Incontestably, they love to kill people, because they are war freaks!

To quote from the article of David Redick, “13 Lies: An Abbreviated History of U.S. Presidents Leading Us to War”, The Activist Post, December 15, 2010:

“Below are the facts on how we got into a few major wars. Each one could be (and has been) a book, and many other smaller wars also could be shown, so please forgive the brevity. The format is: war name; the lying President and the year it started; the stated reasons/lies for the war; and the real reasons.

“1. War of 1812 (Madison, 1812) -- Lies: In 1812, Congress declared war on England based primarily on their kidnapping (‘impressment’) of our sailors at sea. Truth: To drive England out of N. America, so the war started with our failed invasion of Canada at Detroit. DC "expansionists" took advantage and started incursions to acquire Spanish Florida, and Mexican Texana territories.

“2. Mexican-American (Polk, 1845) -- Lies: Fight to defend our Texas border with Mexico. Truth: The disputes started when residents stole The Republic of Texas from Mexico. We invaded and took the northern half of Mexico, now our entire SW region of five states.

“3. Civil (Lincoln, 1865) -- Lies: Fight to end slavery and preserve the union. Truth: The South got tired of economic abuse by the North and had a perfect right to secede. It was not a civil war and it was unconstitutional, illegal, and immoral for the North to start a war to stop them. The Northern states who had the votes to control Congress, wanted to retain the South as a source of cotton and a customer for their manufactured goods (hence the high tariffs on imports in southern ports). Slavery was ended later by the Emancipation Proclamation, but only in Southern states, because the Union wanted the slaves as soldiers. Lincoln was a tyrant beholden to the railroad and canal interests; he jailed journalists and draft resisters who opposed him. Yet, to this day he is revered as a great President who saved the Union.

“4. Spanish-American (McKinley, 1898) -- Lies: Spain blew up the US battleship Maine in Cuba’s Havana harbor. Truth: Hearst publicized, and Teddy Roosevelt mobilized, to use the accidental explosion to take over Cuba by starting a war in April, 1898. We then invaded the Philippines in May and annexed Hawaii in July. A busy time for the beginning of Empire-USA!

“5. WWI (Wilson, 1917) -- Lies: Join Europe to "Make the World Safe for Democracy." Truth: Wilson was convinced to join by US and European industrialists who wanted to sell munitions and guns to the allies, and get paid when they won.

“6. WWII (FDR, 1941) -- Lies; Defend the US from unprovoked attacks by Japan. Truth: FDR poked Japan until he got his "incident." because he wanted to be in the war and prevent Germany from winning and emerge as a superpower (with 1. England and France under his control, and 2. Japan and Italy as buddies). FDR wanted the USA to be the only post-war superpower (with 1. Germany under our control, and 2. France and England as buddies)

“7. Korean (Truman, 1950) -- Lies: Defend America. Truth: Truman and the Generals wanted a reason to have troops in the Far East area of our Empire.

“8. Vietnam (Kennedy, Johnson, 1964) -- Lies: Johnson said Vietnam attacked our ships in the Gulf of Tonkin in August, 1964. Truth: The US didn’t want to lose the Southeast Asia region, and its oil and sea lanes, to China. This "attack" was convenient. Kennedy initiated the first major increase in US troops (over 500).

“9. Gulf War (G.H.W. Bush, 1991) -- Lies: To defend Kuwait from Iraq. Truth: Saddam was a threat to Israel, and we wanted his oil and land for bases.

The Shooting down of MH17 is a Terrorist Act and a Crime Against Humanity: The bastard Americans must back off from the on-going international investigation Part II

0
0
“10. Balkans (Clinton, 1999) -- Lies: Prevent Serb killing of Bosnians. Truth: Get the Chinese out of Eastern Europe (remember the "accidental" bombing of their embassy in Belgrade?) so they could not get control of the oil in the Caspian region and Eastward. Control land for bases such as our huge Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo, and for the proposed Trans-Balkan Oil pipeline from the Caspian Sea area to the Albanian port of Valona on the Adriatic Sea.

“11. Afghan (G.W. Bush, 2001) -- Lies: The Taliban we’re hiding Osama. Truth: To build a gas/oil pipeline from Turkmenistan and other northern ‘xxstan’ countries to a warm water (all year) port in the Arabian Sea near Karachi (same reason the Russians were there), plus land for bases.

“12. Iraq (G.W. Bush, 2003) -- Lies: Stop use of WMDs -- whoops, bring Democracy, or whatever. Truth: Oil, defense of Israel, land for permanent bases (we were kicked out of Saudi Arabia) to manage the greater Middle East, restore oil sales in USD (Saddam had changed to Euros).

“13. Possible Iran War (Obama, 201?) -- Lies: They almost have an atom bomb; they are a threat to Israel; major killer of our troops in Iraq. Truth: Control their oil, defend Israel, and restore oil sales in USD only (they changed to add Euros and others). We created the regional conflict and shouldn’t be surprised that all neighbors (including our "friends" in Saudi Arabia) are helping Iraq. We exaggerate the threat to Israel, especially as Iran has allowed inspections and Israel has not.

“If you approve of the current Bush-Obama wars, but are resting safely at home, you should join the Army’s Chicken Hawk Brigade. There is no restriction on age or sex, and you will get an exciting front-line assignment promptly. Then, you won’t feel badly about sending others to fight your wars for oil, religion, and Empire-USA.”

If I may add, how about the US lies with regard to Cuba? Why is it that up to now, the bloody embargo is still there?

Question: Why is it that the Americans are so afraid of the Cubans?

Warning to the American public

The world now is much aware of the tricks, the lies and the methods of dramatics of your empire. You can no longer fool or dupe the international community.

If it is true that you have evidence against Russia and those rebels, then why don’t you handed them to the international investigation?

Stop irritating Russia and forcing them to the bloody wall, because we don’t know what the hell is going on in Putin’s head and we don’t know what the hell he is thinking.

To the Americans, may I remind you that Russia is not Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, etc. if you will not stop from charging Russia and they give in to your provocations and hostilities erupt, then that conflict may lead to a full scale war, sad but true, then that war will be World War III and that may be will be the end of all of us!

Suggestion:

It would be better if the bastard Americans will back off from this issue and not interfere with the on-going investigation by virtue of the undeniable fact that they do not have any credibility, civility and moral ascendancy!

Hence, to the US government: Back off!

Solidarity

My sincerest condolences and solidarity to all the love ones and families of all the victims of the ill-fated MH17!

May you all live forever!!!


Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy and Social Science lecturer
Polytechnic University of the Philippines and Unibersidad de Manila


The Joint War Criminality of Obama and Netanhayu’s Israel in exterminating the Palestinian People is a Crime Against Humanity

0
0
I refer to “Obama is a ‘war criminal’ for supporting Israel’s treatment of Palestinians – Cornel West”, RT Question More, August 06 with regard to the public speech delivered by a world-renowned dissident professor.

I overwhelmingly concur with controversial professor and political activist Cornel West when he publicly declared President Barack Obama a “war criminal”! I am also in complete agreement with his argument that this is base on the indisputable fact that it was precisely Obama’s “support of Israel and his drone policy make him complicit in the deaths of innocent people.”

According to the said report:

“The controversial activist made the comments at a pro-Palestinian rally in Washington, DC on Saturday, according to Talking Points Memo. West began his speech by pointing to the deteriorating situation in Gaza, where more than 1,800 Palestinians and more than 60 Israelis have been killed, criticizing Israel’s offensive in the region in front of a “Free Palestine” banner.”

Here’s a portion of Dr. West’s speech:

“There’s an intimate connection between mendacity and criminality, between lies and crimes against humanity…

“And what I want to say to my Black brother in the White House: Barack Obama is a war criminal – not because he’s Black, or half-African and white – but because his drones have killed 233 innocent children, and because he facilitates the killing of innocent Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, and it would be true anywhere else.”

Commentaries:

I applaud the courage and the guts of the said professor in saying openly to the public what the general public and the world as a whole needs to hear, no matter how sad and brutal the truth is: and that is the undeniable fact that Barrack Obama is nothing but a war criminal like his predecessor, the utterly stupid Dubya!

Nonetheless, Professor West is absolutely correct in saying Obama is a war criminal not because of the color of his skin or by virtue of his cultural heritage and his ethnicity but precisely because he is allowing the utilization of deadly force and sophisticated killing machines and lethal technology in confederation and connivance with the Israelis in facilitating the systemic and mass killing and mass murder of the Palestinian people!

In a word: Obama is also guilty of genocide which is a crime against humanity in his support and defense of the Zionist Israeli fake state!

Incontestably, Professor West is also correct in saying that “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is in the same category as his American counterpart”, because it is beyond dispute “that anyone who “chooses occupation and annihilation is a war criminal.””

Professor West categorically stated that:

“Benjamin Netanyahu is a war criminal — not because he’s Jewish, but because he has chosen to promote occupation and annihilation…”

“This is a human affair.”

I completely concur with Dr. West in his pronouncement with regard to the mass murderer Netanyahu that this freak is a war criminal, not because he is Jewish, but because he “has chosen to promote occupation and annihilation”.

In a word, Netanyahu is a war criminal, because of his acting worst than the Nazi and that he and his military are guilty of genocide, which are crimes against humanity.

The radical and prominent activist noted that the said rally’s main objective is to highlight the plight of the Palestinian people because their “humanity is rendered invisible in the corporate media.”

That is because the American media is controlled by the Zionist! Sad but true! Consider the argument of the stupid media in the US: If one will criticize the Israeli, they will immediately tag the said person of anti-semitism! That is not only an idiotic charge but a complete bullshit crap!

Do those bastards knew that the Palestinians and so as the Jews both came from the Semitic people?

According to Wikipedia:

“A Semite is a member of any of various ancient and modern Semitic-speaking peoples originating in the Near East, including; Akkadians (Assyrians/Syriacs and Babylonians), Ammonites, Amorites, Arameans, Chaldeans, Canaanites (including Hebrews/Israelites/Jews and Phoenicians/Carthaginians), Eblaites, Dilmunites, Edomites, Ethiopian Semites, Hyksos, Arabs, Nabateans, Maltese, Mandaeans, Mhallami, Moabites, Shebans and Ugarites.”

So, when those bloody bastard idiots talked about anti-semitism, what the fuck are they referring to?

Dr. West has shown his objectivity and further stressed that:

"I would be here if there were a Palestinian occupation of Jewish brothers and sisters, because it's wrong, it's unjust and we stand not with the level of skin pigmentation or ethnic identity; this is ethical, this is spiritual with political consequences…"

Hence, under the prevailing circumstances being face by Gaza “resistance under occupation” is justified!

This is not the first time that Dr. West has called Obama a war criminal. As the report clearly illustrated:

“Notably, West has called Obama a war criminal before. In May 2013, he told the Guardian that although he supported Obama during his initial bid for the presidency, he became disillusioned after seeing the policies put in place both domestically and overseas.”

Commentaries:

Same with the professor, I am also one of those millions of people around the globe who threw our support for Obama, yet after three years in office, I am also one of those who were disillusioned by his false promises and fake persona.

Instead of ending the so-called war on terror, he did not only continue the same, but worst further amplified it and made it more large scale and global. Though, he did not use ground troops, he maximize their technological warfare by using advanced planes and much sophisticated drones that killed a lot of civilians from Iraq to Pakistan to Yemen, and now to Palestine. Not included in the list is their covert war on Syria.

Same with his predecessor, Obama also did not give a damn to the Palestinian cause. In 2011, during his Address before the United Nations, he even hinted that he will veto the right of the Palestinian for an independent state.

While on the local front, he is powerless to control the corporations, the banks, the big business and all their cohorts to the prejudice of the American public, especially those who live at the edge of society.

Obama instead of realizing the American Dream has turn into the worst American Nightmare! Sad but true!
The only difference between him and Dudya is that the latter is white while he is black, but on the level of political character and ideological persuasion --- both are the same! Shame!!!

For in truth and in fact, Obama is nothing more than the protector of Wall Street and the genocidal illegitimate ‘state’ of Israel!

As Dr. West clearly pointed out:

“He's just too tied to Wall Street… And at this point he is a war criminal. You can't meet every Tuesday with a killer list and continually have drones drop bombs. You can do that once or twice and say: 'I shouldn't have done that, I've got to stop.' But when you do it month in, month out, year in, year out – that's a pattern of behavior.”

“I think there is a chance of a snowball in hell that he will ever be tried, but I think he should be tried and I said the same about George Bush. These are war crimes. We suffer in this age from an indifference toward criminality and a callousness to catastrophe when it comes to poor and working people."

LET GAZA LIVE!

FREE PALESTINE!

FOR HUMANITY!


Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy and Social Lecturer
Polytechnic University of the Philippines and Unibersidad de Manila

The Uighur People: In Defense of the Minority, their Identity and Autonomy Part I

0
0

I am writing to bring to the attention of the world the horrible condition of the Uighur people and to highlight the persecution and oppression that they are undergoing under the Chinese Empire.

 

Who are the Uighurs?

 

According to the BBC report of the same title, April 30, 2014:

 

“China's western Xinjiang region has a long history of discord between China's authorities and the indigenous Uighur ethnic minority.

 

“The Uighurs are Muslims. They regard themselves as culturally and ethnically close to Central Asian nations.

 

“The region's economy has for centuries revolved around agriculture and trade, with towns such as Kashgar thriving as hubs along the famous Silk Road.

 

“In the early part of the 20th Century, the Uighurs briefly declared independence. The region was brought under the complete control of communist China in 1949.

 

“Xinjiang is officially designated an autonomous region within China, like Tibet to its south.”

 

I am with China in doing everything that is necessary, within the bounds of their law to counter and stop terrorism, but to fight terrorism with its own state-sanctioned terrorism, in my view will not accomplish anything, worst it may even fuel the “terrorism” that they intend to curb in the first place.

 

Though I agree with the Uighur people on their struggle, quest and aim of separating from Beijing and establishing a land of their own that is independent, I am condemning some of them for resorting to senseless violence and terrorism that they are committing to innocent people and civilians in Xinjiang, Beijing and elsewhere.

 

In the same vein, I am also condemning to the utmost the state sponsored terrorism being committed by China to the Uighur people.

 

I condemn China categorically for their economic black mail, economic bias as against the people of Xinjiang, their act of spiritually persecuting and religiously curtailing the beliefs of the Uighurs, their political and cultural repression of these minority people. All these acts are unforgivable and unpardonable!

 

Question:

 

Under the prevailing condition and present circumstances now in Xinjiang, can China blame the Uighur people who they forced to the wall, if these people will fight back using all means available at their disposal?

 

Who are the real and true terrorists, with regard to this issue?

 

Is it a country or an empire that are repressing, oppressing and persecuting their people and citizens who belong in the minority or it is those persecuted, oppressed and marginalized people who simply wish to fight back for their identity, cultural beliefs and justice?

 

Who are those “terrorists” on the eyes of China?

 

Answer: They are the Uighur people who: either wants an equal right with the Chinese (Han) majority or who wants to separates from China.

 

Historically, in Xinjiang, the majority of the populations are the Uighur, but as reported by Nathan VandelKlippe, “In remote Xinjiang province, Uighurs are under siege”, The Globe and Mail, August 15th:

 

“Their home territory has, however, experienced tremendous change since the Communist Revolution in 1949. Briefly an independent state in the early 20th century, Xinjiang has in the past few decades become home to vast numbers of ethnic Chinese, many of them sent here by government settlement policies.

 

“They now outnumber the Uighurs, and continue to arrive, drawn by untrammelled space and the jobs that flow from a land rich in resources.

 

“But the wealth hasn’t necessarily benefited the Uighur population. As the region’s oil and gas flow east, local filling stations routinely run short, with lineups 150 cars long.”

 

“Xinjiang accounts for 28 per cent of China’s natural-gas reserves, which are being tapped at a roaring rate by a country eager to fuel its remarkable growth with its own energy. Between 2000 and 2012, gas output increased sixfold, while oil production rose by half. Some 60 per cent of Xinjiang’s gross domestic product is now derived from petroleum.

 

“And for all the jobs that development has brought, the region has China’s highest rate of unemployed college graduates – 80 per cent of them minorities, many of them Muslim. Job postings sometimes demand Han Chinese outright. A former manager at a large Western company in Urumqi says that, of 400 employees, only 10 were Uighur.”

 

The terroristic activities, in my view committed by China are the following:

 

1. In July, the authorities from Beijing “banned the practice of fasting during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan”. Adding insult to injury, they also barred the Salat prayer in mosques.

 

As reported by Didi Tang of the AP, “China bans Ramadan fast in Muslim northwest”, July 3rd:

 

“Students and civil servants in China's Muslim northwest, where Beijing is enforcing a security crackdown following deadly unrest, have been ordered to avoid taking part in traditional fasting during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.

 

“Statements posted in the past several days on websites of schools, government agencies and local party organizations in the Xinjiang region said the ban was aimed at protecting students' wellbeing and preventing use of schools and government offices to promote religion. Statements on the websites of local party organizations said members of the officially atheist ruling party also should avoid fasting.”

 

According to the officials, their reason in placing the “laws” is “to prevent religious indoctrination by teachers in schools.”

 

Some of the actual text of the law is as follows:

 

“Students shall not participate in religious activities; they shall not study scripts or read poems at script and choir classes; they shall not wear any religious emblems; and no parent or others can force students to have religious beliefs or partake in religious activities.”

 

That is the “law” for the students, below is the “law” for the teachers:

 

"No teacher can participate in religious activities, instill religious thoughts in students or coerce students into religious activities…”

 

Commentaries:

 

I don’t believe in the powers that be that their intention is pure and noble, far from it, their “law” is enacted not to promote a secular education system, but to curtail the rights of the Uighur people to their religious, cultural and ethnic rights.

 

It is my firm view and so hold that the so-called “law” issued by Beijing is not only illegal but undeniably immoral and unjust.

 

Questions:

 

What is the right of the central government to impose their will upon an autonomous region which is utterly different from them?

 

What is the right of the central government to invade and violate the religious right of their citizens who are minority and other an autonomous administrative region?

 

Is China aware that that their so-called “law” is a violation of the United Nation’s Declaration of Human Rights?

 

2. This month, Beijing bans big beards from buses.

 

As reported by the Telegraph, “China city bans big beards from buses”, August 6th:

 

“A city in China's mainly Muslim Xinjiang region has banned people with large beards or Islamic clothing from travelling on public buses, state media said, prompting outrage from an overseas rights group Wednesday.

 

“Authorities in Karamay banned people wearing hijabs, niqabs, burkas, or clothing with the Islamic star and crescent symbol from taking local buses, the Karamay Daily reported.

 

“The ban also covers "large beards", the paper said, adding: "Those who do not cooperate with inspection teams will be handled by police."”

The Uighur People: In Defense of the Minority, their Identity and Autonomy Part II

0
0
Commentaries:

What is the point?

What the hell is China’s problem with people who sports big beards? What the hell is their issue with those people who wear hijabs, niqabs, burkas?

What the hell is China’s problem with those people whose clothing bears “the Islamic star and crescent symbol”?

Why can’t they ride the public bus?

What the hell is China’s problem with their minority Uighur Muslim population?

Again, is China aware that this stupid and preposterous “law” is a grave violation of the United Nation’s Declaration of Human Rights?

I thought these people are citizens of China, hence why the central government are making and issuing laws that are only applicable specifically to them?

Question:

What is the difference of this law from the law of Hitler compelling the Jews to put into their clothes the Star of David?

China is not only following the discrimination done by the Nazis, but their way of marginalizing an already marginalized people is comparably despotic, barbaric and incontestably absurd!

The German human rights spokesman Dilxat Raxit is correct when she says that this ordeal being suffered by the Uighurs will only “lead more conflicts if China uses coercive measures to rule and to challenge Uighur beliefs.”

If the Chinese believes that they can win against the “terrorists” by using their own brand of “terrorism”, they are dead wrong!

If China will not stop from their repression and oppression, then the conflict in Xinjiang will only escalate and it may even spill to other areas.

Terrorism would not be defeated by another kind of terrorism!

China must respect the rights and true well-being of the Uighur people!



Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy and Social Science lecturer

Polytechnic University of the Philippines and Unibersidad de Manila

Robin Williams: A Tribute

0
0

The meditation of the wise man is a meditation not on death, but on life. --- Baruch Spinoza


Last August 11th, the great actor and comedian, Robin Williams died to the shocked of the world! It is a world that cannot believe that one of the happiest men on this planet has decided to go and did it in such an unexpectedly way and utterly abrupt manner!

How could he do what he did? What led him to decide what he decided?

Nathan Feiles in his article, “Why the Death of Robin Williams Is So Hard to Accept”, PsychCentral, August 20th had offered the following incisive analysis:

“We could all speculate on the underlying issues that led to his suicide, but any explanation would only assist in helping us deny the reality: Robin Williams had a deeply suffering part of him, and he chose to end his life.

“This leaves a lingering question (among many others): If Robin Williams — who appeared to be the master of summoning joy — couldn’t find some element of joy worth remaining alive for, what does that mean for all of us? What are we all striving for if the man who seemed to successfully live life on his own terms couldn’t be satisfied enough to keep living?

“The answer first takes recognition of a notion that I found difficult to come to terms with: we didn’t know all of Robin Williams. At times, it may have felt like he let us in to his deepest childhood and adult states of emotion. However, there was more he didn’t let the world experience (possibly a part he wanted to hide from, as well, considering his multiple addictions). He was a great actor and embodied many fantasies for many people. But this is also a man who suffered greatly, even if we may never know what his demons truly were.

“For me, the reason his death is so difficult to take is because I wanted to believe that what we saw of Robin Williams was in fact who he was. And really, what he gave to us was still part of him. He brought life to these characters through parts of himself. And was so convincing in these roles, that it became easy to feel that Robin Williams was giving his full self to the world.

“But in the end, we’re reminded that that’s what we saw on screen. Characters. Showing the world only what the character was meant to show. Sure, they were parts of Robin Williams, but they weren’t all of him. It’s hard to juxtapose these beloved characters portrayed by Robin Williams with the depth of darkness that remained mostly hidden from our view.”

Robin Williams who played Patch Adams in the movie of the same title uttered the following lines:

“Death. To die. To expire. To pass on.

“To perish.

“To peg out.

“To push up daisies.

“To push up posies.

“To become extinct.

“Curtains, deceased, demised, departed and defunct.

“Dead as a doornail. Dead as a herring.

“Dead as a mutton. Dead as nits.

“The last breath. Paying a debt to nature. The big sleep.

“God’s way of saying, “Slow down.”

“To check out.

“To shuffle off this mortal coil.

“To head for the happy hunting ground.

“To blink for an exceptionally long period of time.

“To find oneself without breath.”

The Greek philosopher Epicurus famously stated: “Death is nothing to us, since when we are, death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.”

What is death and why are we so concern and worrisome about it?

Hence, we return to the one of the most perennial philosophical questions of all time: what it is about death that makes us conscious of it? Why do we fear death and why it is that we do not want our love ones to die?

Professor A. C. Grayling said that:

“The fundamental question is how to deal with others’ deaths. We grieve the loss of an element in what made our world meaningful. There is an unavoidable process of healing --- of making whole --- to be endured, marked in many societies by formal periods of mourning, between one and three years long. But the world is never again entire after bereavement. We do not get over losses, we merely learn to live with them.

“There is a great consolation. Two facts --- that the dead once lived; and that one loved them and mourned their loss --- are inexpungeably part of the world’s history. So the presence of those who lived can never be removed from time, which is to say that there is a kind of eternity after all.”

Interestingly, Robin Williams (again to quote from the said film, Patch Adams) said these moving and passionate words in addressing the board/panel of doctors:

“What's wrong with death, sir?

“What are we so mortally afraid of?

“Why can't we treat death with a certain amount of humanity and dignity and decency and, God forbid, maybe even humor?

“Death is not the enemy, gentlemen.

“If we're gonna fight a disease, let's fight one of the most terrible diseases of all --- indifference.

“Now, I've sat in your schools and heard people lecture on transference and professional distance. Transference is inevitable, sir.

“Every human being has an impact on another.

“Why don't we want that in a patient/doctor relationship?

“That's why I've listened to your teachings, and I believe they're wrong.

“A doctor's mission should be not just to prevent death, but also to improve the quality of life. That's why you treat a disease, you win, you lose.

“You treat a person, I guarantee you, you win, no matter what the outcome.”

I am one of those people who up to now have yet to accept that this great actor is no more.

It is my take that when we say that we already accepted the death of a love one, we are not telling the whole truth, for we are lying (to the teeth) to ourselves. For the sad truth is the brutal fact that we merely accepted the lost or the passing of a love one --- in a sense. We were just compel to accept, by the force of the reality that a love one is already gone, but the ultimate acceptance that they already died will only dawn upon us --- ironically --- on the very day we die ourselves.

For “it remains true that we never quite get over the sorrow caused by losing those most loved; we only learn to live with it, and to live despite it; which --- and there is no paradox here --- makes living a richer thing.”

Perhaps, one of Robin’s characters is correct when he says that: “You don’t know about real loss, ‘cause it only occurs when you loved something more than you love yourself.”

Now, whether it was the “dark side” of Robin Williams who kill himself or one of his characters; makes no difference to me! For in truth and in fact, what he did to himself will not diminished nor will it shatter his legacy, greatness and humanity!

May you live forever, Mr. Funny Guy!


Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy and Social Science lecturer
Polytechnic University of the Philippines and Unibersidad de Manila

The Killing of Jennifer is the Central Issue not her sexuality and gender: the VFA as a symbol of National Shame

0
0
I refer to Rina Jimenez-David’s “Tangential issues”, At Large, PDI, October 17th with regard to the gruesome and barbaric killing of Jennifer (aka Jeffrey) Laude, “a transgender individual, in a motel room in Olongapo City allegedly by an American Marine taking part in war games here, is the “nature” of Jennifer and whether she was plying the “world’s oldest profession” or was merely out for a good time.””

I'm my view, the most tangential and substantive issue is not whether “she was a “trannie” in a land where there is still considerable social and legal discrimination against gays” or because in order for her, “to earn money to put a sibling through school and pay for other expenses, she was engaged in prostitution”, rather is it her gruesome and horrible killing.

The killing of a helpless human being: That is the central issue!

Indeed, Ms. David is absolutely correct in her contention that:

“Of course, it’s irrelevant and immaterial whether Jennifer was a prostitute or simply a good-time gal. She did not deserve to die simply because she was not “fully” a woman, in the same way that women (and men) engaged in the flesh trade cannot be raped, beaten up, or killed simply because they failed to satisfy their customers.”

Yet, instead of seeing it that way, her murder and death has only shown the apathy, the idiocy, the bigotry and the mental discrimination still running on the minds of some people of this country.

Again, to quote Ms. David:

“But her being transgender has trained a light as well on the realities of life for those whose sexuality and sexual orientation lie beyond the pale. Certainly appalling are comments that Filipinos are raising too much fuss about Jennifer’s killing, as if the death of a transgender person deserves less outrage and pain than the murder of a “normal” woman or man. Or that a prostitute’s life is not worth grieving or agonizing over, as if human rights apply only to those living righteous lives.”

I am wondering, what if it is a Filipino man who killed an American transgender, or if it is an American transgender that killed a Filipino woman, will there be a change to their moronic charges and idiotic comments?

To me, the fact remains and that fact is “that murder is murder, whether committed by a Filipino or an American, and must be prosecuted with the full force of the law.”

It is on this juncture that I am condemning to the utmost, some of our countrymen for their discrimination, bigotry, idiocy and even their colonial mentality.

As a Humanist, I don’t give a damn whether the one who violated the law is a man or a woman, “in between” or a transgender; that fact that he or she violated the law is enough for the said felon to be brought to the bar of justice.

In the same vein, I also don’t give a damn whether the offender is a local citizen or a foreigner, if they violated the law, hence they must answer --- whoever the hell they are, whatever the hell they are!

On Humanity

As I’ve stated in one article, “Everyone deserves love”, The Star Malaysia, August 3, 2011:

“Transgenders are our fellow human beings; the only difference is that we are certain of our sexual orientation and gender affiliation.

“They also deserve to be loved and cherished. It is their inherent natural human right to love and be loved, regardless and irrespective of their abnormalities, deformities and physiological-sexual limitations.

“The dichotomy of the individual and that of society has long been settled by both sociology and anthropology. The presence of varied elements is precisely one of the key ingredients for society to grow and develop.

“Such a society would undeniably be vibrant, humane, accommodative to change and refreshingly adaptive to the prevailing circumstances.”

I am sad and it is with a heavy heart on my part to state that this bastard country is not that tolerant and open when it comes to the those people that belongs to the LGBT community!

This society is inhumane and discriminative!

That should not be the case, by virtue of the fact that the equal protection clause of the Constitution is anti-sexism, anti-discrimination, anti-racism and against all forms of cruelty. It is a document of justice, equality and fairness.

Yet, sad but true, such is not the case!

Shame!!!!

On the Question of the VFA and EDCA

I overwhelmingly concur with Professor Walden Bello that the presence of the US military to our country is dangerous to our people’s welfare.

As he stated categorically in his article, Afterthoughts, Fatal encounters: Jennifer meets US Marine Corps, PDI, October 20th:

“When we opposed the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) and the so-called Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), one of our key reasons was to prevent our civilian population from again becoming collateral damage as victims of rape, murder, and hate crimes, as many of them were prior to the withdrawal of the big US bases in 1992.

“The rape of Nicole by another US Marine, Daniel Smith, in 2005 confirmed our worst fears. Now an even more brutal crime has taken place. No doubt there will be apologists who will say that the Nicole and Jennifer cases are “isolated incidents,” that these are outweighed by the benefits of the presence of American troops, as Senator Antonio Trillanes IV is supposed to have claimed. Such assertions are increasingly hollow, especially since Washington is not committed to defending our territories in the West Philippine Sea in the first place, since it says it won’t intervene in sovereignty disputes in the Spratlys.

“To prevent future incidents, some have proposed tighter regulation of shore leave or more intensive instruction of American troops on the “rules of engagement” with the civilian population. But again, why be satisfied with these half measures when those troops don’t need to be here in the first place since they do not promote our national security.”

On the implementation of the VFA

In my view, only a moron, or worst an extreme idiot of the lowest order will failed miserably to see that this so-called agreement between the Philippines and the United States of America is not only a lopsided agreement but undeniably a continuation and perpetuation of US colonization of this utterly damned and super stupid country.

As Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago emphatically stated:

"We are a stillborn state because our umbilical cord from the US has never been cut…"

The VFA is not only a failure, but a shame to us all!

It is a basic rule of criminal procedure that jurisdiction includes custody, now base on that bullshit agreement, it states there that while the Philippines has jurisdiction over erring US officers, Article V, Paragraph 6 of the VFA states:

“The custody of any United States personnel over whom the Philippines is to exercise jurisdiction shall immediately reside with the United States military authorities, if they so request.”

This is not only a "gross inequality" but a bastardization of the sovereignty and dignity of the whole country.

Again to quote Senator Santiago:

"If the Philippines has primary jurisdiction, then it follows that the Philippines should have custody. But this logic is spurned by the VFA…"

This is a shame!!!


Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy and Social Science lecturer
Unibersidad de Manila

To Kiss is to Love, to Love is to Protest: Kissing to Resist State Moral Policing

0
0
I refer to “Kiss of Love: Delhi students take a stand against moral policing, Hindustan Times, New Delhi, November 09th with regard to the bold, brave and unorthodox stand being undertaken by the students of India in resisting and defying the state, the moral police and various conservative section of their nation.

They aptly and appropriately titled their protest action as Kiss of Love.

According to Wikipedia:

“The Kiss of Love protest “is a non-violent protest against moral policing which started in Kerala and later spread to other parts of India.

“The movement began when a Facebook page called 'Kiss of love' asked the youth across Kerala to participate in a protest against moral policing on November 2, 2014, at Marine Drive, Cochin.

“The movement received widespread support with more than 120,000 'Likes' for the Facebook page.”

I overwhelmingly concur with one of the organizers of the event, Pankhuree Zaheer, who said that:

“We must not forget that our main aim is to speak out against moral policing and the propaganda of love jihad. Attacks on us have increased in the recent past. If they are entering our streets our universities and pubs, we will enter their space.”

In another interview, reported by Tony Tharakan, “'Kiss of Love' protests rattle Modi's conservative India”, Reuters, Nov. 10th, the 26-year-old research scholar stated emphatically that:

"It's not about just kissing… It's about ... inter-caste marriages, inter-religious marriages, live-in relationships.”

It is my firm view that the government (of Mr. Modi) has no right to appoint and/or to encourage self-appointed moral guardians (his bastard gang of Hindu radicals and conservatives) who are forcing traditional mores, culture and beliefs on people with different outlook in life.

Consider the mindset of these so-called moral freaks and moral police, a creature by the name of Devendra Upadhyay, who opposed the said event, stated that:

“This is against our traditions.

"We have nothing against modernity but don’t kiss on the streets. If the Supreme Court has said that there is nothing wrong in kissing in public, we don’t agree with it. This is wrong…”

Commentaries:

This idiot said that they are not against modernity, but immediately warned the people not to kiss on the streets, well, what kind of modernity is that?

In his futile effort to appear as a modernist, this moron has betrayed his true color and that is, he declared to the whole of India and the rest of the world that he is indeed a conservative and backward freak.

Another point that I wish to highlight is the cold arrogance and ignorance of this bastard freak! Who the hell is he or they to say that even if the highest court of the land had already declared that there is nothing wrong in kissing in public, they don’t agree and it is wrong.

So, what this creature is telling the whole world is that --- Indian’s Supreme Court is wrong in its landmark judgment, ruling that “that kissing in public is not an obscene act and no criminal proceedings can be initiated, for kissing in public.”

Is that it?

Who the hell are they any way?

If these bastard creatures are not respecting the ruling of the highest court of the land, then what the hell is the purpose of the Constitution?

If they are not respecting the Court, then what is the point in having a democratic government?

According further to the Reuters report, Mr. Modi “has not yet commented on the protests. But a spokesman for the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, affiliated to his party”, said that:

"Our Indian culture does not permit us displaying such kinds of affection in public spaces."

Commentaries:

To that stupid spokesman, hey idiot, India is a democratic government that believes and subscribed to those basic universal principles of republican values, such as freedom of expression, freedom of beliefs, freedom of the press, freedom to petition the government for redress, etc. hence, notwithstanding the fact that I respect your culture, yet it is my fervent and unequivocal contention that the same is under the provision of the fundamental law which is no other than the Constitution.

The provision of the Constitution and the various international treaties that your government has entered into, such as the International Declaration of Human Rights is more and much powerful than your culture.

Now, if you certainly wish to fight for the superiority and majesty of your culture, my humble suggestion is to ask your government to amend your secular constitution; make it a religious (Hindu) one and correspondingly --- get the fuck out of the international community.

Why? Because every time, those lovers, kissers, protesters and activists of modernity, humanism and secularism goes out to protest and your government, with your so-called moral police, stupid police and bunch of thugs and gangsters connive and unite with each other to rough them up, harass them, arrest them and stop their constitutional and human right to express themselves in public --- you are all violating your own constitution and international laws, bastardizing your own institutions and making your country a laughing stock before the eyes of the whole world!

The government (whatever its form) has no right to tell people how the hell are they going to live and lead their lives, so long as those people does not harm any body and they are not violating the law.

The government has no right to impose their brand or type of morality to the people.

The government has no right to tell the people when to kiss, where to kiss and what or whom to kiss.

My love affair is mine and they have no right whatsoever to enter or intrude into my life.

Sex, morality and art can never ever be legislated!

What the hell is wrong in kissing in public, anyway?

Why it is that India is so against the public display of affection?

Why is it that they are against this very intimate act of lovers or couples in the public sphere?

They are so against this, yet I am wondering why up to now they are not doing enough to arrest the high rate of rape in the country?

Such a bloody irony!

Shame!

In defense of the Kiss

If kissing in public is wrong, then so be it, I would rather end up in jail than miss the chance to kiss my love and dear ones, whether in private place or in public sphere!

If kissing in public is wrong, then so be it! I would rather err on the name of love, rather than be right in keeping a backward culture and following a stupid conservative government!

Finally, if kissing in public is criminal, then so be it! I would rather be a “criminal”, rather than a bastard fool and a conservative bloody freak.

In the words of Faith Hill:

It' s the way you love me

It's a feeling like this

It's centrifugal motion

It's perpetual bliss

It's that pivotal moment

It's, ah, impossible

This kiss, this kiss

Unstoppable

This kiss, this kiss…


Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy and Social Science lecturer
Unibersidad de Manila


The Mockery and Barbarism of Iran’s “Judiciary”

0
0
I refer to “Iran: Death Sentence for Facebook Posts”, the Human Rights Watch, December 2nd with regard to the “imminent risk of execution” of a 30-year-old man for “insulting the prophet”.

I concur with the Human Rights Watch’s position that “Iran’s judiciary should vacate the death sentence of a 30-year-old man who faces imminent execution for Facebook posts linked to his account.”

Eric Goldstein, the deputy Middle East and North Africa director said that:

“It is simply shocking that anyone should face the gallows simply because of Internet postings that are deemed to be crude, offensive, or insulting…”

“Iran should urgently revise its penal code to eliminate provisions that criminalize peaceful free expression, especially when they punish its exercise with death.”

As narrated by the said report:

“On November 24, 2014, Iran’s Supreme Court upheld a criminal court ruling sentencing Soheil Arabi to hang. The court transferred his file to the judiciary’s implementation unit, opening the way for his execution.

“A Tehran criminal court had convicted him in August of sabb al-nabbi, or “insulting the prophet,” referring to the Prophet Muhammad, which carries the death penalty. Arabi’s legal team has asked the judiciary to suspend the death sentence and review the case.

“Nastaran Naimi, Arabi’s wife, told Human Rights Watch that intelligence agents linked with Iran’s Revolutionary Guards arrested her and her husband at their home in Tehran in November 2013. They soon released her but transferred her husband to a special section of Evin prison that the Revolutionary Guards control, where they kept him in solitary confinement for two months, subjected him to long interrogation sessions, and prevented him from meeting his lawyer, she said. They later transferred Arabi to Ward 350 of Evin prison.”

Commentaries:

Did the so-called “supreme court” put into consideration the vital fact that the accused were kept in solitary confinement?

Putting or placing a detainee in solitary confinement is not allowed under international law.

Such practice is a grave violation of the International Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Convention against Torture.

I say that it is a violation of the Convention against torture, because isolating an individual detainee from the rest is a form of mental and psychological torture.

Worst, the bastard Iranian so-called Revolutionary Guards did so, in two brutal months.

Is the so-called court aware that the accused were subjected to long interrogation sessions?

Is the so-called court has any idea that besides the fact that the accused were placed in solitary confinement, subjected to long interrogation hours, he was also deliberately denied seeing and conferring with his lawyer?

All of these acts are violations of the constitutional, civil and international rights of the accused.

Base on all these violations to the rights of Arabi, he, as a matter of right is entitle to an acquittal!

Yet, the bloody idiotic and bastard court, instead of doing that not only affirmed the judgment of the lower court, worst it even inserted another offense or crime to the prejudice of Arabi.

Grave Abuse of Discretion

Vahid Moshkhani, the lawyer of Arabi, told Human Rights Watch “that instead of upholding or overruling the lower court verdict, the Supreme Court unlawfully added the charge of efsad-e fel arz, or “sowing corruption of earth,” to Arabi’s case. In addition to carrying a possible death sentence, the charge also forecloses the possibility of amnesty, he said.”

Commentaries:

It is a basic principle in criminal law, in all judicial trials, wherein said jurisdiction subscribe to the universal standard of justice and equity that a court which call itself a supreme court can only affirm or deny the judgment or ruling made by a lower court.

Said superior court, if it is truly fair and conforms to the international practice has no power whatsoever to change or modify or add up the allegation or the charge originally subject of the indictment to the prejudice of the accused.

Further, it has also no power to increase the penalty or punishment.

To illustrate:

If A were charged originally for the crime of acts of lasciviousness (example: touching the breast of a woman by-stander), he on appeal cannot be charge by the higher court by the crime of rape.

Acts of lasciviousness is a lesser offense, while rape is a capital crime.

It is a well-entrenched rule in criminal law that the accused is only mandated to answer or reply to the allegation as stated or stipulated in the original complaint.

To answer another charge or accusation not included in the original complaint will be a violation of the constitutional right of the accused to know the nature and the cause of the accusation against him or her.

The bias and incompetence of the so-called supreme court of Iran

Moshkani, Arabi’s defense counsel said that the Supreme Court “rejected his client’s defense that he had not written many of the Facebook posts and that he was merely sharing others’ views on the social media site.”

The question here is:

Is the mere act of sharing others’ views on the social media site enough for the authorities to arrest this man and charged him of “insulting the prophet”?

What kind of fucking “law” is this?

However, Iran does have that fucking “law”!

Article 263 of the revised Islamic Penal Code expressly “provides that a person who “insults the Prophet” while drunk or by quoting others, among other acts, will be subjected to 74 lashes and not sentenced to death.”

Nonetheless, when the lower court handed its judgment, which was reviewed by the Human Rights Watch, said court “relied on Arabi’s confessions and “available images and printouts” attributed to his Facebook page, and concluded that his actions “constitute clear proof” that he insulted the Prophet Muhammad and should be sentenced to death.”

Commentaries:

This is outrageous!

Art. 263 is clearly a blasphemy law which has no right to exist in any democratic and modern criminal statutes.

In the words of Robert Green Ingersoll:

“All laws defining and punishing blasphemy were passed by impudent bigots, and should be at once repealed by honest men.

“An infinite God ought to be able to protect himself, without going in partnership with State Legislatures.”

The Question of “sowing corruption of earth”

Comment/Question:

What the fuck is that?

It is a basic rule in law, specifically in Statutory Construction that if a law is so vague and so bloody ambiguous, that law carries no force or effect whatsoever for being so pervasive and plenary.

The Iranian authorities instead of sentencing Arabi to death should have acquitted or at least discharged him!


Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Philosophy and Social Science lecturer
Unibersidad de Manila

A Mockery and Travesty of Justice: The Continuing Persecution and Permanent Harassment of Anwar Ibrahim by the powers that be in Malaysia

0
0
I refer to the “Anwar Ibrahim guilty in sodomy case”, by the Guardian, February 10th with regard to the latest conviction of the Malaysian Opposition leader.

As of the moment, the Old Man or Uncle Anwar is now there in Sungai Buloh prison serving his newest five year jail sentence.

Last month, the 68 year old Anwar Ibrahim, the de facto Opposition leader, the hero of the Malaysian people of all walks of life, the greatest single threat to the 58 years of bureaucratically racial and despotically selective rule of the elitist UMNO and BN, the indispensable glue that unites Pakatan Rakyat (the Opposition Coalition), the global image of human rights violations in Malaysia, a fierce political fighter par excellence and a universally acknowledged prisoner of conscience --- was once again declared guilty, this time by the so-called highest “court” in Malaysia.

Prison is not an unfamiliar arena and place of struggle for Anwar.

His first spell of jail was back in 1974, under the draconian Internal Security Act, when he was then a student leader, wherein he protested the prevailing hunger and poverty then in the country.

After the culmination of the first so-called Sodomy Trial, he was sent in prison from 1998/9 up to 2004.

Who would ever forget his picture with a black eye while he is in police custody?

Said photo shocked the world!

In 2008, he led the Opposition Coalition in nearly overthrowing the Federal government. That is the Political Tsunami that completely changed not only the ideological landscape of Malaysian politics, but also its political history and historical dimension.

For the first time in Malaysian political life and history --- there is now a vibrant, growing, “young”, strong and genuine opposition against traditional politics, crony capitalism and single party rule for more than five decades.

March 8, 2008 --- scarred the hell out of all UMNO and BN that they’ve decided that they have to do everything --- at all cost --- to end Anwar’s political career --- by hook or by crook --- in order to save their assets and asses.

The very frightening thought of PR defeating the administration in a democratic election, send such uncontrollable fear and undeniable paranoia to the powers that be!

Said fear and paranoia is not misplaced or baseless!

In the last General Election, the PR has garnered 53% of the popular votes, yet ironically by virtue of the abnormal and sinisterly peculiar form of Malaysia’s bastardized version of parliamentary system, Anwar and his allies was prevented by the prevailing “norms” and politico-racial set up of the establishment from duly forming the government.

This aberrant and highly unusual political fiasco in Malaysia did not escape the knowledge and attention of the international community.

The central substantive question that needs to be asked is:

Why PR who won the popular votes still remains in the opposition?

Or to put it in other words:

How could the true majority be in the minority and how could the minority be in control of the bloody government?

What the hell of the right of this “government” to rule the Malaysian people?

The whole thing boils down to the issue of political legitimacy and moral ascendancy in governance.

Again, to pose the inescapable question:

What is the political and moral right of the prevailing “government” to rule the rakyat?

The fear of the powers that be that that the next G. E. will put an end to their rule has led them to concoct the gravest and the most ludicrous political conspiracy ever made in the entire history of Malaysia. Their paranoia has also led them to perpetually persecute and habitually harass Anwar and his family.

They’ve systematically, since day one, portrayed the de facto Opposition leader as a sodomist, a gay, an immoral creature, a curse and a disgrace to the Malay race and a threat to the unity and diversity of Malaysian society.

They’ve tried to brainwashed repeatedly and in such notorious manner the entire country about all of these baseless charges and ridiculous accusation against Anwar by using all the resources of the Federal government, that is from the media (both print and online), the various television networks and other nefarious means available.

Yet, despite all of these dead rat shits and tons of mud thrown against Anwar, history has shown that the Malaysian people, does not believe the “government’s” evil lies, propaganda and slanders.

The following are the undeniable proof that the people believes in Anwar and subscribes to his reform agenda/struggle:

1. In 1998, for the first time in history, the Malaysian people went out of the streets, occupy Kuala Lumpur to show their solidarity to the sacked deputy prime minister.

2. While in jail, Anwar’s Reformasi Movement continues to grow and gather strength.

3. The volume of the people who greeted him when he was released from prison in 2004.

4. In 2007, he led the massive mammoth Bersih rally in the Malaysian capital.

5. March 8, 2008, as already noted, he inspired the political tsunami that threatened the status quo.

6. In 2009, he won a landslide victory in the Permatang Pauh by-election.

7. 2012, he led the Pakatan Rakyat in garnering the greatest popular votes for the Opposition Coalition.

Question:

Why after all of these feats, triumph and victories by Anwar and his allies with the support and solid solidarity from the Malaysian people, why the hell he is in jail?

Answer:

Because the powers that be in Malaysia, that is UMNO and BN and the rest of their impertinent so-called component parties are all afraid of Anwar and his vision for the Malaysia.

A Call to the Malaysian People

You want to change the system, you want a better life and a good society for your family and children, then I say to all of you; there is no more recourse available for all of you but the path of the Struggle.

In a word: to the streets! It is only in occupying Kuala Kumpur that you shall conquer Putra Jaya.

Onward to the Struggle!!!

ALL POWERS TO THE PEOPLE!!!

REFORMASI!!

HIDUP RAKYAT!!!



Jose Mario Dolor De Vega
Philosophy and Social Science lecturer
Unibersidad de Manila





An impertinent and ridiculous position paper of the so-called “sol-gen” of the Republic of the Philippines: A counter-position Part I

0
0
I am compelled once again to write forced by the prevailing ludicrous circumstances concerning the supra stupid “case” filed by a bunch of fanatical freaks whose name is unconstitutional against the so-called “Terror de Manila” which they dubbed as the so-called “national photobomber” of the land.

I have already written a great deal with regard to this matter, but what is “special” and necessary for this occasion is the issuance of the “official” position paper of the so-called sol-gen of the republic.

I am also forced to hold the bloody pen once again to tell to the whole Filipino people and the rest of the world that on this specific case, the solicitor-general has committed not only mistakes, but blunders of the highest order.

For the benefit of our people, please allow me to dissect some of the “notable” provisions of the “official” position paper as released by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG).

On the issue of the Procedural aspect of the “case”, item number one, on the question of the legal standing of the petitioner to sue, the sol-gen states and I quote:
“Section 7 of R. A. 7356 imposes a duty on citizens to preserve and conserve Filipino historical and cultural heritage and resources. This is sufficient to confer legal standing on petitioner to seek adjudication on whether the construction of Torre de Manila impairs the physical integrity of the Rizal Monument in Luneta.”

Comment:

Assuming arguendo that the petitioner whose name is in violation of the constitution (Art. 6, Sec. 31) has the legal standing to sue, do they have the moral right to pursue this matter?

I heavily doubt that the petitioner have the legal standing to sue. Besides the moral aspect of my contention, the sol-gen had in my view impliedly admitted in the negative that:

“In any event, this case involves questions of transcendental public importance which necessitates the relaxation of the rule on standing.”

Hehehehe!

Questions:

What are those questions of transcendental public importance that involves in this case?

Assuming for the sake of the argument, that perhaps there is a slight or a minor so-called transcendental public importance involve in this case; does it mean and does it necessarily follows that it will lead to the relaxation of the rule on standing?

I do not think so!

To the question of whether or not the construction of Torre de Manila impairs the physical integrity of the Rizal Monument in Luneta demands a determination of facts and requires a full-blown trial, hence, hence, why the hell those idiots went straight to the Highest Court of the land wherein it is a well-entrenched rule that the Supreme Court is not a trier of facts?

Number 2:

Whether petitioner is the real-party-interest

Again, let us assume that the so-called petitioner have the legal standing to sue and correspondingly are the real-party-interest in this case, my question is: why the sol-gen stated that, “In any event, this Honorable Court may resolve the case on the merits.”

Comment:

I wonder, how come the sol-gen did not even gave us the definition or meaning of a real-party-interest as defined by law?

According to Section 2 of Rule 3 (Parties to Civil Actions) of the Revised Rules of Court, “A real party in interest is the party who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or the party entitled to the avails of the suit. Unless otherwise authorized by law or these Rules, every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party in interest.”

Questions:

What benefit shall the petitioner received or have if ever the ruling would be favorable to them?

Corollary to that, I am wondering what is the injury that the petitioner shall endured or have or received if ever the ruling would be adverse to them?

Lastly, I am also wondering why it is that the sol-gen used the word “may” instead of must or shall?

Is he aware that the Supreme Court may dismiss or remand this case to the appropriate court?

Number 3:

The sol-gen stated and I quote that:

“Petitioner’s direct recourse before the Honorable Court is justifiable as an exceptional circumstance that warrants immediate action from this Honorable Court.”

Question:

May we know “sir”, what the hell is that “exceptional circumstance that you are alluding or referring to?

Then, uncharacteristically the sol-gen defended the disrespectful act done by the petitioner in by-passing the lower court by directly going straight to the Supreme Court by invoking its original jurisdiction yet --- to the prejudice of the doctrine of the hierarchy of courts and exhaustion of administrative remedies.

This, the sol-gen have done by listing and naming some exception to the said rule, such as:

The issues involved are of transcendental public importance

When dictated by public welfare and the advancement of public policy

When demanded by the broader interest of justice

Questions:

As I’ve already noted and by way of necessary reiteration: What are those alleged questions of transcendental public importance that involves in this case?

What is public welfare? Who dictates it?

What is the official public policy of the government with regard to this issue? What or which relevant government agency or instrumentality or office has the legal and the moral right to advance said policy?

What does in our laws and jurisprudence means by the broader interest of justice?

Who has the right to invoke it?

Who has the power to interpret and implement it?

On “Substance”

Now, let us dwell on the Substantive part of the “case”, item number one, the sol-gen contends that:

“The Constitutional mandate to conserve, promote, and popularize the nation’s historical and cultural heritage and resources, includes, in the case of the Rizal Monument, the preservation of its sightlines and setting.”

Question:

I wonder, what the hell does “sightlines and setting” means?

Are those words or concepts written in the Constitution?

When the sol-gen stated that: “the only way to “conserve” the Rizal Monument is by removing the impairment to its sightline: the presence of Torre de Manila”, is he referring to those buildings and structures behind the monument?

I would like to ask a categorical question to that guy: “sir”, if sightline means the elimination and/or destruction of all those buildings and structures and “photobombs” behind the monument of Rizal, then what the fuck is your “view” with regard to all those buildings and structures and “photobombs” that can be seen from the left side and so as from the right side of the bloody monument?

The so-called Sight line “Rule” and the so-called “Doctrine” of the setting: illegal, impertinent and super stupid petition of the “Knights” of Rizal and the Question of the Soul of the Nation

0
0
I refer to “SC Justice Carpio: No law vs Torre de Manila construction”, posted on August 12th by the Inquirer.Net with regard to the continuing Oral Arguments before the Supreme Court concerning the petition filed by the so-called “Knights” of Rizal calling and demanding for the demotion of Torre de Manila.

During the course of the proceeding, Justice Antonio Carpio categorically quipped to the lawyer of the respondent, Victor Lazatin:

“If there is no law prohibiting [it], what is stopping you?”

To quote from the said news report:

“Associate Justice Antonio Carpio on Tuesday pointed out the lack of a law barring the construction of a high rise behind the Rizal Monument in Manila as he questioned Victor Lazatin, counsel for DM Consunji Inc. (DMCI), at the continuation of oral arguments on the petition seeking the demolition of the Torre de Manila.

“The Knights of Rizal wants the 49-story condominium building demolished, saying it destroys the view of the Rizal Monument in Manila.

“During the third round of oral arguments, Carpio cited the lack of a specific law protecting the sight line—particularly “the background sight line”—of a monument and constricting the exercise of one’s private property rights.”

To quote from the good Justice:

“Under the Constitution, what is not prohibited by law is allowed. To deprive someone of property, there must be due process…”

“Since there is no implementing law to protect the background sight line, we go back to the general principle that what is not prohibited by law is allowed. Otherwise, there would be a violation of the due process clause that no person shall be deprived of property without due process of law…”

Commentaries:

I overwhelmingly concur with the line of questioning and the overall contention of Justice Carpio. Indeed, to deprive someone of property without the due process of law is not only illegal, but undeniably unconstitutional! Because under the Constitution, what is allowed by law is not forbidden or prohibited!

Indeed, “since there is no implementing law” that protect the so-called “background sight line”, hence base on common sense and the elementary rules of the law, “we have to go back to the general principle that what is not prohibited by law is allowed”.

Therefore, “that is the core value of our society today. It prevails (over) all other values. Without that core value, all other core values cannot survive.”

To disregard or to go against this super basic rule will lead to the violation of what the good Justice termed as the “core value” of our democratic society and the said violation of the said core value will shaken and blacken the very “foundation” of our whole body politic.

Further and most importantly, to allow that judicial fiasco to happen will incontestably result not only to the impairment, but ultimately to the destruction, bit by bit of our civil liberties, which is the very heart and bedrock of our republican and democratic form of government.

Again to quote Justice Carpio in his interpellation:

“In our democratic society and our legal system, the core foundation of everything we do is what is not prohibited is allowed. Correct? Because otherwise, we will be in a dictatorship. If there is no law prohibiting it and the President prohibits it, he becomes a dictator. Correct?”

Hence, this “issue” of the Torre de Manila is not only about the so-called protection of the sight line and the background and the setting of the monument of Dr. Jose Rizal. For in truth and in fact, common sense, logic, the law, culture, identity, the question of the soul of the nation and a lot more are also involved in this “case”!

On the question of the common sense

Common sense (though it is not common to some) will tell us that because of our growing population and the rapid development of our urban centers notably the capital, there is no way wherein we could stop development from happening.

On the question of logic

Logic will dictate to a reasonable person that one’s we look or state at the monument of a hero --- our focus and undivided attention should be centered on the said hero (his legacy/ideals/beliefs/principles and sacrifices for the country) and not to his background.

Why the hell are we bothered by some unnecessary and unimportant “sightings” and “vistas” and “angles” and “viewpoints?

Is it necessary and important for us to look at the left and the right of the monument of the hero?

When we go to the monument of the said hero, what is our objective: to look at the monument or to the image of the hero?

On the question of the law

It is my firm belief that Justice Carpio has already killed and junked the super stupid, undeniably impertinent and utterly ridiculous “petition” of the so-called “Knights” of Rizal. Why? It is baseless and completely devoid of logic.

There is no law wherein that so-called KOR can cite to support their fantastic contention.

Their so-called Sight line “Rule” and the so-called “Doctrine” of the setting are illegal, impertinent, stupid and myopic.

They are not even written in the fundamental law of the land. It is my firm and vehement contention that they are unconstitutional!

On the question of culture, identity and the soul of the nation

I certainly believe without the slightest iota of doubt that Justice Leonen has already answered these questions during the second round of the Oral Arguments.

Our culture and identity as a people will not only be determined by a single statue, but what we are doing good and noble as citizens of this country. It is demagogic and fanatical to state that the soul of the nation is the Rizal monument.

For in truth and in fact, the soul of the nation can be found in the hearts and minds and souls of each and every Filipino who believes in their legacy as a people and is proud of their glorious albeit bloody past and continuing struggle to further forged and enhanced both their identity and culture appropriate for the new millennium.

The soul of the nation can be found and be located in all of us as Filipinos indeed, not only in words but indeed in fact in deeds and that we do all that we can to make this nation, this country a beautiful place to live in for the benefit of our future generation.

The soul of the nation can be found in our distinctive culture, in all that is good and noble in us. It can be seen perfectly in our Bayanihan, in our Balikatan, in our concept of Social Solidarity not only in our community but in our society and in the country as a whole.


Jose Mario Dolor De Vega

Director
Andres Bonifacio Studies and the Katipunan Movement

University College
Unibersidad de Manila

The Hypocrisy of a bloody bastard bias world: Their West-Terrorism and the Terrorism of the Terrorists I

0
0
Was reflective the whole day in light of the Paris, and Beirut, events. How can one now talk of public reason and reasonableness, of being able to put oneself in the place of the Other, when these events happen? And so many other similar occurrences. We are back to each side claiming righteousness and validity, and the Other is negated and annihilated. We claim our own versions of what we take to be true, and become impervious to how it is possible to have other perspectives. These perspectives can dialogue and engage each other. Regardless of our languages, and paradigms, commensurability and translatability can be actively pursued. The meaningfulness of our perspectives can be appreciated by other minds. --- Zosimo Lee

I condemn on behalf of Humanity to the highest possible degree the utterly inhumane, barbaric and vicious terroristic attack made by those bloody bastard mass murderers in Paris that led to the gruesome deaths of 100 plus innocent souls!

I join the people of Paris and all the families of those who died in this absolutely senseless tragedy! I am with them especially on these trying moments of grief and immeasurable loss!

This tragedy is truly a product of madness, of fanaticism, of hate and bigotry!

Yet, having said that, I am wondering why it is that the sole attention of the world is only focusing on the bloody carnage that happened on the French capital?

Two days before the Paris attack, Beirut was bombed wherein 40 plus individuals were killed!

The question is? Why it is that the world’s media did not even reported or highlighted this horrible and despicable act of barbarism that happened in Lebanon?

I am inclined to ask: is the life of a Parisian more valuable than that of a life of a Lebanese?

It is my firm view that the soul and humanity of those who died in Paris is the same as the very soul and humanity of those people dying every day in Palestine, in Syria and the like!

Every day, scores of people are dying because of on-going military terrorism in Palestine, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan and in Mindanao (I am referring specifically to the issue of the Lumads who are being killed in score by paramilitary forces in connivance with the so-called Armed Forces of the Philippines) yet how come when that thing happened in Paris --- immediately the world was thrown into a frenzy, and suddenly the world has become one or acted allegedly as such?

Why it is that when a tragedy struck in the West, it seems that the world has cease working, stop moving, promptly look, listen attentively and quickly sympathize --- yet the same cannot be said if the same happened in some “remote” and “unknown part” of this planet?

What the hell is the point with regard to this standstill?

I cannot erase from my mind, the helpless and heartbreaking image of Aylan Kurdi, the Syrian toddler and refugee who drown because his family left their home in order to escape the chaos and the trouble on-going to their land. Yet, what happened to them?

Did the world stand as one for him and his family? Did the world lift a finger for the suffering of his people?

Is it because they do not come from the west?

Is it because they are not white people?

They did not invite the war into their land! Those bastard imperialist countries from the fucking west are the one who brought that misery, famine, desperation, chaos and countless deaths to their nation.

Did the world or their so-called international media truly give a genuine report about the current situation in Syria?

Who are the ones financing, training and supporting those bloody bastard mass murderers, terrorists and mercenaries in Syria? In Iraq and elsewhere?

Who are those responsible? Who are those who created one of the largest problems with regard to the refugee of Syria?

After the bloody and shocking event in Paris, immediately a “movement” has begun in Face Book, a lot has turned their profile picture using the French foreground. That they do without even knowing the bloody history of the country they are allegedly supporting.

To quote the categorical and direct words of Thomas van Beersum:

“If you want to show your resistance against terrorism it's probably not the best idea to change your profile pic to the French flag, the national flag of one of the biggest colonizers and imperialists of the planet. The terrorist French state, a prison house of oppressed nationalities, has created (and is still creating) many catastrophes in the world similar to the one from last night. For so many people and countries in the world, waving the French flag is like waving the Nazi flag.

“More than a million people died in France's 7 year war with Algeria, many impoverished African countries up to this day are still forced to pay colonial tax to its "former" colonizer, France was also one of the main instigators behind the recent wars on the people of Libya and Syria. These are just a few out of many examples directly linked to the French empire.

“Let's stand with all the victims (with the people killed both in France and by France, but also with the people becoming victim to the ongoing and upcoming racist backlash), and in no way we should associate ourselves with the murderous, genocidal French regime. Imperialism is also terrorism.”

So there you are: Imperialism is also terrorism!

To all those creatures who like brainless herds immediately put the French color to their Face Book profile pictures:

I respect your act of solidarity to the French people; however I am heavily wondering why you did not do the same thing to the Lebanese people wherein they suffered an earlier terrorist attack? Said attack led to the deaths of more than forty souls!

How come no one among you had put up the Lebanese flag in solidarity to all those victims that died in Beirut?

Perhaps, you will say: but that news was not reported by the international media.

Fine, my next point is: how come you are not putting up the flags of Palestine, of Iraq, of Syria, of Yemen, of Libya and other war-torn countries attacked and pitilessly shattered by Western imperialist countries?

Are you telling us that you do not know about all of these? Or, it is the case that you don’t give a damn about these people?

Common, bloody bastard liars, hypocrites and opportunists of the worst kind, speak the truth and shame the devil!

I condemn the hypocrisy of this bloody bastard bias and perverted world. Shame to this “selective” Humanity and quest for “justice”!

In the words of Hamza Ali Abbasi:

“And here we go, French flag being projected all over the world and face book makes a French flag DP filter. I wonder why FB never created a Palestinian flag filter while hundreds die each month? Or may be a Syrian, Iraqi or Afghan flag? A Pakistani flag after 16th Dec. APS attack? Its exactly this “Selective” Humanity and Imperialistic mindset which lead to hatred towards the west. I condemn Paris attack but I also condemn the hypocrisy of western imperial mindset. #MarkZuckerburg”

If it is true that you are all concern with the problems of the world and the burden of Humanity, then why not hoist or place to your wall the Flag of Solidarity and the Banner of Universal Humanism?

Please stop lying to yourselves and end this shame, idiocy and mockery!


The Hypocrisy of a bloody bastard bias world: Their West-Terrorism and the Terrorism of the Terrorists II

0
0
As Karuna Parikh wrote in her moving and utterly succinct poem:

“It is not Paris we should pray for.

It is the world. It is a world in which Beirut, reeling from bombings two days ago before Paris,
is not covered in the press.

A world in which a bomb goes off at a funeral in Baghdad
and not one person’s status update say “Baghdad”,
because not one white people died in that fire.

Pray for the world
that blames a refugee crisis for a terrorist attack.

That does not pause to differentiate between the attacker and the person running from the very same thing you are.

Pray for a world
where people walking across countries for months,
their only belongings upon their backs,
are told they have no place to go.

Say a prayer for Paris by all means,
but pray more,
for the world that does not have a prayer
for those who no longer
have a home to defend.

For a world that is falling apart in all corners,
and not simply in the towers and cafes we find so familiar.”

THIS IS A QUESTION OF BOTH HUMANITY AND CONSISTENCY! CRY FOR PARIS, YES, DO IT, BUT ALSO CRY AND BE WITH ONE --- WITH ALL THE POOR PEOPLE OF THE WORLD!

A Call for Humanity

Our duty is to fight all forms, types and kinds of terrorism whether they are from the West or the East, from the Left, the Center or the Right, and whether they are “governments” or bunch of some bloody bastard maniacs and whackos!!!!

We must all stand up as One, for in truth and in fact, We are One!!!


#WEAREONE!!!

#FORHUMANITY!!!





Latest Images