Tuesday, May 3, 2016

Right On & Funny


History Mystery

[]Have a history teacher explain this----- if they can. [][]
Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.
Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.
John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.
Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.
Both wives lost their children while living in the White House.
Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.
Both Presidents were shot in the head
Now it gets really weird.
Lincoln 's secretary was named Kennedy.
Kennedy's Secretary was named Lincoln
Both were assassinated by Southerners.
Both were succeeded by Southerners named Johnson.
Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808.
Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908.
John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln, was born in 1839. Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy, was born in 1939.
Both assassins were known by their three names.
Both names are composed of fifteen letters.
Now hang on to your seat.
Lincoln was shot at the theater named 'Ford'.
Kennedy was shot in a car called ' Lincoln ' made by 'Ford'.
Lincoln was shot in a theater and his assassin ran and hid in a warehouse.
Kennedy was shot from a warehouse and his assassin ran and hid in a theater.
Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials.
1) Fold a NEW $20 bill in half...
2) Fold again, taking care to fold it exactly as below
3) Fold the other end, exactly as before
4) Now, simply turn it over...
What a coincidence! A simple geometric fold creates a catastrophic premonition printed on all $20 bills!!!

As if that wasn't enough...
Here is what you've seen...
Firstly The Pentagon on fire...
Then The Twin Towers.
..And now .. look at this!
Disaster (Pentagon)
Disaster ( Twin Towers )
Disaster (Osama)???
It gets even better ... 9 + 11 = ($)20!
Creepy huh? Send this to as many people as you can, because:
Hey, this is one history lesson most people probably will
not mind reading!

Desperation Time for Duterte Rivals and Critics

May 3, 2016
by Hector Gamboa

We are now just less than a week from the Philippine Presidential elections and the fever amongst the electorate has reached temperatures as high as the heatwave currently plaguing the nation. Passions from different camps flare in all directions, making even the most civilized and educated amongst us act like crazy sports fanatics cheering for their team and defending them to the hilt. The frontrunner, Presidential candidate Mayor Rodrigo Duterte, has swept the nation like a tsunami. He is widely expected to win the Presidency next week and his rivals and critics have been throwing mud as well as the proverbial kitchen sink at him in acts of desperation hoping to pull Duterte down as they approach the finish line.

In the Philippines, politicians with lots of money and properties are usually frowned upon. There is a presumption that such riches are ill-gotten as the salaries of politicians are meager. Although it is quite illogical to automatically make the jump from riches to corruption, I can’t really blame the Filipino people for falling into the Non sequitur fallacy. The Philippines has been plagued by corruption for a long time and it has always been considered as one of the most corrupt countries in the world outside of war ravaged lawless third world countries with totalitarian regimes like in certain African nations. In fact, even under the rule of the current administration headed by President Benigno Aquino III (PNoy) who many have believed to be an honest and incorruptible leader, the Philippines was perceived to have become more corrupt by global watchdogs such as Transparency International. The people have become angry and fed up with the politicians ruling the country. Genuine change has become the most important issue in this election. Platform of governance and specific economic recovery roadmaps have taken a backseat behind voter frustration and anger. This has paved the way for the rise of Asia’s political Donald Trump – Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte.
Last week, one of the perpetual bottom dwellers in in the polls, Vice Presidential candidate Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV, has released a couple of bombshells in hopes of pulling down Duterte. Trillanes alleges that Duterte has hundreds of millions in the bank (even up to Php2.4 Billion in bank transactions) as well as 41 properties under his and his family’s name. This is a classic yellow attack job just like what was used against former CJ Corona. In Corona’s case, the yellow mob, through the Ombudsman and the Commission on Audit, made it appear that Corona has illegally amassed an obscene amount in US dollars throughout nine years. But instead of basing their claim on Corona’s balance, they based it on “bank transactions”. This means that they added all the debit and credit entries for each of the transactions Corona made throughout 9 years. (e.g. A deposit of Php500 and a withdrawal of Php500 would make you have Php1,000 in the bank, as per the government’s calculations.) This is exactly how Trillanes is making it appear that Duterte is a billionaire crook. Trillanes is feeding the public the thought that Duterte, with the meager salary of a City Mayor, could not have accumulated billions of pesos – hence, Duterte must be corrupt. In Corona’s case, it turned out to be Corona’s savings when he was still a private lawyer, proceeds of sales of property that was part of the inheritance of his wife, and the savings of her daughters and son commingled with his account in order to command a higher interest rate. But the yellow mob is not exactly known for playing fair and honest. The name of the game for them is to poison the well and condition the minds of the people into believing their propaganda. Duterte appears to be being attacked in a very similar fashion.
With regards to the 41 properties Trillanes alleged Duterte to have, we may recall how the yellow mob did a number on CJ Corona. The Land Registration Authority, claimed that their records show that Corona had 45 real estate properties. It turned out that most of these 45 properties were not in Corona’s name but either in a namesake’s name or which the Corona had already sold long before. Corona, it turned out, only actually owned just five properties! In a similar fashion, Trillanes alleges that Duterte owns 41 properties but it is turning out to be another smear. In one of the alleged properties, Trillanes included the property of a person not related to Presidential candidate Duterte. It turns out that a person named Gian Paulo Duterte, who is a dentist in Cagayan De Oro, owns the said property. In addition, the Land Registration Authority confirmed that four of the properties had been sold to new owners yet Trillanes still included these in his count.
Trillanes, in his desperate attempt to make candidate Duterte and his family look excessively rich, was so quick to announce to the media his large count for candidate Duterte’s properties that he failed to realize that he just gave his case a big blow. If he were to file a case against Duterte in a Court of Law, bringing all his evidence and allegations with him, his testimony would be weakened by the legal maxim Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus. So if Trillanes lied about Duterte’s alleged Php211 million pesos (or even billions of pesos) or his 41 properties, could he also be lying about the rest of his allegations against him? The credibility of Trillanes, as an accuser in this case, can rightfully be doubted. Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago (another Presidential aspirant in this year’s elections) said during the Corona impeachment trial:
“Once the court is convinced that one panel has been foisting a fake document on the court, the court will then justify indulging the disputable presumption that if one panel has been lying on one particular, then he has been lying on all particulars and will have to disbelieve everything that the panel offers in evidence.”
But of course all these principles are not important to yellow attack dogs such as Trillanes. Never mind how evidence for their allegations were obtained (violating Bank secrecy law), the smear has now been presented in the court of public opinion. Again, very much like how PNoy and his minions have smeared the late former Chief Justice of the Philippines Renato Corona during his impeachment back in 2012, Trillanes has poisoned the well with his allegations and has shifted the burden of proof to the accused (a special form of the logical fallacy that appeals to ignorance).
Last week at a rally in Daet, Camarines Norte, Duterte showed a bank statement from the bank where Trillanes accused him of having some Php211 million. The bank statement revealed that Duterte only has Php27,000, contrary to the millions he was alleged to have. As mentioned previously, the 41 properties alleged by Trillanes is also not accurate. The Bank of the Philippine Islands (the bank where Duterte was supposed to have hundreds of millions of pesos and billions in “bank transactions”), through its representative Jose Teodoro Limcaoco, issued a statement:
“I don’t know where Sen. Trillanes got his information, but the graphic posted by the Philippine Daily Inquirer showing alleged credits, that is not a BPI document.”
So as it stands, these are the relevant facts:
1. Duterte having hundreds of millions (even billions) in the bank is merely an allegation or accusation at this point.
2. The claim by Trillanes of Duterte owning 41 properties is inaccurate.
3. BPI has stated that the evidence presented by Trillanes is not a BPI document.
5. In criminal cases, the burden of proof is on the accuser (or the prosecution), and they must establish that fact beyond a reasonable doubt. (So technically speaking, Duterte doesn’t have anything to do and he doesn’t have to make his detractors’ fishing expedition easy for them.)
6. Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus is a legal maxim used to impeach opposing witnesses in court: the principle discredits the rest of their testimony if it is without corroboration
Any conclusions based on the facts given are premature at this point, have no legal weight, and are merely noise.
Would the facts enumerated bring sanity and level-headedness amongst the political camps in the Philippines? Would these facts convince the anti-Duterte folks to take a pause on their smear drive to let the legal process take place, ensuring that if Duterte is indeed a crook as they allege him to be, he will be accountable to his crimes and punished accordingly instead of merely being hanged in the media? I highly doubt it since it is also a fact that Duterte is looking more and more likely to be the next President of the Philippines (according to the polls with less than 1 week to go before the elections). Desperate times call for desperate measures and it appears that Duterte’s rivals, as well as Duterte’s critics, are getting desperate by the minute.
(Image taken from kami.com.ph)

Rodrigo Duterte represents the revolution that was denied the Filipino

May 3, 2016
by benign0
Leading presidential candidate Rodrigo Duterte is unstoppable. He does not only weather storms, he thrives in them. The latest witchhunt launched by disgruntled vice presidential candidate Antonio Trillanes (who consistently ranks near bottom in the many surveys taken so far) was a mere blip on his radar. Duterte’s fans remain adamant in their choice, and all this latest Trillanes stunt had achieved was to keep Duterte’s face trending on headline news.
All those who stand in Duterte’s way are now perceived by the vast voter base who have rallied behind him as the people who failed to deliver on their promise. Duterte’s detractors, for their part, remain baffled by this massive support. Duterte’s supports are, as one “thought leader” puts it, “not a fringe group of reactionary fanatics” as most “civil” Filipinos would like to believe. They are, “neighbors, friends, the old high school classmates who drive their children to school and post pictures of Jesus and Coach bag discounts.” In short, Duterte’s appeal to the Filipino public draws from a deeper need that transcends social class.
Why are Filipino voters going for broke and betting on a Duterte presidency? Perhaps it is because there never has been any true revolution in the Philippines that had truly been won. The 1986 people power “revolution” was anything but. There was nothing revolutionary about it. It wasn’t even transformational. It was a fresh coat of paint applied to a termite-infested house.
Duterte’s revolution, to many Filipinos, comes across as real. In contrast to Cory Aquino’s, and subsequent presidents who followed her, sucking up to American dole-outs, Duterte spits out the teat that had, in all ironic glory, nourished Filipino “independence” since 1946. He stands apart from the tired and flaccid “decency” of the Philippines’ so-called “civil society” and the quaint politically-correct platitudes that pepper their campaign slogans and their “trending” Twitter discussions. To the nebulous “unity” espoused by the traditional guard of Imperial Manileno politics, Duterte proposes that the artificial country known as “the Philippines” be broken up into a loose federation of autonomous states where Muslims can be Muslims, Sagadas can be Sagadas, Cebuanos can be Cebuanos, and the Taga-Ilogs can be, well, the same apathetic mallrats they’ve always been.
This is where Duterte’s supporters are coming from. Duterte is different. He is unlike anything ever seen in Philippine politics. He is baffling to those who fail to cast an empathetic eye upon Duterte’s base of supporters. These are people who have as much a legitimate claim to “the mainstream” as those who have traditionally regarded themselves as “the mainstream”, the latter being those who wax nostalgic about their contribution to the 1986 “revolution” and who have, as a matter of routine, looked to those whe beg to differ to them as being outside of their “mainstream”.
In that fact alone lies the reason why it is pointless to demonise Duterte any further and why continuing to do so will merely make him more powerful and his supporters even more resolute in their choice. It has come to a point where everything the old “mainstream” has to say merely rings hollow to a jaded Filipino public. Duterte’s rise is the result of 30 years of unparalleled squandering of priceless political capital that saw its peak market value in 1986.
Duterte is the revolution denied Filipinos in 1986.
* * *
The thing with referring to social media as a means to check the “mood” of Philippine society is that it is an inherently inbred source of information. We get information from people we opt into following. In that way we limit our exposure to information and opinion that is biased to our own preconceived notions.
That a once obscure mayor from Mindanao would rise to prominence right under the noses of Manila’s noisy clique of “civil society” Netizens attests to the poison social media “activism” can deliver if used unintelligently.
[Photo courtesy Daily Mail.]

Monday, May 2, 2016

Mar Roxas’s fatal campaign error: Selling continuity to a people who wanted change

May 2, 2016
by benign0
It should have been obvious from the onset. Filipinos are not happy with the status quo under which they slog through life in the Philippines. Day-to-day, they are beaten down by rampant crime, imprisoned by gridlocked traffic, cowed by Islamic terrorism, and deeply embarrassed by an inability of their own armed forces to protect their country’s sovereignity. Underneath all that is the vast foundation of systemic problems that continue to hinder progress at the grassroots — galloping population growth, intractable unemployment, and shifting weather patterns wreaking havoc on agriculture and public safety.
But despite these obvious issues that impact ordinary Filipinos everyday, the administration of Benigno Simeon ‘BS’ Aquino III had consistently trumpetted “achievements” that fly way above ordinary Filipinos’ heads. “Improved” economic indicators (like GDP annual growth) and credit rating “upgrades” are the stuff macroeconomists’ wet dreams. But for odrinary Filipinos working on scraping together a day’s earnings everyday those “sound economic fundamentals” mean nothing.
Unfortunately for Wharton boy Mar Roxas, those nebulous economic numbers formed the foundation of his ill-fated presidential campaign. Perhaps, as many have observed, because Roxas is hopelessly out of touch with ordinary Filipinos, Roxas had grossly mis-read the sentiment of the public he was pitching himself to. Unhappy people generally want change. Roxas, instead, sold to them continuity.
Huu-wwwhattt?! Continue what is clearly broken??
This seems to have been the collective gasp of Filipino voters looking to the president’s Anointed One for answers upon finding out he had none such — which possibly explains why voters had now abandoned Roxas and Robredo and crushed the Liberal Party’s hopes of maintaining that much cherished but now-irrelevant status quo.
Filipinos have always been an emotional lot, which is quite ironic because the original Yellow Horde that won current President Benigno Simeon ‘BS’ Aquino III the presidency in 2010 knew this well. Against the cool rationality of seasoned executives like Gibo Teodoro and Dick Gordon who espoused relatively well-thought-through visions and platforms back then, Aquino rose to power on the back of the vacuous sentimentality that erupted following the death of his mother, former President Cory Aquino.
Indeed, one of the casualties of that battle that pitted Aquino’s emocampaign against the Vulcan reasoning of his rivals and detractors is none other than Mar Roxas himself. Roxas had to “sacrifice” his presidential bid to make way for the sweeping — but ultimately empty — promises of The Pedigreed One.
It seems that the lessons of that one-time Liberal Party victory failed to make its way into Roxas’s quaint campaign. The situation has now been reversed in a twist of tragic fate. Roxas is now regarded as the most rational amongst a line-up of candidates who, within their respective followings, have successfully pitched an emotional campaign. Indeed, nowhere else is this successful tapping into strong public sentiment more evident than in the campaign (or, shall we say, non-campaign) of frontrunner Rodrigo Duterte.
Duterte’s campaign is hardly rational. But it worked. The gaping hole of irrationality left by Roxas’s pitch to the Filipino voter was the niche grabbed by the Duterte campaign. Roxas’s continuity tagline, though logical in many aspects, merely highlighted the numerous failures of the administration that he served for six years — a government that left a legacy of crumbling infrastructure, unresolved plunder allegations at the highest levels, and botched emergency and military responses that resulted in thousands of preventable deaths.
All of these failures plus Roxas’s foolish promise to continue the administrative approach that had underlain these failures paved the way for Duterte’s irrational but wildly-successful campaign. From being an undecided and even reluctant candidate from Mindanao voted least likely to succeed just a few months ago, Duterte had risen to the top and is now poised to ace these elections.
With the benefit of hindsight, it is easy to see now that Roxas was — and is — the face of failure for the Liberal Party. The insult of being beaten to the vice presidency by Jejomar Binay in 2010 was added to the injury of having to step back to allow his chum Noynoy to run for president. The appalling PR disaster that was his role as the face of the Philippine government response to Supertyphoon Haiyan in 2013 had reduced Wharton’s child to a national laughingstock. The degeneration of the MRT, the jewel of Metro Manila’s public transport crown, into an international punchline had all but dealt a fatal blow to Roxas’s ability to issue new promises to his people. Most tragic insult of all is his being left out of the command loop by his own boss even as 44 of the Philippines’ most elite crack police commandos under his charge were slaughtered by Islamic terrorists in early 2015.
Yet Roxas’s supporters remain baffled as to why their bet is losing at the polls. Perhaps it is because, like Roxas, the Yellow Horde fail to or, worse, will not see the obvious situation before them — that ordinary Filipinos just want a change in their personal circumstances — a piece of that “economic growth” pie Roxas and his camp had myopically talked about ad infinitum but failed to make relevant to the Filipino voter.