“Praise the lord and pass the life boat, Billy!”

gunpointed api dot ning dot com

[Photo source: api.ning.com]

When times are rough, or a tad crazy, it is easy to get disoriented or discouraged or confused or depressed. Humans were built for routines, for the comfort of knowing that what is outside the door won’t hurt us, and the confidence of knowing we’ll return back home without getting shot or shredded by a bomb or run over by a truck.

We like knowing there will be food in the stores, and a doctor if we are ill or injured. We like knowing there is a city at work to provide order, police here and there keeping us safe, and a national government that has as its single highest priority our welfare. Our security. Our safety.

I don’t know about you, but the Duterte Administration has raised my level of insecurity through the roof. I DON’T KNOW that if I leave the house in the morning, I’ll return at night.

Filipinos up to now were discreet gunslingers. Who here DOESN’T have a gun? I for sure have one. Maybe more, I’m not telling. Well, the weapons belong to my wife because I’m not allowed to own one. But I know how to shoot, that’s for sure. The US Army trains people in that particular skill, and I was one of the best in my battalion.

But now the discreet is gone. People are packing and hunting and the government doesn’t give out fluorescent flak vests to protect the innocents. Not even the kids are safe. The gun slingers shoot people begging for their lives, they shoot whoever is with the target, kids and women, they shoot first and take names and count bodies later.

Police are shooting, drug lords are shooting, and from the barrel side of a gun, they both look an awful lot alike.

In the Philippines.

In 2016.

My neck is sore because my “head is on a swivel” as I drive the kid to school, looking out for motorcycle tandems approaching fast. Maybe they think bloggers look like drug users if they write the wrong story.

“Praise the lord and pass the life boat, Billy!”

There is a lot of anger being exercised in the Philippines these days, an ocean-load full of it, and I’d sure like it if the national government of this place were helping out, rescuing the vulnerable rather than tossing them to the gunslingers and telling the gunslingers

“You go get ’em podnah!”

Is this President grown up, I wonder? Can he add up all the bodies and comprehend the whole of his work? Does he know how to spell compassion, and can he apply it for the little guy?

Oh, I know he can apply it for the powerful, for the NPA extortionists, the head-hunting Abu Sayyaf, the bullyboy thief China, the alleged drug lord Lim.

But what about the little guy, the guy who was at the end of his rope and did dope and can’t get out. The man who is a father to young kids. The innocent bystander, the mistaken target, all the people who have reasons or excuses but never get the chance to present them IN A COURT OF LAW, where something called FAIRNESS is doled out.

Does our President understand FAIRNESS?

And will he go greet the coffins? Will he?

And what about the kids at my son’s school? What the hell does he think he is teaching them? They get home from school and see vivid news on TV about all the bodies in the streets, blood flowing in fresh crimson rivers, bodies shrink wrapped in plastic as if they were a suitcase heading for the airport but the bullets were left inside.

THIS is on track to first world?

THIS is decency?

THIS is the best the Philippines can be?

In 2016?

And I won’t even mention the jokers in the congress, the boxers and actors and big shots in their town who are so frozen by their entitlements that they can’t summon up an ounce of compassion and courage to get the nation back on track.

They cannot be troubled to make us safe and modern again, to check and balance with the urgency of knowing a LOT OF ORDINARY PEOPLE’S LIVES depended on it.

When God gave out bold, he skipped the Legislature.

Let me be perfectly clear about this:

  1. The Constitution bans the death penalty. The Constitution mandates that government assure our safety and protect our human rights. It is a humane Constitution.
  2. Hundreds of Filipino citizens have been killed in recent weeks without judicial process, dozens at the hands of government officials (PNP).
  3. The scale of the slaughter is worse than Mamasapano, worse than the truck at Nice or bombs in Baghdad, and worse than the mass murders in the US.
  4. The pace of killings shows no sign of letting up, and may even be accelerating.
  5. The killings have been incited intentionally by the President of the Philippines with the support or acquiescence of his Chief of Police and Cabinet.
  6. Legislators are doing little to stop the slaughter; indeed, many are running to the President’s political side.
  7. Mass murder was not on the ballot last election.


247 Responses to ““Praise the lord and pass the life boat, Billy!””
  1. Wilfredo G. Villanueva says:

    Thank you, Joe, first of all.

    Secondly, it’s high time we called a spade a spade. It’s an extermination. It’s trabahong tamad (lazy man’s work) and sipsip (buttering up) to the powers that be. So far, President Duterte has brought out the worst in us.

    I’m waiting for the emergence of the beloved Mayor Duterte, the reason why he won the elections, for making Davao a safe place.

    For now, it’s time to suspend credulity, to go with the flow, as if believing a movie’s twists and turns in order to enjoy it. But sooner or later, the movie will come to a close, and we have to stagger out of the cinema to recover our personalities at the till. I hope I will be the same person, realizing it was only make-believe, and the real world of due process, fairness, democracy awaits to be fulfilled.

    Jogging in place, to keep fit, not going anywhere, awaiting deliverance by people power, for bad melts in the heat of a people shoulder-to-shoulder for democracy, not EJK.

    • Joe America says:

      Complacency in the face of wrongdoing is not complacency, it is a positive act of supporting the wrongdoing. I still wish the Duterte Administration success, but killing outside the judicial process is just plain wrong. There is such a thing as reasonable force to prevent criminal acts, and there is murder.

  2. A nice novella on the prisoner’s dilemma.
    It contains this beautiful quote:

    “It is time,” said the Lord Pilot, “to see this calamity to its end.” Spoken in Archaic English: the words
    uttered by Thomas Clarkson in 1785, at the beginning of the end of slavery. “I have set my will against
    this disaster; I will break it, or it will break me.” Ira Howard in 2014. “I will not share my universe
    with this shadow,” and that was the Lord Pilot, in an anger hotter than the nova’s ashes. “Help me if
    you will, or step aside if you lack decisiveness; but do not make yourself my obstacle, or I will burn
    you down, and any that stand with you -”


    Every head in the room jerked toward the source of the voice. Akon had been an Administrator for a
    hundred years, and a Lord Administrator for twenty. He had studied all the classic texts, and watched
    holos of famous crisis situations; nearly all the accumulated knowledge of the Administrative Field was
    at his beck and call; and he’d never dreamed that a word could be spoken with such absolute force.
    The Ship’s Confessor lowered his voice. “My Lord Pilot. I will not permit you to declare your crusade,
    when you have not said what you are crusading for. It is not enough to say that you do not like the way
    things are. You must say how you will change them, and to what. You must think all the way to your
    end. Will you wipe out the Babyeater race entirely? Keep their remnants under human rule forever, in
    despair under our law? You have not even faced your hard choices, only congratulated yourself on
    demanding that something be done. I judge that a violation of sanity, my lord.”

  3. I hope I am still on topic with the links, and quote joe.

  4. Vicara says:

    The president’s encouragement of summary executions, or extrajudicial killing, by PNP forces which are known to be partly complicit in the illegal drug trade is a recipe for disaster. If matters begin spiraling further out of control, and local politicians and implicated PNP start to retaliate, and collateral damage piles up–not just tatooed street types, but middle class people caught in the crossfire, like that little girl in pink sitting in a Mercedes, half her face blown off–continue to circulate, then maybe 16 million Filipinos will reconsider their choice of leader.

    Or maybe not: Filipinos have been known to stick to their choice of manok out of a skewed sense of amor propio, and against all logic. Maybe, benumbed by all the images and accounts of death, we will all just shut down and wait out the six years. Never thought I’d ever say this, but China’s barbaric system of mass public executions, with a single bullet to the head of the conviction, seems more humane, and at least makes it a point to follow judicial due process.

    • Joe America says:

      Sure, change the Constitution and line up the executions. I suggest they be done in front of the Rizal statue.

      • Vicara says:

        Somewhere along the six-year timeline, I would not be surprised if public group executions were to happen. Given the constitutional revisions being planned, out of sight, to be rammed down our throats of a public stupefied by the killings and the arbitrariness and contradictions in what passes for policy emanating from a motley Cabinet steeped in cluelessness and self-interest, and from the president’s off-the-cuff-on-purpose remarks.

        Look, he SAID he would do this: authorize summary executions, approve coal, appoint Joma (or reps) to the Cabinet, ignore the Constitution if he felt like it, etc, etc. He SAID it. And 16 million stupids bought the package.

  5. LG says:

    Drum IT, Joe, drum IT.

    The unfairness of it all, the brutality of it all, the misled law enforcement, the nonchalance of legislators and supreme judges, the silence of the clergy.

    There is a …conspiracy against the little sinner and apparent consideration for the big one?

    Peter Lim, for suspicion, is kindly asked to submit to a probe, kanto boy, yelled at to surender, for the same reason. Peter lives free while probed, if at all he’d be, kanto boy, dies instantly if he does not.

  6. karlgarcia says:


    At least one mayor will stop the killings,though for the wrong reasons.

  7. Ed Celis says:

    only an insane president of a nation will incite killings and violence.. in this modern time..the cyber

  8. josephivo says:

    The task is to disrupt a criminal industry. Killing the shabby workers in the field might not be the solution, certainly not a lawful one.

    Where is the NBI to map the syndicates?
    Where is the legislative to set up emergency courts?
    Where are the money flows? Not the petty cash on the streets, the big money.

    A golden bullet does not exist, in not a single one, not even in authoritarian countries. So what are the parallel initiatives? What about education? What about the medical approach? What about legalizing to bypass the criminals and reach the addicts? Where are the churches, big business, the fiesta organizers, the celebrities, the media, the academe… addiction is more than a presidential problem.

    The killings are justified by the “greater good”, saving our kids and eliminating all the misery that addiction entails is more important than a few useless lives (and even if this is true it requires a legal base). No need for this argument if you can reduce the number on new addictions in different ways, if you can reduce the misery with a warm heart, not a cold gun.

    • NHerrera says:


      May we look at this drug problem a different way so we can look at it with a clinical eye, that is efficiently and unemotionally? Suppose we are dealing with this pestilence not about humans but chickens. The objective is then to reduce significantly if not eliminate the pestilence. Right?

      Is the method right? Killing off the weak and sickly among the chickens, but handling the fat, healthy ones who are feeding the weak chickens and the source of the pestilence with kid gloves is not being efficient, setting aside fairness to the weak chickens compared to the fat, healthy source of the scourge.

      I know there is the retort — the many weak chickens are the demand side of the equation. Kill the demand and the pestilence is solved. There may be some demand-side respite, but since there are many of those chickens who are weak and who know no better than death-wishes, the demand may not cease — as situations in rich countries attests.

      So kill, kill, kill those weak chickens. Is that the clinical solution?

      • josephivo says:

        So to solve the obesity problem cause by calorie rich soda drinks, the solution is not to kill all obese people and some sari-sare owners selling them.

        We have a criminal problem, the solution is partly educating/rehabilitating the demand side, but most importantly eliminate the profitability for the criminal organizations. In your example, the chicken are not sick by an act of God, but because the where contaminated by some people that saw a lot of profit in sick chicken. So killing the chicken will change little as their may be profit too in sick pork, cattle, rice, corn, wheat, sugar, coconuts….

        Follow the money!!!

        • NHerrera says:

          Follow the money! But only the lowest level retail side in flip-flops is being followed but not the wholesale side. The wholesalers in the business and their associates are doing the clean-up.

    • LG says:

      Too bad, the movie, The Infiltrator, is not shown in the theater nearest me.

  9. karlgarcia says:

    I say again that the poverty reduction program of Malacanang to the chagrin of DSWD,NEDA,DBM etc is to eliminate poverty by killing the poor.

    • andy ibay says:


      The online news portal of TV5

      Author Cesar Polvorosa Jr. is a business school professor of economics, world geography, and international business management in Canada. He is also a published writer in economics, business, and literature.

      “The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.” – Antonio Gramsci (Prison Notebooks)

      Britain made the stunning decision to exit the EU. Trump may yet triumph in the upcoming US Presidential elections. Duterte is the new Philippine President. There’s more: Modi and Jokowi had emphatic victories in India and Indonesia respectively. President Erdogan of Turkey repulsed a coup attempt through his own version of “People Power.” What connects these seemingly disparate developments in various regions of the world? Indeed, there is a method in this madness which refers to a logic, a reason or explanation that links these seemingly disconnected and bewildering strands in geographically diverse places in economics and politics and their intersection.

      These myriad developments underscore the global rise of new populism in reaction to the adverse impacts of intensifying world-wide trends since the advent of the 21st century. These include the interconnected uneven effects of globalization and neoliberalism, secular stagnation of the global economy, the rise of inequality, the flood of immigrants and refugees, terrorism and the dominance of supranational organizations. We are in a perilous era of uncertainty and turmoil.

      Swing of the Pendulum and Duterte in Context
      In December 2015 I argued that the meteoric ascent of Duterte to the Philippine Presidency is best understood not as an isolated Philippine phenomenon but as a manifestation of broader geopolitical trends in the campaign against criminality and security threats and the focus on grassroots development. I noted that “in what may herald another swing of the pendulum some populist presidents have emerged which is a backlash to the elitist and technocratic leaders of the past often seen as corrupt, ineffectual, and out of touch with the reality of everyday lives of their citizens.” (Duterte in Context). The past six months confirmed the gathering momentum toward populism in reaction to the inimical effects of neoliberalism.

      The pendulum represents the swings in currency between alternative models of governance, economic systems, and intellectual currents. While declaring “history repeats itself” is a hyperbole; in important ways many of the current pivotal trends represent a throwback to an earlier era of authoritarianism, populism, ardent nationalism, economic protectionism, age-old conflicts, ethnic and religious tensions and subsequently, historical revisionism.

      Past the High Noon of Globalization and Neoliberalism
      Western Europe is a compact, densely populated region with fertile plains and numerous sea ports that makes it ideal for economic and political integration. With nation states competing for power and resources, Europe had been plagued by wars over the past millennium. After the carnage of World War 2, European countries began working to realize the compelling vision of economic integration and political union to ensure regional prosperity and peace, especially between France and Germany. The UK however had a troubled relationship with the EU with its disruptive undercurrent of historical insularity and would only join in 1973.

      EU is the vanguard of globalization and is based on the freedom of movements of labor, capital, goods and services. The Globalization Project accelerated and deepened with the ascendance of neoliberalism as the mainstream capitalist model from the 1980s. Ironically, it was the EU expansion to Eastern Europe more than a decade ago that have sown the seeds of Brexit as many immigrants especially Eastern Europeans competed with Western Europeans for scarce jobs. The EU seemed to be at the verge of a tipping point in recent years from the disastrous confluence of refugee and immigrant crisis, terrorist attacks, and fragile economies which impacted member states in varying degrees. The major fear recently was that Greece would leave the EU. It was in fact the UK that severed its EU membership.

      Winners and Losers in Globalization
      As it is clear by now, even the IMF which is the staunch defender of economic orthodoxy recognized that neoliberalism as the ideological basis of globalization has highly uneven impacts including increasing inequality. Economist and Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz likewise argued in The Great Divide (2015) that inequality is the result of unjust policies and misguided priorities.

      The winners in globalization include TNCs, mobile professionals, consumers, and global cities as centers of finance while losers include migrants, poor and less skilled workers, and SMEs unable to compete with foreign firms. All these led to the rise of inequality even among industrialized countries evidenced by rust belts and blighted communities. These adverse effects magnified as the global economy lurched into the Great Recession of 2008. The “trickle down” effect development strategy of neoliberals or allowing the elite and entrepreneurial class to prosper first through tax cuts and let the wealth eventually “trickle down” is now discredited.

      Such sentiments also resonated across the “pond.” The North American Free Trade Agreement or NAFTA had been controversial in its member countries of Canada, USA, and Mexico. Recent surveys indicated that many Canadians want a re-examination of Canada’s role in NAFTA.

      Given the huge divergence in the level of development of the ASEAN states, will the ASEAN Economic Community eventually lead to discontent among states that realize dubious benefits from membership?

      There is empirical support for the “rich get richer and the poor get poorer” narrative. The economist Dani Rodrik reported in World Economic Forum that those who gained from globalization over 1988-2008 in real income gains were the global top 1% and the Asian middle class. Those with the least gains were the US and Western lower middle classes which fed voters’ revolt. Thomas Piketty’s best selling magisterial work, Capital in the Twenty-First Century (2013), turned widespread focus on inequality.

      Donald Trump was able to discern this political tempest from the changing political mood. He was a candidate in the US presidential elections of 2000 but his candidacy did not prosper. Now, his platform has gained traction with a significant American electorate and will oppose Democrat candidate, Hillary Clinton. Timing is key.

      Trump stressed on issues that mattered to Americans in this troubled time: immigration, loss of manufacturing jobs, terrorism, rise of inequality and the perception that the system is rigged to favor the elite — the same issues that galvanized Britons to vote for Brexit. British historian Niall Ferguson wrote about the end of the American Dream in 2013 which proved to be a precursor to the rise of Trump. His platform and style resonated with many Americans similar to Filipinos for Duterte: outrageous rhetoric that stood out through raw, visceral appeal, and sheer shock value.

      Complicating the issues is that Western countries had contributed to Mid East instability through political upheavals unleashed by Western invasion and intervention. This dates back to at least the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement that redrew the Mid East map to the recent 2003 US invasion of Iraq. President Duterte bluntly pointed out the Western role in the destabilization of the Mid East. (Duterte accuses US of ‘importing’ terrorism)

      Change is Coming
      Duterte assumed power in a wave of voter discontent on the abysmal peace and order conditions in the Philippines. While average economic growth since 2010 had been the highest in 40 years, the fruits of development had not been equally shared. The Philippines has a highly unequal income distribution and its class structure is more akin to Latin America than neighboring East Asian states. Thus, the Philippines and Latin American countries have high rates of criminality.

      Just like Trump, Duterte has enunciated unorthodox policies and a radical break from the past: from federalism, negotiations with Communists and Abu Sayyaf, to bilateral negotiations with China over disputed territories, a controversially tough stance against criminality, especially drug addiction and corruption, and the restoration of the death penalty. At this time though much in his 10-point plan also represent policy continuity such as in macroeconomic management.

      Just like Britons who voted for Brexit and Trump who rejects the Trans Pacific Partnership, Duterte has railed against multilateral agreements perceived to compromise national sovereignty. Philippine media reported on July 18 that President Duterte said his administration will not honor the historic Paris agreement on climate change on the ground that it stifles the economic growth of developing nations. How will this impact on foreign investor confidence?

      Last July 12, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) ruled in favor of the Philippines on its territorial dispute with China in the South China Sea/West Philippine Sea. The Tribunal concluded that there was “no legal basis for China to claim historic rights to resources within the sea areas falling within the ‘nine-dash line'” and that “China has violated Philippine sovereign rights in its exclusive economic zone.” In a departure from current policy, the Duterte administration has indicated that it will pursue the bilateral negotiation track. Pragmatism appears to be guiding the negotiating philosophy of the Philippines after the favorable PCA ruling. Thus, negotiations for expanded engagements are expected including Chinese-built railroad projects in the Philippines.

      The Death of the Nation State is Highly Exaggerated
      As regional integration became the trend after World War 2 especially with EU and NAFTA, the eventual demise of the nation state became fashionable discourse. For instance, business strategist Kenichi Ohmae argued that nation states are “dinosaurs waiting to die” (End of the Nation State, 1996). For globalists, the death of the nation state heralds the coming of a world government. In fact, years before Brexit there were already signs of resurgent nationalism such as independence movements in Scotland, Spain, and the former Yugoslavia. While present technology allows a more efficient and borderless trade and communications worldwide, we are witnessing the rise of vibrant local communities and the assertion of national identities. The sentiment that the EU was infringing on British sovereignty was a strong reason for British voters to choose Brexit.

      Trump’s key election rhetoric had been to make America great again through economic protectionism by increasing tariffs, renegotiation, and possible disengagement from international trade agreements such as NAFTA and the Trans Pacific Partnership and other US commitments — understandably generating unease among businesses and US allies. There are his controversial proposals to protect American borders by the building of walls and enhanced security measures and restrictions on immigrants inflaming racial prejudice. He believed that US strength is being sapped by imports — a throwback to the Mercantilist theory a few centuries ago! It’s the swing of the pendulum.

      In the heady afterglow of the Fall of the Berlin Wall, political scientist Francis Fukuyama boldly argued in The End of History and the Last Man (1992) that Western liberal democracy is “the final form of human government.” It ignored the continuing evolution and flux of governance, its varying practices and oscillations in different places.

      There is a new focus toward grassroots development and empowerment of local communities. In the case of the Duterte administration, it’s a rejection of “Imperial Manila” and the emergence of traditionally neglected Mindanao and especially Davao as the new power centers. Potentially profound and far reaching is the proposal to push through with a referendum on federalism or to assign greater power, responsibilities, and resources to local governments. What will happen to the poorer provinces? Will the local elites actually work harder to make their regions attractive to investments? Knowing the power relation and the history of the local elite in the country, will they not try to dig deep, maximize the exploitation of the regions, and entrench further political dynasties?

      A Possible Post-Capitalist Future
      As Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci so succinctly observed society faces great challenges when the old system no longer works but the contours of the new Order are not yet well defined.

      The global economy had been in sick bay since 2008. Bouts of recovery had been transitory even as the full scale of counter cyclical monetary and fiscal policies had been applied. What ails the global economy? An explanation gaining ground is that present mainstream capitalism is structurally unsound and is in a process of breaking down. The discontent with the present economic system has given rise to populist leaders who offer alternatives such as in the US, socialist Bernie Sanders or billionaire and presumptive Republican candidate Donald Trump, who both are anti-free trade.

      It is remarkable that the rejection of the existing order is not only in rich regions like US and Europe but also in developing countries. Increasingly, there is also the revival of authoritarianism. Prime Minister Modi of India is described as an authoritarian populist leader. Presidents Erdogan and Duterte are both populist and emerging authoritarian leaders with present vigorous campaigns against suspected coup plotters for Turkey and drug pushers in the Philippines.

      A New World Being Born?
      Neoliberalism and globalization suppressed local identities, regions, and cultures and fostered instability and the dominance of technocrats and huge corporations. The rise of inequality exacerbated class differences and worldwide, the pendulum had swung to an anti-establishment populism from Brexit to Trump and Duterte. As an era where the voting masses are increasingly rejecting the current state of world governance while the shape of the future remains unclear, it is also a time fraught with peril.

      Is the world going through epochal change? The world undergoing birth pangs three centuries ago in transitioning from feudalism to capitalism went through the fires of revolution particularly in America (1776) and France (1789).

      Voter revolt and populism do not automatically translate to the triumph of the masses. Thus, notably in 1848 “The Year of Revolutions,” reactionary forces repulsed the uprisings of progressives in many European countries as well as in Latin America. Major strides to modernity and social progress would take several more decades to gain fruition.

      At the worst, a demagogue can hijack a popular movement and engender brutal dictatorships. The Soviet Union years after its 1917 Revolution was convulsed by the iron rule and devastating purges of Stalin. A country can slide into extreme fascist racial intolerance and xenophobia. Hitler plunged the world into World War 2 in the 1940s to achieve national glory based on delusions of racial superiority.

      I have argued that the challenge to the Duterte administration is to implement reforms and achieve a lasting legacy of inclusive development without embarking on the precarious road of authoritarianism. The concern about the authoritarian drift dated back to the election campaign period.

      Trump is recognized as an authoritarian leader in the making. Will the much vaunted democratic institutions of the US be able to thwart the authoritarian designs of a possible Trump presidency? Will the US be able to withstand the authoritarian turn given the country’s slide to violence? Will France and other European countries remain as liberal democracies in the face of continuing heinous ISIS attacks? As voters and political parties gravitate to both left and right, will the political center continue to hold? As theorized by philosopher Thomas Hobbes people will be willing to exchange their freedoms for greater feeling of security and order.

      Another Swing of the Pendulum
      With the resurgence of nationalism as a backlash against globalization, would it not lead to a revival of internecine wars among countries which in fact regional associations such as the EU sought to avert? Europe is especially vulnerable given its history but so are other regions such as Mindanao. The world had been on this road before, when a continent wide political union such as the Roman Empire declined and collapsed, ushering in the Dark Ages.

      While there are extreme alternatives, the viable option is also to introduce institutional reform. Capitalism has demonstrated an admirable capacity to renew itself such as the introduction of Roosevelt’s New Deal economic programs and Keynesian policies during the 1930s Great Depression and especially during the 1940s.

      Will a less regimented socialism make a comeback over the ruins of neoliberalism? The strong showing of Bernie Sanders in the US primaries was unthinkable even a few years ago. President Duterte, a self-proclaimed socialist appears to take a more pragmatic approach — negotiating with communists but also welcoming foreign investors. The administration will likely adopt a more eclectic approach with its inclusion of both leftists and centrist bureaucrats and politicians. There will be tensions between those supportive of the authoritarian drift and those who advocate for adherence to the democratic process.

      The anti-globalization and -neoliberalism movement has clearly progressed from advocacy at the fringe to a mainstream agitation for greater local participation, relevance, fairness, and accountability. Ironically, it is at a time when international cooperation is urgently needed that multilateral engagement is fraying at the edges. Will the new order constrain multinational cooperation just when global action is needed in vital areas of climate change, pollution, resource depletion, terrorism and crimes that are increasingly transnational in nature? The world is at a critical historical juncture as the dysfunctional order show signs of unraveling. Forging a new, effective, and equitable global governance structure is imperative.

      • karlgarcia says:

        Andy,many thanks.We asked Bill in Oz to do a writeup on globalization,but he begged off. It is still a good topic,and you may want to submit a blog about it.

        • andy ibay says:

          karl G, JOHN RALSTON SAUL, (go google him) my other favorite Canadian philosopher recently wrote a book WHY GLOBALISM FAILED, may be a good read for people who cares for beings beyond their national borders. If I may interdict the new millenniumnism (my word) is the ultimate contradiction before the second big bang if WWIII it is when the new colonialism of third world emigration face of with establishmentarianism. Sorry that I can not now attempt for an erudite piece as posted here, preferring to spend time STOP ping, LOOK ing, and LISTEN ing. Our railroads though mostly straight are presently in shambles.

          • karlgarcia says:

            Will do Andy.Many thanks.Ok enjoy your train ride,the railroads in Canada must be in good shape. Though you stop look and listen when you are driving a vehicle crossing a rail road.😏

  10. Javier Gris says:

    I am one of those who voted for that monster, Joe. Not a day goes by that I do not regret my vote. Not a day goes by that I do not feel foreboding that I may have unwittingly made myself an accessory to the atrocities of this madman. Why, oh why did I doubt PNoy?

    • Joe America says:

      Well, no one knows the future, Javier. We generally do our best and trust that others will use compassion and reason, not unleash the killer dogs on us. Most people simply voted for action by government to solve a few headaches, I think. They got something quite different.

    • jolly cruz says:


      Im on the opposite side. I did not vote for duterte but im glad that he is doing what he is doing right now. Before this regime, I was always worried when my daughter had to go home late from work. As I have already said before, I live in the seedier part of Tondo where snatchings and robberies are rampant. These acts are mostly done by the addicts in the neighborhood.

      I still remember a gruesome robbery, where a student walking home from a nearby friend’s house when drug addicts riding in tandem forcibly took her laptop. When the girl refused to let go, one of the addicts stabbed her not once but several times. She did not reach the hospital alive.

      These are the incidents that I am so scared of, not addicts and pushers being killed.

      It is a fact that in our neighborhood, there are no more “istambays” in the streets by 10.30 pm. Indeed, I am more at ease with the current situation.

      I have lived in Tondo all my life. I can say that the poor today are so much different from the poor of yesteryear. Of course, there are those worthy of compassion but generally these people don’t care whether their actions are right or wrong. They will justify any wrongdoing by saying that they are only doing it because they are poor.

  11. karlgarcia says:

    Time to listen to Eeyore.

  12. DA says:

    My sentiments exactly. Couldnt even imagine why they are not bothered by their conscience.

    And yet when the big wigs are involved, they get due process. Or they have no balls? Only the little guys because they could not retaliate?

    If thats the way they choose to bring fear to those involved, liquidating 10 drug lords, 10 judges, 10 prosecutors, 10 politicians would do the trick, i believe.

    Its like China bullying us. Whats the honor for that? Elephant trumpling the ant? If you pick a fight, pick a fight in your division, heavyweight versus heavyweight not against a flyweight.

    Just cowards

    • Joe America says:

      Way to knock two bully boys with one shot, DA. To me, President Duterte’s recent deeds reflect what I suspect he grew up with, the system of entitlements that go with power. The impunity, the favors given and gotten, whereas the “little people” are deserving only of scorn. It’s a slow motion version of the Ampatuan murders, an incredible sense of entitlement.

  13. madlanglupa says:

    Some people are now starting to ask: where are the supposed “big fish”? The shadowy lords who are the source and the iron hands of the narcotics hierarchy? My friends are also more concerned with the growing bloodiness of the news, with the exception of the few who thought Tulfo was waiting for this day to come and must be beside with joy, satisfying his right-wing urges of law-and-order.

    Asides from the promise to rein in the supposed corrupt (or was it political enemies?), what else is next in this New Order? Rapists and other sexual offenders?

    • Wasn’t that the reason why Mr. Lim paid DU30 a visit?

      But I think as soon as Mr. Lim left the room, this is the conversation that transpired among DU30 and his staff,

      Arrest him!

      -For what?

      -He’s dangerous!

      -Libel. He’s a spy!

      -That man’s bad!

      -There’s no law against that.

      -God’s law!

      -Then God can arrest him.

      -While you talk, he’s gone!

      Go he should, if he were the Devil,

      until he broke the law.

      -Now you give the Devil benefit of law!

      -Yes, what would you do?

      Cut a road through the law

      to get after the Devil?

      Yes. I’d cut down every law in England

      to do that.

      And when the last law was down,

      and the Devil turned on you…

      …where would you hide, Roper,

      the laws all being flat?

      This country is planted with laws

      from coast to coast…

      …Man’s laws, not God’s,

      and if you cut them down…

      …and you’re just the man to do it…

      …do you really think you could stand

      upright in the wind that would blow then?


      I give the Devil benefit of law

      for my own safety’s sake.

    • madlanglupa says:

      And, oh, two things I recall — the wage hike for the cops wasn’t enacted, and that the presentation of statistics from the PNP, with increasing recurrence is… well, let’s just say it’s becoming the local equivalent of the Five ‘O Clock Follies, complete with arrest/kill charts.

      • madlanglupa says:

        Considering the pattern we’re seeing, it’ll be inevitable that low-tier sexual offenders would be dealt with, something that VACC may be awaiting to happen.

    • DAgimas says:

      DU30 and his top cop down to the lowest PO1 are cowards. they can only liquidate the pipitsuging tulak. the big fish? not within their league. they know that with these VIPs, they could just cool their heels and wait for the next administration.

      but I might change my opinion. who knows, next week they will start liquidating these VIPs already

    • jolly cruz says:

      When Duterte named the 5 generals wasn’t he running after the big fish. But as usual the haters said that the 5 should have been given due process and not named. The haters kept on saying that no big fish were being implicated before this, and yet when the generals were named, they shout no due process and the gens should not have been named. What is the man to do ?

      • karlgarcia says:

        Who are you calling haters? joke only.
        First reaction,the usual if they are not guilty why would they be afraid,but that is the president himself who did the announcing,so guilty or not be very afraid.

        Another mixed reaction of mine have to do with the pictures being spread with Duterte together with alleged big fish,if he is rubbing elbows and shoulders with them,then what the hell is going on?Are they photoshopped?
        Is that only to counter the Delima connection with the jail birds meme going around?

      • chempo says:

        I’m with you on this, Jolly.
        I’m actually glad he walk the talk on this one. Du30 must have some intel to publicly announce the 5 gens. He has the galls to go after them and shake up the PNP. That’s what I’m talking about. I just hope they are given due process. And I hope this is not selective justice at work.

      • The big fish is the Chinese guy who went to the palace, jolly…he is being given the due process being denied his countrymen, dirt poor or not. The drug lords, the suppliers of the synthetic drugs, who allegedly have laboratories in ships, subdivisions, condominium units rented by the moneyed drug lords. These drug lords have managed to allegedly buy the generals and the other pushers.

  14. chempo says:

    Some congressmen are trying to push the death penalty law for hienous crimes. I’m all for death penalty if they include plunder in their definition of hienous crimes.

    • But I think the most important question is not about the punishment itself it is about how we can punish the most influential people pin the society, otherwise it is the poor people that will always suffer the death penalty. That’s the problem in the Philippines.
      I believe GMA is now acquitted by the Supreme Court.

      • LG says:

        Am with you, James. Plunder = heinous.

        Death penalty will not touch the rich at all. Estelito Mendoza knows that and whoever can afford him.

  15. madlanglupa says:

    Offtopic: …and the tables have been turned. Tiglao must be having a field day now.

    • karlgarcia says:

      With Enrile miraculously cured, will she remove her neck brace anytime soon?

    • LG says:

      Bad K might be GMA’s real punishment. Who knows, she will trip badly from poor balance (due to poor exercising X 5 years), gets bedridden for life, finally gets pneumonia n die a mean death.

      • What’s going on?” is the question du jour in the wake of Pampanga Rep. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s successful petition for the dismissal of the P366-million plunder case against her on grounds of insufficiency of evidence. The Supreme Court’s approval of the former president’s demurrer to evidence was not exactly a surprise, the tribunal having “telegraphed” it by suspending her plunder trial at the Sandiganbayan and extending the suspension a number of times until this year. Nevertheless, some people find the ruling unsettling, wondering if it is a sign of things to come.

        The Supreme Court’s grant of bail last year to then Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile “on humanitarian grounds” was already deemed an ominous sign; many feared that the ruling could set a precedent among those detained for offenses not covered by bail—offenses like plunder, of which Enrile, along with Senators Jinggoy Estrada and Bong Revilla, is charged in connection with the P10-billion pork barrel scam allegedly engineered by Janet Lim Napoles. “What’s going on?” went the rounds, seeing as how Enrile’s legal team did not even cite humanitarian grounds in its petition, and at any rate the man was hardly doddering, indeed was quite tiptop for someone in his 90s (jet-black hair and all). It seemed a classic case of the high and mighty getting the usual star treatment even by the blindfolded Lady Justice, given that other elderly men, ailing, despondent and unable even to enjoy video games on a tablet, political prisoners included, have been languishing in prison for years.

        Now (at this writing) Arroyo is preparing to leave her quarters at the Veterans Memorial Medical Center, where she stayed for four years, for the comforts of home. Per one of her lawyers’ account, members of her legal team and sundry aides were in tears to hear news that the tribunal had quashed the plunder suit approved for filing by the Ombudsman in July 2012. The suit charged Arroyo and officials she had appointed to the board of the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office, as well as Commission on Audit officials, with conspiring to take money from the agency’s corporate allocation funds and treating it as a confidential intelligence fund, which is exempted from audit procedures.

        (Surely halfway attentive observers have not forgotten harrowing scenes at the Senate in July 2011: Rosario Uriarte, appointed general manager and board vice chair of the PCSO by Arroyo, with whom she had a long-running association that began when the latter held the trade portfolio, weeping at a hearing of the blue ribbon committee and invoking her right against self-incrimination, “plunder [being] a nonbailable offense.” The committee was then looking into the fund irregularities at the agency whose charter stipulates that its funds be used exclusively for national charities, medical assistance and services, and health programs. At one point, Sen. Franklin Drilon pointed out to Uriarte that in 2009, as much as P116,386,800 in PCSO funds was allotted for “bomb threat, kidnapping, destabilization and terrorism.” Uriarte said it was Arroyo who had personally approved the PCSO’s intelligence budget.)

        Arroyo’s legal team did not present its defense at the Sandiganbayan. After its demurrer to evidence was rejected by the antigraft court—a rejection that was upheld on appeal—it sought relief directly from the Supreme Court, on the lead of the redoubtable Estelito Mendoza. The resolution of the tribunal, which voted 11-4 to lift Arroyo’s hospital arrest, is (at this writing) awaiting the justices’ signatures. Ordinary citizens who, unlike lawyers, are disinclined to ponder on the minutiae of the law, can only wonder at the dismissal of the six plunder cases filed against the former president, and at the apparent conclusion that all these constituted much ado over nothing. Is the “Hello, Garci” case also included in that conclusion? Is it true, as bandied about, that life is “weather-weather lang”?

        On TV, the representative of Pampanga seemed better—much better than years ago when her counsel

        Mendoza caused the release of photographs showing her in a strange neck brace, her face shorn of makeup, her hair awry—the apparent subtext being that her travails had reduced her to a shadow of her glamorous self. On Tuesday her husband thanked God and declared her “an innocent woman.” The person in the street may well ask: Is that what insufficiency of evidence means?

        Read more: http://opinion.inquirer.net/95821/an-innocent-woman#ixzz4F1Qj8zFM
        Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

        • This article answered my question above, “was the GMA trial even started?”

          I now know it is the the Supreme Court itself, deciding on a petition of who else…(drum roll, please) Estelito Mendoza, to delay the trial at the Sandigan. They themselves delayed the trial and then played martyr before Amal Clooney, the celebrated barrister who works with the Doughty Chambers in London, who then filed the Arroyo case with the UN.

          The Ombudsman was not even given the chance to present their case in the Sandigan. The SC (composed of her appointees) has inserted itself in the process!


        • Joe America says:

          A political ruling, not a legal ruling. It defines the Philippines as a land of entitlement, not democracy.

          • LG says:

            It’s embarrassing to claim Philippine citizenship nowadays😣

          • LG says:

            Blame the 11 incumbent associate justices of the SC if, in the near future, all plunder cases involving elected and appointed govt officials,, big or small, shall be dismissed by the SC, as in the case of Arroyo. Forget the hard work of the overworked courts beneath the SC. What are they needed for?

            What motivation is there for them to convict if there is still an overworked SC to appeal?

            My rant…..

            Just have a SC and call it the C, no below and above it. Just expand its composition (of well selected, paid, NOT judges, but ‘justices’, for more apt title) sections, departments, whatever… their decision final. THAT’S IT. No appeals possible….

            Talk of broken institutions, God- (e.g. Marriage) or man-made in this beloved country…..

            • Joe America says:

              The Philippine courts are the most busted down public institution I have ever witnessed in my somewhat sheltered life. It is incredible to me that the supposed smartest of the smartest do not see their dominant role in propping up the unfairness the Constitution tries to guard against. FAILURE in capital letters. The judges are failures as compassionate humans, as caretakers of the law, and as moral beings.

        • “A total of P365,997,915.00 was disbursed in cash as additional confidential and intelligence fund from the PCSO. Where it went and why it was disbursed was not fully explained. It is clear that the cash was taken out by the general manager and the chair of the PCSO among others,” Leonen said.

          “The general manager had intimate access to the President herself. She bypassed layers of supervision over the PCSO. The approvals were in increasing amounts and each one violation established financial controls. The former President cannot plead naivete. She was intelligent and was experienced. The scheme is plain except to those who refuse to see,” Leonen said.

          Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/…/majority-ignored-irregularit…
          Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

  16. Javier Gris says:

  17. Fred Escobar says:

    Hey Joe America, this is the first time in my following your blogs that I will Disagree totally with your blurb. You have to understand Joe America that this is necessary at this point and time of the administration.. Your are making the only President of this country look like a crazy leader bent on killing people. Absolutely wrong. This stage of the tenure calls for strength in the imposition of the medicine that will kill the virus that has been plaguing the country for a long time. CORRUPTION, DRUGS, CRIMINALITY, MURDERS, RAPE, CARNAPPING, HOLDUP FOR RANSOM and many more. It might seem unfair in your eyes but I am sorry to say that you have to get rid of the pink glasses that you have been wearing for a long time. This is reality Joe America. Face it. Are you a drug lord too or are you a corrupt blogger/journalist? My country needed a man with an iron hand for a long time. A man who is willing to risk his life and all to better the country for everybody and our present President is that man. I agree with bringing back the death penalty to protect the citizens of my country from the criminal elements that will always be there to ready to kill or maim innocent people who are just minding their own business trying to make a living. Joe America, you are a bleeding heart trying hard to get sympathy from those who are pretentious like you. Next time you blog, be careful of what you are trying to induce to the minds of the people whom you hope will read and agree with you. There are people like me who is intelligent enough to dissect and analyse your rotten views. At the end of six years you will be thankful to leadership, courage, risks, honesty, true intentions and love of country of our very own President Rodrigo Duterte.
    Shake your head off violently Joe America and get rid of the stinking cobwebs that has invaded your dementia ridden brain.

    • madlanglupa says:

      Wow, a true believer. Are you the one who comes out at night with a gun or a knife, and then kills anyone out there looking like a druggie for sport? I wouldn’t be surprised either that you revel in gore, watch gory Facebook videos of public executions, and must be longing for the day that a Marcos would sit in the Palace again and that you, once again, be a loyal minion.

    • chempo says:

      Fred would you agree to death penalty for plunder? I’m just curious.
      Fred, do you think they should go after Ronald Chavit?

    • Joe America says:

      Okay, Fred. Thanks for your post, which matches in its incivility the path that the Philippines is now on.

      • “Hey Joe America, this is the first time in my following your blogs that I will Disagree totally with your blurb. “

        Joe, so does this mean he agreed partially with your other blogs?

        “Your are making the only President of this country look like a crazy leader bent on killing people.”

        + “the medicine that will kill the virus that has been plaguing the country for a long time”

        = “people like me who is intelligent enough to dissect and analyse your rotten views”

        kill + kill = intelligent

        Fred, unlike Joe, I care more about results, not morality,

        “At the end of six years you will be thankful to leadership, courage, risks, honesty, true intentions and love of country of our very own President Rodrigo Duterte.”

        Forget about 6 years, Fred, how about now? Mr. Lim paid him a visit, where is he now? List the big name drug lords over there… then judge DU30’s success according to what he does with that list,

        that’s results-based thinking. Talk is cheap, Fred. Make a list, check it twice… 😉 Don’t make Joe wait six years.

      • Fred Escobar says:

        Joe America thanks for you subtle reply at least I got one. I know that you know where I am coming from. Time will show the fruits of a noble intention that the masses and the leader work so hard to achieve for the good not only of the people but the country itself…..that is civility Joe America

    • Fedelynn says:

      Fred, part of your post reminded me of a scene between Arthur and Eggsy of “Kingsman: The Secret Service.” I suggest you watch it… Add also “The Star Chamber”, a 1990s fils starring Michael Douglas, and :Dead Man Walking.”

    • Rank says:

      Fred, you said “death penalty to protect the citizens of my country . . .” BS. There was still death penalty when two thugs approached my father and mother while dancing during a barrio fiesta. One of the goons shot my father in the head. The other shot him in the waist. My father was still gurgling blood when I reached the scene. So don’t talk to me about the death penalty.

      Do I wish the death penalty on his killers and those who sent them? No. I simply wish they were caught and sent to jail. But they were not.

      • Sup says:

        Horrible to watch your own father die like that….

      • karlgarcia says:

        Sorry to hear about that Rank.

      • chempo says:

        There’s a segment of Filipinos who make trivial extra-judicial and vigilante killings simply because they have no personal experience of someone close to them being on the receiving end. If the violence accelerates, sooner or later, these people are going to suffer a dear one falling as a victim or a collateral damage. Let’s see if they will then still maintain the means justify the ends.

        • “it’s not me, it’s not me, it’s not my family…” from the song Zombie by the Cranberrys, regarding the war in Northern Ireland… that song is worth listening to. It was “only” our blood that flowed during Martial Law. UP blood. Ateneo blood. Not La Salle blood, but it was indeed Prof. Xiao Chua of La Salle who made the first documentation of Martial Law Torture called “Tortyur” as a high school paper… something I personally thanked him for, because it is rare that Filipinos care for someone outside their own circles… the Makati/Greenhills crowd that went on the street in 1986 only cared for Ninoy and for their economic situation that was sinking, not for the dead among “us”… but that is the past.

          The lesson that can be learned is… stop seeing fellow Filipinos as OTHERS and thinking only of KAMI, the in-group. If anybody here is ready to organize an initiative to give the victims at LEAST a decent burial somewhere, I pledge to donate. Irineo has spoken.

        • jolly cruz says:


          ” simply because they have no personal experience of someone close to them being on the receiving end.”

          As I have replied to you in a previous blog, this could go both ways. If you or any of your loved ones are victimized by these criminals, you may change your mind. I also invited you to pour place to see the situation.

          I ask you, is it better to be killed by a criminal or a crime fighter?

          • LG says:

            Deep ?. Criminals only injure, most times.. Crime fighters don’t miss. So I’d take the criminal.

          • chempo says:

            I understand you, Jolly. Nobody wants to be a victim of crime for sure.

            Jolly, you have totally missed the point in many discussions in many blogs here. None of us here are going nanny and cheesy on the criminals. It is not about the criminals, IT IS ABOUT US. We live by morals and laws, that’s what set us apart from other animals. If our society applauds the extra-judicial and vigilante killings, then we ought to be a nation of shame.

            If you do not stand up and be counted and speak out against the spate of killings going on now, your hands are just as tainted. That is why it is paramount that leaders of any moral standing must speak out their minds on this issue. It is a time when Filipinos get a chance to glimpse leadership with true values. I’m disappointed people like Bam Aqiuino and Angarra remain silent, I’m glad to see Delima and Leni Robredo leading the vocal charge. Now, where is people like Poe? Does she come around only in election time, or as a real leader step up and be counted when it matters?

            If criminality is prevalent in the country, if law and order is appalling, whose fault is it? If drugs are flooding the country, whose fault is it?. Killing criminals is not the answer. If you want to kill, then I say kill the crooked cops and politicians. And I say, vote in better people, not actors, boxers, murderers, plagiarists, plunderers, rapists, people with all sorts of legal cases pending in courts, people with practically whole family running the country, celebrities of all sorts etc. This is what Filipino massa have been doing for decades. The kind of people have their kind of leaders. The wrong kind of leaders lead to high criminality.

            Crime prevails because the police, the judiciary, the executives, the legislative are ineffective, corrupt and problematic. That is the real problem. Criminality is the consequence. If law and order is broken, fix it.

            Netherlands is a country that is below sea level and they constructed dykes to keep out the sea water. Once upon a time a little hole appeared in the wall and sea water sprouted out. A little Dutch kid came along. Now, should he scoop the sea water out, or put his little finger into the hole in the wall and plug it?

            • Joe America says:

              Thanks for getting to the point that I agree escapes those who see benefit to the killings that target mainly drug dealers or users, it is the sense of self, the discipline, to be different than animals. It requires a mental construct called compassion for the down and out. Jesus understood, but I know for a fact His lessons fly over the heads of many here. Or they’ve never read the bible, and never thought about how to live a bigger life than doing what comes easily, or is done by others.

            • jolly cruz says:


              I wont argue anymore because its obvious that we are coming from very different situations. So that you will know where Im coming from let me relate my story. When I was a kid, my parents never hesitated to spare the rod to keep me from associating with the bad elements in our neighborhood.

              It was only when I was in college that I fully realized the wisdom of their deeds. The more I see my “kababatas” now, the more I appreciated the way they raise me. As young and care free as I was, it was very easy for me to become involved in disreputable activities. If it wasn’t for the fear of retribution from my parents, I would surely have fallen by the wayside.

              Ours is a very young democracy with a very immature citizenry that does not understand what democracy is all about. They think that democracy means being able to do what wants without any accompanying responsibility. That democracy is being free to live for one’s self without regard for the well being of their fellow citizens.

              This is what is causing anarchy and criminality. The law enforcement and justice system should address this, but in its present state, it is too weak to prevent this inherent weakness of democracy.

              I believe Duterte is just the person to instill the discipline that is needed to make our democracy work. I grant that his real motives are yet uncertain. But, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because this is how my parents used to instill discipline and the right values in me. The difference, of course, is that my parents’ intentions were meant for my good while Duterte’s is still unclear.

              I know that it is difficult to justify the means but how long must I, and people who think like me, wait before the institutions become strong and reliable. In the same way that an abusive Duterte regime will destroy the country, allowing the rampant drug related criminality and corruption to continue unabated will likewise destroy the country, maybe sooner than the six years of the Duterte regime.

              • Joe America says:

                Very interesting reading, Jolly. What resonates with me is that the institutions are broken, not so much that drugs and crime are the problem. But I keep asking why are there drugs and crime, and it is because of poverty. Why is there poverty? Because the institutions are broken. Will President Duterte fix the institutions?

                Education: Not if he takes out algebra and dumbs it down.
                Democratic processes (three branches each dutifully working for the people): No.
                Civil processes (respect for law): No.
                Policing (respect for lpolice): No, he is teaching fear and mistrust.
                Sovereignty and patriotism: No.
                Transparency: No, he runs a propaganda internet army.

                List some others. List the one’s he is going to repair, maybe.

                So my take, if institutions are broken and he is not fixing them, how is he helping?

              • He is trying to fix the symptoms and not the root cause.

                Family Development Sessions or FDS try to teach people how to be good parents.

                At least the 4Ps instituted wanted to break the cycle of poverty.

                We can kill a half a million pushers but how will it stop the next batch of pushers.

                Some people say that this will be effective because it makes the price of pushing too high.

                If the price of pushing is one’s life then that just pushes the price of the product.

                This is another case of wanting to see something done when what we need is to do measure and adjust.

              • Joe America says:

                That’s the way it seems to me, for sure. Poverty is the root problem, so are broken institutions. Crime and drugs are symptoms.

              • Joe America says:

                Yes, I read about that. Truly tragic. If there were a coffin that President Duterte decided to attend to, it would be that one.

                Of course, that would take great courage, to deal with the collateral damage, and the pains. That would take honesty, and conviction to his purpose. To find the words to speak to the parents . . .

              • josephivo says:

                As we can not do double blind experiments, the only way to be more “scientific” is to look at similar situations. The rest are just opinions. Drugs is a problem in the US too, one of the old democracies with well established institutions. Anarchy in the south of Chicago, Detroit…

                So young democracy is not the only cause.

                End justifies the means. Shouldn’t we prioritize then? What illegal activities have the worst effects? Drug use? Corruption? Corrupt businessmen, politicians, judges? War lords? Tax evasion? Dynasties? Entitlement? Organized crime? Pimping?… Personally I see corrupt judges or politicians, war lords and organized crime as very high on the list, but totally absent the killing spree. Any explanation Jolly?

              • chempo says:

                Jolly, we are not arguing for arguments sake. You are stating your point of view, which I appreciate, but not necessarily agree.

                Wrong comparatives Jolly. You can’t possibly relate indiscrimate killings to tiger moms. As far as parenting is concerned, I too believe in sparring the rod will spoil the kids. I too had a loving but tough father. As punishment for one of my percoscious misdeeds,I once had to kneel on a sea shell under each of my naked knees for almost 30 minutes. I grew up OK I guess, but was it due to my tough parents? Absolutely NO. I grew up OK because of values that were taught to me at home, in schools and elders around me, and those good old family TV programmes, and doses of good books that teachers guided me to read, like Enid Blyton.

                After the killings are done, and after Du30’s reign is over, if the system is not fixed, criminality will return. Remember, Philippines once had a much tougher President who imposed much more stricter disciplines, much more indiscriminate killings. What do we have 30 years after he was gone? The very criminality that you despise. What does that show — that killings never work.

                Many are those who think that Du30 can be like Lee Kuan Yew dishing out tough love on Philippines to instill discipline. Lee succeeded with tough love AND proper institutions that worked. There was no indiscriminate killings but lots of education and promotion of civilities and aspirations to achieve Swiss standards of living. Yes, he kept drugs at bay with the death penalty. But it applies to the people on the supply side only. Those apprehended are given all due process of the law. As a matter of fact, the minimum weight of drugs (I think it’s 30gms) which calls for a mandatory death penalty is mercifully defined as the pure substance. That means the stuff that one is caught with goes to a laboratory which will filter out all other substances leaving a much lighter pure drug. In short, the pushers are given as much opportunity as possible to prevent the death sentence.

              • NHerrera says:

                Thanks fellows for the enlightening exchange starting from

                chempo says:
                July 19, 2016 at 6:25 pm

              • jolly cruz: “I believe Duterte is just the person to instill the discipline that is needed to make our democracy work. I grant that his real motives are yet uncertain. But, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because this is how my parents used to instill discipline and the right values in me. The difference, of course, is that my parents’ intentions were meant for my good while Duterte’s is still unclear.”

                That’s a fair statement I think.

                It’s too early to tell, but since DU30 gave himself a timeline 6 months,

                1). he has to produce big fish (not simply PNP generals), but rich Filipinos with all sorts of armored SUVs, planes and helicopters… like Peter Lim.

                2). he has to convert these surrenders of small timers, into something useful.

                So, my question to you is,

                if DU30 fails to capture the real drug lords and fails to convert surrendered druggies into work (rehab is ideal, but work of the chain gang variety is good enough), will you then change your stance?

                DU30 gave himself a timeline, will you hold him to that?

              • jolly cruz says:


                You bet I hold him to his word. If the situation in our neighborhood deteriorates again, I will join Mr Joe, Karl, Chempo, Giancarlo, and the rest in calling him out to account for his failure.

              • jolly cruz,

                I’ve been attempting to play Devil’s Advocate since DU30 was elected, before that I partook in the DU30 bashing fiesta, my personal contribution was that DU30 was a sheep disguised as a wolf, as meme (it didn’t go viral 😦 )

                This was the official end of my pro-bono Devil’s advocacy work, https://joeam.com/2016/07/01/marriage-on-the-rocks/#comment-185255

                But I like your perspective here, we’ve had a bunch of crazies pro-DU30 (even one I fell in “love” with 😉 ) , I was wondering if you could write a blog on this very subject.

                Unlike most here, I’m more of a results kinda guy, though I appreciate values and morality, when it comes down to where the rubber meets the road, I know it gets messy— I afford guys in that position the benefit of the doubt (especially in the third world).

                So my follow up questions, ones I hope you can answer and expand in a blog article here, is

                1). what will be your metrics for DU30’s results? (just keep it within peace & order, rule of law, etc. no need to tackle other issues)

                2). once you’ve laid out these metrics, where do you say ‘not good enough’ and ‘outstanding’?

                3). Once you get the scores, what are your courses of action, ie. if ‘outstanding’ will you push for another term, if ‘not good enough’ will you attempt another EDSA?

                if you do expand this to an article, it’d be great if you can address all this from an on-the-ground perspective, like stuff you see in your neighborhood, personal experiences, etc.

                thanks, jolly. 😉

              • Joe America says:

                I second the invitation.

              • jolly cruz says:

                @Lcp, Mr. Joe,

                I will try but I don’t know if it will pass muster. Il let Mr Joe read it first to judge whether its worthy of the THS. Thanks for the encouragement.

              • Joe America says:

                Great, jolly. I’m confident it will pass muster.

              • karlgarcia says:

                Third the motion Jolly.

              • Jolly..

                I understand where the victims of drug addicts are coming from…the victims of multiple stab wounds numbering to more than 50..the rape, the murder and theft…those are heinous crimes deserving of the severest punishment allowed by our law and constitution. But we must remember that death penalty is unconstitutional as of the moment.

                On the other side of the fence – we have here a President who is on record in saying kill them, kill them and those who will follow his orders will be pardoned by him, so what is the consequence of such public instructions to the police and to citizens?….outright killing without due process…so what about the victims of mistaken identity, they will no longer be afforded to clear their name or defend themselves because they are already accused, sentenced and executed on the spot…vigilante style, What if one of your daughters (hope it will not happen, ever) became one of those who are victims of mistaken identity, or who have secret enemies who will frame her, her name secretly included in the police list of drug pushers or accomplices of drug lords? How will you feel if one of your families and friends who are innocent, upstanding and law abiding, productive citizens, but whose lives are snuffed just because they are accused of being drug pushers? These are not hypothetical questions…these are happening for real on a daily basis, jolly.

                Drug problems and the crimes emanating from them are truly problematic, those who chose to be involved in them are wrong to decide that way of life, but a wrong solution cannot right a wrong.

                Chemp is correct, we need to eradicate the root cause of the problem, not just the symptoms.

              • “we need to eradicate the root cause of the problem, not just the symptoms.”


                Ang tao, tao… Pulitika nga ang sumisira sa tao. Kasama na doon ang pataasan ng ihi. Kasama din doon ang pagiging matakaw sa pera… Ang pera, mata ng demonyo. Kitang-kita ito sa kuwento ni Ma Rosa na tungkol sa shabu – sa kagipitan nagsisimula lahat. Hindi kahayupan ng pagsalvage ang solusyon diyan, kundi hanapbuhay at respeto para sa TAO.

              • jolly,

                Looking forward to it. I hope this article on Laos and political assassinations there, will help—

                once you’ve clicked on that link, if you scroll up or down, that’s me and Joe’s discussion re US drone program, since it’s extrajudicial killings it should be relevant.

                Hope it helps! 😉

    • LG says:

      Fred Escobar, Xerox this particular blog and your reply above. At the end of Dutetrte’s six years, log in to TSH and, regardless of the topic then, oblige us your with thoughts then. Would you have changed your perspective by then? Or stuck with it?

      I will humbly oblige you of mine, at least. Perhaps, others, too.


    • josephivo says:

      Good diagnosis Fred, wrong medicine. You can not kill lawlessness with lawlessness.

    • Thea says:

      “My country”? It is OUR country,Fred.

      • His name is Fred ESCOBAR.

        He might be Colombian and related to Pablo.

        • LG says:

          It helps to be global, right, IBRS? He he he.

          • It helps in being sarcastic. Colombia had a period known as “La Violencia”.

            Of course LCPL_X is right that a lot of Philippine gun culture is American, but a part of it also comes from Don Quixote like he said, via the culture of Mexican gunslingers…

            • “Of course LCPL_X is right that a lot of Philippine gun culture is American, but a part of it also comes from Don Quixote”

              Jose Rizal was known to challenge people to duels,

              and its widely written that the people he challenged usually apologized knowing his skill in duel, not Don Quixote at all,

              but my question is machismo Mexican, or do you also see this in Spain… if I’m not mistaken it was more codified chivalry that the Spanish were putting out there (no doubt much of it came from the Moors), only somehow, somewhere along the line, this concept was watered down to simply posturing, hence

              macheesy-mo. 😉

            • LG says:

              I wish i had more of sarcastic wit. And of the opposite😉. But that Fred, in his initial reply, fits the definition of T, as defined by JA.

    • fedelynn says:

      Fred, I am sharing this article with you. This is proof why going through “due process” (which is in the 1987 Constitution) is necessary: “Seares: Why Peter Lim case is getting more odd” (http://www.sunstar.com.ph/cebu/opinion/2016/07/19/seares-why-peter-lim-case-getting-more-odd-486146)
      “…after all those government law enforcement agencies tagged Peter Lim — which apparently led Duterte to shame the Cebu businessman publicly, not once but twice — NBI is telling the public it would have to identify the “bad” Peter Lim first and then gather evidence of his alleged crime.”

      • I agree, fed… the test is in the Peter Lim case, and other cases of big drug lords, if DU30 is the man he’s promised the nation he’ll be, he’ll have no compunctions “killing” this guy, but as goes with drug lords, who go thru great lengths to hide their hand, DU30 will need the evidence based approach.

        What to do, what to do?

        On another note, anti-DU30s are describing the killing fields, while pro-DU30s are describing similar but assuring all that the right people are dead, I’d like to know how many of these recalcitrant drug offenders, are now surrendering, asking for penance?

        The mere surrender isn’t the results, it is… can DU30 convert this wave into FDR’s New Deal, get these recent surrenders to work for the greater good, in their local communities or in bigger national projects. What are the plans for them?

      • LG says:

        The NBI is being cautious?. My foot, they’ve been warned. By who? guess who?

        Peter Lim will demand n get his due process. With reasonable doubt that he is the wanted Peter Lim, you think he’ll just go to Belo, have a re-christening party, and live happily ever after?

        Maybe Du30 needs a Peter Lim to have a WATERLOO this early.

        • LG says:

          Hold! Change Belo to the plastic surgeon that was used by Mickey O’Rourke.😉. Maybe he, the plastic surgeon, won’t botch this time. 😉.

  18. Francis says:

    Reminds of that anecdote of slaves whispering to triumphant Roman conquerors, “Memento homo.” Remember that you are man.

    Two point.

    One. As cruel and detached it may sound—should society be treated like a child in need of a good lesson? Let a child get cuts playing outside—and he or she will learn. Let a society go through bloodshed—and it will learn. May Trump be a sign of a generation that forgot the brutality of WW2, of what happens when you make your dreams of supremacy, “alphas” and “betas” come to life—no one spared? May Duterte be a sign of a generation that forgot the harshness of Martial Law?

    Must we even go through this to just learn? Bah humbug. Shame.

    Two. The first hundred days aren’t over. The post-election ecstasy has yet to subside. Time will tell whether buyer’s regret will come. Yet worth noting: the SWS polls say much—those mostly likely to be the victims under this crusade aren’t fools.

    • Joe America says:

      Shame. It is bizarre to me, we have here within this discussion thread so much wisdom. “Follow the money”, says Josephivo. Yes, because if you just shoot a few consumers and retailers in the marketplace, the big dealers will adjust. The moneymen will mark up the price for the additional risk. Nothing will change, really.

      Except the dead innocents will be dead as dead can be.

    • sonny says:

      It’s “Memento mori” from the slave. “Memento homo quia pulvis es et in pulverem reverteris” if the Roman conqueror is going to church for Ash Wednesday ritual.

    • “Must we even go through this to just learn? Bah humbug. Shame.”

      Certain lessons have to be repeated, until one learns from them. Such is life.

      But if the nation forgets everything again – as usual – the cycles will repeat, repeat, ripit.

  19. josephivo says:

    Last year the Dutch police used their guns 158 times. 70 times with warning shots, 61 with taking aim, 5 times both, 4 times accidently, the rest was unclearly classified. Not all resolute shooting was fatal and it include situations as killing a raging dog or a charging bull. Only 33 cases resulted in dead or severe injuries with consequent judicial analysis. To compare with the Philippines, multiply these figures by 6.

    Last figures for Belgium are from 2012. A total of 112 shooting incidents. One quarter (28) with animals as target, on fifth (22) with cars as target, 10 accidental shots, 12 aimed to kill one person. Total number of fatalities unknown. To compare with the Philippines, multiply these figures by 9.

    2010 statistics. One in 5 million shooting fatalities by police bullets in the Netherlands, one in 27 million in the UK. Part of the difference is explained by better training, only 4 times a year in Holland, 6 times in Belgium, variable in the UK. Also the procedures to aim first under the belt to avoid fatalities differ.

    Just to give some perspective.

    • “Also the procedures to aim first under the belt to avoid fatalities differ.”

      OUCH!!! I’d rather be shot in the heart, josephivo! 😉

      BUT seriously,

      I think much of Philippine gun-culture is American gun-culture…

      ie. while most Western Europeans were playing with Lego and reading Tin-Tin (because of WWII?)… Filipinos and Americans play cops and robbers, watch the same Hollywood movies (or Filipino action flicks, which are basically Charles Bronson, Dirty Harry movies), etc.

      Where the Philippines differs I think is the Latin macheesy-mo culture, all talk and no results. Or the inability to self-assess truthfully.

      Only the Philippines and the US have bounty hunters (unofficially, but as part of the criminal-justice system)… though since the Philippine prisoner usually has no cash, the bail-bond business isn’t as evolved, and/or ubiquitous as here.

      Wyatt Earp vs. Don Quixote , but both products of the West mythology, IMHO.

      • josephivo says:

        And a different attitude towards life. Making and taking it, just a momentary emotional/pleasure thing. Where is the ulam? Let’s move on.

        • ang dasal ko sa kanya, masagasaan ng auto
          bahala na ang tatay niyang gumawa ng panibago

          My prayer for him is that he gets run over by a car, it’s up to his father to make a new one – a somewhat joking song my kumpare who was once a Manila cop liked to sing…

      • My German mother NEVER liked it when I played “barilan” (shooting) with other Pinoy kids. While my Filipino father laughed at her pacifism… which I know now is born out of her first memory as a seven year old child in 1945 being the smell of corpses in the street of Berlin.

        To answer the question of how children are affected by killing… during my mother’s 77th birthday last year, her old friends from childhood started opening up about all the things that happened when Berlin fell in 1945… a boy shot by snipers on the way to the water pumps which in parts of Berlin are on the street corners… a mailman bleeding to death in my grandmother’s kitchen, hit by Russian shrapnel.. that generation has not forgotten.

        • My grandma took the mailman in, he had been hit by shrapnel… nothing could stem the tide of blood not even my grandmas attempts in the kitchen…

          My mother’s friends told the story about how my grandma buried him in her garden…

          This Sunday I talked to a woman from Ex-Yugoslavia – she is mixed Serb-Croatian from Bosnia… and she told me how the graves of the dead were even along the street there… with proper stones for young men aged 17, 18, 19… and how things turned radical… the husband of a Muslim girl she had held in her arms as a young woman refused to let her see the grown woman’s face a few years ago… how in her youth Muslim Bosnians ate pork and drank slivovitz like everybody else… she said aren’t we all humans in the end?

          • Ireneo, that’s what I’ve wonder re WWII , since it was mostly western Europe’s deer-in headlights reaction to Hitler that got him his much need momentum. Was it WWI then? Just war wearied,

            or is it how western Europe is set up historically into fiefdoms, and such? But the question is where did this non-martial out look start? this tradition of stick your head in the sand hoping for the best of humanity.

            Because aside from Poland, France and the UK, western European militaries don’t even want to shoot, which is fine, human nature prefers not to take another person’s life, but even in cases where lethal force is necessary, they’d been known to acquiesce … I’d lump Canada in there with them.

            We’re pretty crazy over here, and I’d agree that the NRA has taken us into uncharted territory these days, but if the choice is me dead or alive, I’d rage rage rage against the dying of the light. 😉

            • It could that like the Philippines, Western Europe relied too much on American protection.

              UK and France are old imperial powers that still have retained a bit of the old mentality.

              Poland is not only Eastern European, Russians are just across and they hate them…

              In fact the Polish are busy forming militia / irregular groups in case something happens.

              Lots of Polish and Ukrainian contact and mixed marriages, they know what can happen.

              Of course the non-martial outlook started after WW2 and generations used only to peace.

              Somewhat like the Late Romans who took peace for granted and just enjoyed life…

    • NHerrera says:

      Good comparative statistics. That does not consider the unfortunate victims grabbing the authorities’ firearms at a distance while hand-cuffed does it?

    • Joe America says:

      To be sure, the criminals here are also trigger happy and well-armed, and not afraid to shoot. Still when there are 9 alleged criminals in a group, and 8 come out dead, then the use of force seems just a little overmuch. It is amazing to me how often all the culprits end up dead. That is the environment now. Someone resists, then execute. My guess is if the police see a gun, it will be execute. It is like Lord of the Flies here, a dark place where rules are made up and the thinking is largely that of children.

      • And mean while at the RNC in Cleveland, Ohio… Secret Service guys are not happy 😦

        • madlanglupa says:

          That’s a lot of penises out there.

          • That one in the Nike running shoes is w/out penis,

            State law forbids cities like Cleveland to enforce more restrictive gun regulations, although the Secret Service will not permit anyone but law enforcement to carry weapons inside the Quicken Loans Arena where the convention will take place.

            It’s legal in Ohio to openly carry a gun in most public places without a license, while those who want to pocket their guns need concealed-carry permits. Gun owners’ rights are written into the Ohio Constitution, which says “the people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security.”

            “I’m an old man,” Klein said. “I cannot run and I cannot jump. And if some group of people were to threaten my safety or my wife, I have been trained to stop them.”


            I’ve been watching the RNC (3rd day now), and no one seems to be challenging the Secret Service. So I think they have a ‘don’t ask don’t tell’ policy and everyone’s simply doing concealed carry.

            Those gun nuts outside are the ones protesting, pictured above.

            On one hand I’m a big fan of Charles Bronson movies, on the other hand I know those guys carrying as a form of protest, don’t train at all, or think “training” is target practice.

            Also part of all this goes back to the whole notion of austerity, wherein people who sense a need to fill their security needs, end up buying 10-20 AR-15s and/or handguns of all sorts. Like someone who needs love, eating their fill thinking that food is love.

            Everything can be traced back to excess. There’s an emotional need being filled with material.

      • NHerrera says:

        This is indeed a case where one can reasonably argue with the use of numbers and statistics to show the ridiculousness of the situation — something a person can understand, and he does not have to be a legislator or a member of the judiciary to appreciate. How long this can go on is a puzzle.

      • caliphman says:

        Its Duterte’s crazed zealots who believe they now have carte blanche license to kill based on mere suspicion one must be wary of. Its not surprising when the president himself declares open season on suspected pushers and addicts, after blaming journalists for their own murder.

        Stay safe, Joe.

        • Joe America says:

          Maybe I’ll do like some 70 LP reps and go over to the other side. There is a certain pragmatism to that.

          • Not so fast, Joe. Here is a whiff of fresh air for you:


            The rest of the LP members will join the minority bloc in the House, to be headed by Belmonte. 50 jumped to PDP-Laban but the remaining 30-35 members are staying put.

            ” “I always felt that was the natural course of things for LP. This will define the party’s legacy in the Duterte administration – an objective intelligent fiscalizer and advocate for liberties,” said Baguilat in a text message.”

            Let us applaud the efforts of these decent, law-abiding and judgmentally able Filipinos. May their tribe increase!

            • Joe America says:

              Thanks for the update, Juana. That is good.

            • LG says:

              Cheers to the LP DNA positives. The negatives self-select themselves out to join as pseudo majority positives. To be used for sure. And trusted?

            • LG says:

              30-35 vs. 50 almost equal number,slightly leaning PDP.. But how do the collective brain weights of each compare to each other?

              We already know that the defectors, compared to the stayers, are lower on trustworthiness. But on divergence, which group weighs heavier. Seen Divergent? The movie.

              • Joe America says:

                The real meaningful impact of the switch is that impeachment is off the table because the minority is too weak. It also provoked Senator Drilon to draft an anti-turncoat bill, which I will write about in a few days. Lots of luck with him getting that passed . . .

              • LG says:

                Ah…deep. Impeachment thoughts this early? What would anti turncoatidm law do? How enforceable is that?

              • Joe America says:

                I’ll cover the law in a separate blog. It has to be passed to become law, and I peg that as a very slim chance. It would be enforceable as a law.

              • Juana Pilipinas says:

                Yes. I saw the movie. Being an optimist, my answer to your question is predictable. Turncoats are ampaws – very little substance, mostly air . They wear leaded shoes to keep them from floating away.

              • LG says:


                If in the movie, the ampaws will be factionless, shameful, as in real life.

              • Juana Pilipinas says:

                In PH, they live happily ever after in perpetual political dynasties?

              • LG says:

                Shameles dynasties.

  20. We have a president who says he will pardon the members of the police force if ever they are taken to court for the extra judicial killing, and who boasts that he would wish to be likened to Idi Amin when he finishes his term of office and doesn’t care what the local and international human right groups say about him.

    We have a Solgen Calida who is threatening to file a case against Sen de Lima so as to protect his boss and anyone in the cabinet who agrees with the said boss.

    We have the social media who made possible his winning the presidency and who is now editing pics and videos to discredit Sen De Lima when their call to impeach her failed as it is not allowed in the existing Constitution.

    We have the small time pushers and drug addicts being killed right and left, some desperately surrendering in large numbers for fear of being killed and had to be police informers but had to face the wrath of the warring factions of the giant drug lords to the delight of the authorities who cry out in glee, “they care killing each other!”

    We have a national government who gives due process to the billionaire drug lords and is BFF with China which is allegedly the source of supply of the most horrendous type of drugs, the chemically produced ones, per LCpl_X (@LCpl_X).

    And they said PNOY dispensed what they call “selective justice”, argh!

    We have a judiciary who returned the favor to their appointing power by setting PGMA free…after her lawyers filed endless motions to delay court trial (was the trial ever begun?) …argh again!

    We need to speak up louder, we need to pray. May God help us all.

    • edgar lores says:


      The SC vote was 11 – 4.

      The dissenters were Sereno, Carpio, Leonen and Caguioa.

      This means that 3 PNoy appointees joined the majority composed of GMA appointees. These are Reyes, Perlas-Bernabe, and Jardeleza. Even if they hadn’t, the vote would still have been 8 – 7.

      Jardeleza’s vote is interesting. He used to be SolGen. It may be his spite (against Sereno) is greater than his gratitude (to PNoy).

      • chempo says:

        I would be saddened to know that they voted based on loyalties, to whoever. I would have loved to understand their legal frame of mind for the decisions they made. Were they standing on well-thought out legal foundations? Were legal basis that formed their opinions, or were they leaning to certain positions motivated by whatever personal myriad reasons and then cooked up a legal basis to substantiate their opinion?

        • I so love Senior Justice Carpio…his decisions in almost all issues brought to the SC are almost all sound ones. I also like his booming voice and clear grasp of the constitution, the local and international laws during the live telecast of the case vs the Comelec en banc re the citizenship and residency issues of then candidate Poe. (not to mention his untiring efforts on our West Philippine Sea conflict with China culminating in the the PCA)

          What a guy!

      • It’s a good thing SC Senior Justice Carpio does not share his spite against CJ Sereno, knowing he should be the CJ now.

    • madlanglupa says:

      Some people do not forget.

      Nothing else freezes the blood than watching all those disturbing signs show up in a matter of weeks, and what’s more — Duterte now trying to compare himself to, of all men, the Ugandan IDI AMIN?

      • LG says:

        Duterte reads!? Bios. When? He sleeps 8 hrs., must, out of 24/7.

        Funny, he must just have started with dictators’. How they end must be his target.

    • “China which is allegedly the source of supply of the most horrendous type of drugs, the chemically produced ones, per LCpl_X (@LCpl_X). “

      No alleging here, Mary… it’s from China, whether or not it’s Chinese criminals, the state or both putting it out there is the question. And since it’s a command economy, the Party’s complicit, the question is it a local issue or are national decisions being made here?


  21. JoeAm: The question arises, “Will the President greet the coffins?”

    ANY of them? I guess I have to tell my Filipino-German sistah to let him go…

  22. edgar lores says:


    Nobody seems to have commented on Duterte’s stance on the climate change pact. Duterte’s justification was that he did not sign the pact.

    I know that Dean Tony La Vina headed the mission to Paris and was proud of the accomplishments made there, so I wanted to find out his reaction. To my great surprise, he approved of the President’s stance. If I may quote from the Dean’s FB page:

    1. “President Duterte is right; we should never commit to anything that limits our ability to industrialize, to pursue sustainable development.

    2. “The previous administration decided to offer an ambitious NDC but it made it contingent on support by developed countries. That was a strategic decision and it was done with care. It’s a no-harm commitment because we said we are bound only to the target to the extent that developed countries provided finance and technology for us to achieve it.

    3. “The 70 per cent BAU emissions reduction is ambitious but because it is contingent on support, then it should be fine from a bindingness point of view. This means plain and simple that, if no money or technology were forthcoming, we cannot be held to account for that target.

    4. “As a goal, it is right because we have been pushing all countries to reduce emissions – developed countries which are historically responsible for the early emissions and majority of current emissions as well as big developed countries who are increasing their contribution (China is now the number one country in terms of annual contributions). We belong to neither group – as a middle-income country; we are in the group of countries that contribute around 1 percent each of the total emissions. Majority of countries actually emit even less than us – small island states, least developed countries, etc. But added together those of us who are in the 1% or less emissions still would total a fifth or a sixth of total global emissions. That’s why even the lesser emitters also have to reduce emissions because if they don’t, the problem won’t be solved. For a country that suffers climate change, that is not acceptable. And a country that suffers climate change should also not contribute to the problem even if very little. That’s like suicide – contributing to your own destruction.

    Points 1, 2 and 3 support the President’s decision.

    Point 4 does not.

    Is this a good example of judgmental disability or not?

    • Francis says:

      I think the professor was being completely reasonable.

      The principle that the professor and I think most other developing countries had in mind was this: “Dealing with climate change via sustainable development necessitates recognition of the different circumstances of rich and poor nations.” This is valid—especially from the viewpoint of national welfare and economic justice.

      Yet, what about the matter of global welfare—of mankind’s welfare. This is where his fourth point comes into play. The professors uses point #4 to reiterate that points #1-3 are and cannot be excuses for prioritizing national welfare over global welfare. Using point #4 to nuance points #1-3 leads to a stance that suggests that while a developing country can “not go all the way” if NO concessions are made by RICH COUNTRIES towards their poorer counterparts—a developing country is still obliged to MAKE AN EFFORT NONETHELESS for GLOBAL WELFARE as if GLOBAL WELFARE is not taken care of—that hurts NATIONAL WELFARE.

      Of course—there are Dutere’s words. A liberal interpretation of his words would that he shares the principle of the professor and that he merely put that principle into very crude and brash words. A negative interpretation of his words would be that he utterly prioritizes national self-interest over global self-interest, does not see the “environment” as either/both a global-interest or/and important issues—or assumes that “global interest” is but a fiction of evil western powers.

      Normally—I hate being directly negative and would like to be kind to the administration. Normally, I would content myself with resigning myself ala vox populi vox dei to this administration—but these words couldn’t help but make me remember of that one guy in one of our national delegations to a UN climate change conference who cried. C

      I can’t help but feel that guy must’ve been slapped in the face by these words. I dunno. I’m just some relatively well-off kid living okay in Manila but I dunno. I dunno.

      Regardless of whether one takes a liberal or negative interpretation of Duterte’s words—those words betray a worrying degree of blinding localism. Sa madaling salita—mas kanto boy kaysa pangulo ang pag-asta ni Digong.

      • Francis says:

        Addenda: There may and indeed can be a silver lining in Duterte’s kanto-boy style of governance. With respect to our diplomatic fortunes—the other side of the “brutally pragmatic coin” would be effective realpolitik. Duterte recognizes power—not fancy-shmancy morality—is the thing that matters to achieve the goal above all: a win for me, my town, my nation. Duterte also recognizes that all the other players (nationa) feel likewise.

        And while some may find that discomforting—it has its benefits.

        May our President be blessed with a Kissinger. Or that somebody—or even the President himself—would suffice to be such a man.

    • NHerrera says:

      Actually, PH’s contribution to world’s carbon emission is a fraction of 1 percent (closer to 0.2% ). Among these 8 nation groups with sizeable populations — China, United States, European Union, India, Russia, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil — the percentage contribution to carbon emissions are 19.5, 18.0, 11.9, 5.3, 4.8, 1.6, 1.3, 1.1, respectively for a total of 63.5 percent from these 8 groups alone. All other countries contribute only 36.5 percent — or on the average about 0.2 percent/country like us.

      There is pragmatism in not subscribing to the agreement NOW. After all the big culprits, China and United States, pussy-foot on the matter too. But to be a good world citizen, it will be nice to comply. Also, if the other countries that now contribute 36.5 percent think the same way, we will soon be in bad shape because they are all itching to develop.

      Going full-speed on the other aspects of the environment for the PH is of course another matter altogether.

      • Francis says:

        That’s worth noting. Thanks. Am in full agreement that we should be pragmatic.

        However, the administration should do so in a way that is truly pragmatic. Not hard-line. With finesse. Granted, if there’s anything that the administration has taught us—it pays (for good or ill is anyone’s opinion, but I’m digressing) to use “blunt” instruments. But, I think that administration should realize more that true pragmatism requires use of all instruments—blunt and fine, hard talk and soft talk.

    • “Is this a good example of judgmental disability or not?”

      I agree with NHerrera; and Francis’ “—the other side of the “brutally pragmatic coin” would be effective realpolitik. Duterte recognizes power—not fancy-shmancy morality—is the thing that matters to achieve the goal above all: a win for me, my town, my nation. “

      For trade there is ASEAN (the most “green” would probably be Brunei, but I’m not talking about environmentalism 😉 ) , but ASEAN’s not known for environmentalism, they are basically smaller countries that want to be China.

      So maybe the Philippines can ally with South Pacific nations (to include Papua New Guinea) to push climate change effects.

      If DU30 is not signing as a protest to the bigger polluting countries, then its not so much judgmental disability as it is the start of negotiations. Can he hold out for better deals, ie. more electric vehicles, solar power stations, loans to be able to buy green technology from Chine en masse, money to fund sea level rise, study salt water intrusion, get the big polluting countries to construction reservoirs, etc.

      “ability to industrialize, to pursue sustainable development.” As paradoxical as that sounds, so long as they mean shifting from dirty GDP to clean GDP, it makes sense.

      But my point here is when it comes to climate change, ASEAN isn’t the group to hang with, it’s the South Pacific nations, then expand the South Pacific league to Indian Ocean island nations, and you’ll have a strong bullhorn pro-climate change call for shifting to clean GDP,

      since these nations can cry victimhood rather convincingly. victimhood usually equals reparations 😉 that’s what the 1%’s should be fighting for—- this is your fault industrialize world, show us the money! and since clean GDP as oppose to dirty GDP is what big polluting countries also want, they’ll see it as an investment to the future.

      The money’s there, guys, we saw Pakistan and Iraq get trillions of it. I think doling out money or collaborating on green projects is a lot more palatable to the taxpayers.

      Whether or not this is DU30’s end game, it seems his not signing is at least a start on this path.

  23. NHerrera says:

    This is relatively good news. PRD and DFA Sec are listening to the DFA staff.

    Manila, Philippines — Foreign Affairs Secretary Perfecto Yasay Jr. on Tuesday revealed that China asked the Philippines to hold bilateral negotiations outside the ruling of an arbitral tribunal to resolve the South China Sea dispute.

    The Foreign Affairs chief, however, rejected Wang’s offer citing that it was not consistent with the country’s Constitution and national interests.


    Easy does it in that sector, however China wants to accelerate things.

  24. DAgimas says:

    the Dept of Justice and the Judiciary inluding PDEA should be ashamed and resign en masse. since the PNP has assumed their role of being prosecutor and judge, they are no longer needed and their salary be used to increase the salary of the policemen, solving the problem of the DBM where to source their promised salary increase.

    what a way to do police work. I thought the way of the PC was gone with all these fresh young men joining the force. been away for 10 years so I don’t know how serious the problem is now but my boss at one of the enforcement agency before always emphasize that di bale nang wala marami accomplishments basta malinis lang ang trabaho natin at wala sabit/bulilyaso.

    that’s why we laughed at those Marines who filed cases and got dismissed because of sloppy police work. now everything is done shortcut. pity these canon fodders.

    they should remember that DU30s term is only 6 years. what comes around goes around and the next administration may not be sympathetic to your “pagsisipsip” to him and you go back to hila mo buntot mo.

  25. karlgarcia says:

    Chuckie Englund and some relatives of mine are saying that the CHR was not there for the victims of rape,murder,theft done to them by drug addicts.They are asking,what anout the rights of the victims.
    First of how would they know that the CHR was not there for the victims?
    They seem to imply that the CHR condones crimes and is always after the human rights of criminals.

    • Joe America says:

      Chuckie to me seems to place a priority on being provocative and just enough off the mainstream that he can always rationalize his way back. He is a shade away from going GRP on us.

      • karlgarcia says:


        I think after you told him to go to GRP,he did just that.
        The link above are his articles there.

        • LG says:

          No post election Englund post in GRP, espcially of late?

          • karlgarcia says:

            If you are active in FB,LG, you can find his posts there.

            • Joe America says:

              WHY would LG want to do THAT?? bwahahahahaha!

              • karlgarcia says:

                Bwahaha,I only read his post because I saw your comments,I had a one on one with him about the Duterte rape joke and Bernie Sander’s sexual fantasy essay.I said it is apples and Durian and he even asked why? In the end he just trivialized the rape joke and I just thanked him for his time.

                LG,you are advised not to bother.hehe.

              • LG says:

                U guessed right😊😊😉. I hit reply to posts at Inbox.

            • LG says:

              Not worth my log in. After scheming the titles of his GRP posts.

              • Joe America says:

                Charles is a gameplayer. He posed as a foreigner, then said he was Filipino. He told me that he and I should join forces to remake the Philippines, and I said I didn’t have that kind of expectation, I was here to learn. Then he wrote a blog casting skepticism on my integrity. He stirs up issues, and I suppose there is some benefit to that. But others have to do the work to resolve the issues.

              • LG says:

                so now, this Charles pushes his blogs direct to FB. That’s FB abuse. He must be starved for followers.

              • Joe America says:

                He is actually acquiring a bit of a following on FB. He writes well and uses popular incidents well as the subject material of his commentary. I just wish he were not so intent upon being a devils advocate, critic and intellectual flame-thrower and tried instead to build something useful.

              • LG says:

                That’s FB pollution 😣

  26. LG says:

    Joe, there is supposedly a Charles England (White-looking) who was a professor and died in 2012/Internet. This Charles Englund, in question, a pseudonym only?

  27. The Duterte Administration and Filipinos who support extrajudicial and summary executions have forgotten a simple but important ethical principle: good intentions/objectives (elimination of drugs and related problems) do not justify illegal or immoral means (extrajudicial/summary killings).

    • Joe America says:

      Does the concept of ethics even exist in the Philippines? In a meaningful way? I note the Senate failed to chair an ethics committee even as its own were jailed.

  28. pilgrimsurgeon says:

    Killing our own brothers and sisters dates back to the beginning of time when Cain murdered Abel. Such a crime reached up to the heavens as we read in Genesis. God was not happy then. I seriously doubt God is happy with the summary killings we now see in the Philippines. Why would my countrymen/women celebrate such killings? Have we lost our decency, our morality, our spirituality, our religious values and traditions?

  29. uht says:

    I always thought we, as a people were better than that….and I still do. We just need to show a better path for people, that there are other paths besides killing everything in sight.

    Off-topic: And I thought nine-dash was bad enough already

  30. Jojo says:

    **Credits to Teodoro Valte for this comment** Due process? In their eyes, the authorities are guilty of ejk even before internal affairs have completed their investigation. The 300 or so killed were because the police gunned them down in cold blood. Nasaan po ang “due process?”
    Never mind the sheer number of operations…7,000. These were not surrenderees, these are actual operations meaning that they somehow resisted arrest. That most of them was taken alive is a feat on its own.
    Now let’s talk about lethal force. If you are in a fire fight, one would not do a rambo and charge at your enemy with gun blazing. Of course you will run for cover. In this situation, which part of the body will be open? You probably guessed it, it would be the head and torso when they fire. Can you shoot these parts without a kill shot?
    That is your opinion, your heart goes out to these people. Perhaps you have never seen or heard what these people can do. A family of 3 was stabbed to death, why? For a few hundred pesos so the assailant can buy a sachet of shabu. This never made it in the news. How about a student on his way home from school and was stabbed dead just because di gusto nung addict pagmumukha nya. Again, this never made it in the news. Or your house getting shot at, the .45 cal slug going through the window, through your parent’s bedroom, through the door then the living room and finally embedding itself on the concrete wall.
    These are but a few things why i stand behind this war on drugs. Common people such as myself will have other stories. We are at the frontline where these people are, not behind a guarded subdivision.
    300 may seem like a big number, sure but against 7000 arrests where the police officer’s life is on the line? Don’t you think it may be hasty to say “di na kapanipaniwala na lumaban ganyan karami.”
    In my books, you want to live? Surrender like the 140,000 or so who did. If not, join the statistics, they may end up behind bars or 6 feet under. They have made their choice. **Credits to Teodoro Valte for this comment**

    • Joe America says:

      Jojo, thank’s for providing this point of view. I have a blog coming out in a few minutes. The problem I have with the aggressive approach is that it is holding the druggies, the outcasts of society, responsible for their ills. I think the accountability rests with those who have governed poorly – corruptly and ineffectively – to create such a large number of people who can only find their rewards by popping drugs.

  31. If not for the human rights issues and the heavy emphasis on the war on drugs, I think this administration would have probably been close to the best, if not THE best the country has ever had. But then again, it is probably still too early to say that and not to mention that I think that we really can’t have it all as of now. But still, maybe in the future…

    But on the war on drugs, though I don’t condone it, I can’t help but think it somewhat necessary and the best we could probably do now is try to minimize the impact of it. So why this kind of mindset? Well, from what I’ve observed, I think the saying “out of sight, out of mind” comes into play. As I’ve mentioned in another post, we usually have to make things huge so that Filipinos will realize that there is a problem. As for making them move into action, it’s a completely different thing altogether as we don’t have just to make it huge, we actually have to make it *stupidly* huge for that to happen.

    And with this war on drugs, it seems that rehabilitation and drug awareness efforts were just spearheaded now because, well… Things got stupidly huge. Because really now, imagine if there were no ‘war on drugs’ right now, do you think these kinds of actions would’ve happened? If we just stuck to what was always done, we would probably be at par with Mexico already when the people start to realize the problem . I don’t know if you’ll agree but most Filipinos always did seem to need to experience huge adversities before they started doing anything. Sure, it really shouldn’t be the case and there are surely better ways. But as of now? IMO, there really is no other way. I don’t think slow change like what most liberals here are advocating will work. The Filipino seems to have built a strong tolerance against it. Given that, it seems to be that stagnation will be regression and slow change will be stagnation. That’s how much it sucks. Call me a cynic, but hey, I think it is warranted. =| As bad as the events are right now, I think we really just have to start from somewhere so that the people can start to get moving. The option we would have after that would be to just try to redirect the direction once we’ve started moving. And looking at the current administration, it seems that they’ll be easier to nudge towards a new direction given the resources available to the common people right now and not to mention that they do also seem to listen to them.

    • karlgarcia says:

      War on drugs yes but ejk no.Can war on drugs be done without ejk? maximum possible tolerance before killing.

    • Joe America says:

      The conceptual argument makes sense, except for one thing. The pain of those whose loved ones were taken away without them saying good bye or understanding why.

      • And that repercussion is something that I really cannot deny. However, does it actually not make sense? Though there is nothing bad with idealism, I’d just like to say that a dose of pragmatism every now and then can really help a lot as it can break paralysis resulting from the waiting of proper ideals that actually bring about more problems at times due to passivity. Because really now, that is what put us in this situation in the first place. And given the magnitude of the problem now, do you really think that we could actually avoid it completely? And as for the brutality, I think I agree with the comment by jojo. Let us put it into perspective:


        Though I’d really prefer that the deaths be much lower, who is to say that it really is not as low as it can get given our current situation? Does distrusting the police accomplish anything? Can it really not be said that most of them are indeed just doing their jobs? Only ‘most’ because I won’t deny that there are surely those that were out of line and they should surely be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But to cast doubt on all of them as a whole? Does it help? Though you may say that this is not intended, this is how it is perceived by many right now. And do note that from what I see, this is a stance that’ll breed much distrust with the police and the people in general and I think it really won’t help. This can be seen with the USA where there is now a vicous cycle of distrust between police and blacks, which in a way are ‘outcasts’. But then again, not casting tthe doubt on the police would be casting the doubt on these outcasts, which is also a problem, if not even a bigger one. Hmm… I think what I’d like to say is there should probably be some sort of balance on these doubts? But then again, you can’t doubt a person if he’s dead… Uhm… I’ think I see the dilemma now.

        You know what, I think body cams would be a quick and simple solution to this problem… But how would that fair for the police that would have to wear them? I actually have no idea. They’d probably see it as distrust on their part. But then again, that would probably also imply that they also distrust their own actions.

        • Link related:

          “THE PASAY City police have recommended the filing of murder charges and an administrative complaint against two of its men who killed drug suspects Jaypee Bertes and his father, Renato, inside their headquarters on July 7.

          Chief Insp. Rolando Baula, head of the Station Investigation and Detective Management, said the recommendation against PO2 Alipio Balo Jr. and PO1 Michael Tomas would be forwarded to the Special Investigation Task Group “Bertes” created by the Southern Police District.

          According to Baula, they could not yet file a case in court as the victims’ relatives refused to cooperate with their investigators, apparently fearing a whitewash.

          Instead, Harra Kazuo, Jaypee Bertes’ widow, went to the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) for help.

          In an investigation report obtained by the Inquirer on Tuesday, the Pasay police said Balo and Tomas may have violated the standard operating procedure in handling persons in custody. ”

          So how do you suppose will the police prove themselves if people won’t actually give them a chance as they seem to just bypass them altogether for the CHR? People seem to scream due process and respect for the rule of law yet they themselves also don’t follow it. They seem to only abide by it when they know that that following it is to their advantage.

          Another reason why the situation we are in now sucks big time.

          • Bill in Oz says:

            I have just realised that this whole discussion about the war on drugs in the Philippines is missing a wider regional dimension. Three neighboring countries enforce the death penalty on drugs : Singapore, Malaysia, Viet Nam Indonesia. In fact Indonesia is about to execute convicted drug criminals this week. Singapore has had this policy for decades.So has Malaysia. Indonesia resumed executions in the past year or so. I suspect that Thailand also has a similar approach but I am not sure. That is a regional pattern to a common problem.

            I suggest that Duterte’s approach on this issue is of the same character as in Indonesia or Malaysia or Singapore.With the added twist that as the Filipino justice system is corrupt & operates ‘for’ the wealthy & educated elites. So he has encouraged short circuiting the justice system….

            I wonder what are the reasons for this similar regional response ? Compared to say Australia where drug use is also rampant among certain groups but draws no “kill them all” response in the public or in the police forces.

            Any thoughts on this ?

            • Joe America says:

              I think we should kill alcoholics.

              • Joe America says:

                And liquor store owners including the manager of Robinson’s Supermarket in Tacloban . . .

              • Joe America says:

                And old people who become a burden to society.

              • On a satire mode, again Joe, I see….

              • Joe America says:

                When sense can’t make the point right, go to nonsense. 🙂

              • Bill in Oz says:

                Joe I’ve been afflicted with brownouts today and not seen your responses till just now…

                I do not think alcoholics should be killed even though my father was one so I know all about alcoholism and it’s impacts on others…

                In my comment above I was not trying to ‘justify’ the deaths of drug pushers or drug takers in the Philippines…I was simply seeing a wider regional context…And hinting that maybe there is a similar cultural context …leading to similar outcomes…Eg a Pan Malay response or whatever…Where is Irineo ? he may be able to offer something here…

              • Joe America says:

                Tomorrow morning, Bill. I put this on the table squarely for discussion.

            • Bill in Oz says:

              Joe, some added details re the offcoal response to drug pushers etc in other SEA countries

              From the printed version of The Australian page 9 :’ Death Row Inmates in Indonesia were abused & tortured during interrogation”. The article goes on to explain that there are 14 people who were given 72 hours notice of execution on Tuesday as “drug convicts’. All claimed that they were abused and tortured when arrested or during interrogation. Among those facing execution by firing squad are Chinese, Nigerianss, Pakistani & an Indian as well as Indonesians.

          • Joe America says:

            Good to see that case filed. Now factor in President Duterte’s comment that no policeman will be jailed in the drug fight effort.

            • But has Duterte already done anything to prove that he will actually follow through with what he said? Do also factor in that he says a lot of things. And as many have already surely observed, even to their irritation at times: Duterte does backtrack a lot and he doesn’t mind that he does.

              But since a case has been filed already, let’s see where it will go. If it goes well, would it be then right to give the police the benefit of the doubt afterwards? If it doesn’t, then something is indeed not quite right and something should indeed be done about it.

              Lastly, to be quite frank, a general note that we’re all working on assumptions here and we actually still don’t have little idea of which ones are right. The uncertainty surely boggles and it does indeed suck. And IMO, I think we really can’t quite do much about it. Well, except just jump in into the darkness and see if the assumptions are indeed true or not. And from what I see, the good thing about this is that some people will become more courageous and they shall be able to learn to stand their ground. In turn, these people will probably also be the ones that may help us in the future. But in the case that none will stand up, which I highly doubt, I think the country’s many problems will still be forcibly brought to light as it’ll become increasingly impossible to ignore.

              And that’s the thing with adversity. It can change stuff.

              • Joe America says:

                “I think we really can’t quite do much about it.” I don’t share that view, and it is why I write to oppose the killing rampage. I don’t write to oppose President Duterte, but to oppose his approach to drugs. Each article goes out to several thousand people, many of them opinion leaders and journalists. I know for a fact that it influences their thinking, and that it leads to deeds, even if that is one person talking to another. The alternative, to remain silent, is . . . for me . . . an act of irresponsibility. Being silent means have a voice, or a platform, and not using it to speak for the best interest of the Philippines. Why would I want to accept bad things for the Philippines?

              • Joe America says:

                “I think we really can’t quite do much about it.” I don’t share that view, and it is why I write to oppose the killing rampage. I don’t write to oppose President Duterte, but to oppose his approach to drugs. Each article goes out to several thousand people, many of them opinion leaders and journalists. I know for a fact that it influences their thinking, and that it leads to deeds, even if that is one person talking to another. The alternative, to remain silent, is . . . for me . . . an act of irresponsibility. Being silent means having a voice, or a platform, and not using it to speak for the best interest of the Philippines. Why would I want to let bad things happen to the Philippines?

              • @Joe America, it seems that I may have implied that silence is the only alternative and I’d like to correct that. If anything, we should be making more noise and personally, what you’re doing is actually really laudable. Nevertheless, I think I’m here only to provide some perspective, hoping that some middle ground may actually be found. Because as I see it, there are currently two views to it:

                1.) From your perspective, you seem to imply that Duterte dictates that all of these be people killed.

                2.) From Duterte’s perspective, he seems to imply that you people dictate that not one person be killed.

                Now, do you think that any of these views is possible? How about a middle ground of minimizing it? Because to frank, both seem to be asking the impossible. Oh, and some emphasis on ‘dictates’.

                And to share an article I’ve stumbled upon:

                ” As a result, it feels as though everyone is an angry fucking extremist and is full of hate and violence** and the world is coming undone thread by thread, when the truth is that most of the population occupies a silent middle ground and is actually probably not in so much disagreement with one another.

                We become only exposed to the most extreme negative aspects of certain groups of people, giving us a skewed view of how other people in the world really think, act, and live. When we are exposed to police, we only see the worst 0.1% of police. When we are exposed to poor African Americans, we’re only exposed to the worst 0.1% of poor African Americans. When we’re exposed to Muslim immigrants, we only hear about the worst 0.1% of Muslim immigrants. When we are exposed to chauvinist, shitty white men, we’re only exposed to the worst 0.1%, and when we’re exposed to angry and entitled social justice warriors, we’re only exposed to the worst 0.1%. ”


                I do recommend reading the whole article. Though it was in the context of Trump, well, when there is Trump, Duterte usually relates in some way. However, in the PH’s case, but maybe even still with the US, it does seem to ignore the fact that though quality of life has been objectively improving: It’s just that relative to the difference in classes, it seems to have stayed the same.

                And on the ‘**’ note, for our case, it still applies. For your view of Duterte, it is probably obvious. For Duterte’s view on you guys, you’re full of hate and violence because you tolerate the inaction when it comes to these people, hiding in the covers of human rights and due process, when it is known that these are seemingly non-existent in the country and he doesn’t current have a handle on that. Yet.

                Lastly, I think when I said that we can’t do much about it, it is with the context of ‘we’ being the people like myself who do not actually have their own platform. Personally, it is probably a frustration on my part as I feel that nothing significant will ever happen by speaking up. And it isn’t exactly unfounded given that there really has been a many occasion of speaking up where it had usually fell on deaf ears.

                But then again, here I am. Posting. Heh.

              • Joe America says:

                Hahaha, and something happened, for I read your posting, and found it thoughtful, provocative as to my own position in the extreme, and well worth responding to.

                The moderating position is the law, as it represents society’s codification of the values and acts deemed important to define. The Constitution does not permit the death penalty, and we can presume the authors were not extremist in so writing that section into the document. They can be defined as historically extreme if modern law re-inserts the death penalty.

                Most civil (civilized) societies also have laws that mandate that law enforcement use certain tests of reason before unloading their cannons into the suspects. Mainly because that is what they are, suspects presumed innocent, and we ought not be willy nilly shooting them.

                The Philippines has had some 500 killings recently, mostly PNP but also a lot of vigilante-style killings. That is five hundred. Not 44 or 67 or 100 or 200 but 500.

                So who is outside the law in their arguments? Me, or the President, given that he is directly responsible for the daily acts of his police department, and directly responsible for stopping vigilante killings, which are themselves outside the law.

                Now who is the extremist? The guy advocating for the law (me), or the guy apparently willing to set the law aside?

              • On the point of human rights and due process, I’d like to add that it is seemingly non-existent because it is seen only as a facade as it seems to apply only when it is convenient rather than all the time.

                And as for what Duterte can do about it, well, as he said on some interview, if you want to ask for due process, you bother the judiciary, not him as he is in the executive.

                So until he can do something about the judiciary, he has to first play their game first so at least he will be accomplishing something while he waits for some changes, while at the same time, put some pressure on them to change as well.

              • @Joe America, I guess my additional note was late. You’ve ninja’d me. haha

                As for your reply, okay. You say that you are advocating the law as the law is better. And ideally, it is suppose to be as what you’ve said. But looking at this realistically, is it really the case?

                I don’t know if you’ll agree but as stated by Duterte in some of his interviews, the five pillars of the Philippines’ justice system—law enforcement, prosecution, judiciary, correctional institutions and the community—are dysfunctional. And it really does not seem far from reality.

                With that said, do you really think that playing by the rules will yield something significant? From the way I see it, in case that you do play by the ‘rules’, chances are you either get dispatched (either killed or removed from office), or get corrupted yourself. So what I think is happening now is he is toeing the line of what is legal and what is illegal? Moving in the grey areas so that he can reach them while putting the pressure on them with little repercussion?

                So given this, am I saying that the killings should continue then? Well, in a way, both yes and no. Why? From the way I see it, I say yes because it will continue as it is unavoidable. I’m sure there are cases, if not most, where there really was retaliation from the operation. As you’ve said, there are certain tests of reason before unloading their cannons into the suspects. And I think self-defense does indeed fall within that

                But again, it can’t be denied that there are abuses every now and then. So given that, I also say: No, the killings shouldn’t continue. Specifically, these ones.

                So to reiterate, is it really not possible to minimize it? But that is assuming that it is not already minimized. Because in the case that the casualties are already minimized, and we still say that they shouldn’t kill, then we may be asking for the police to might as well put themselves in more unnecessary danger than they need to. But then again, they do have to prove concretely that this is indeed the case. That it really self-defense.

                But then again, that will probably be the job of the judiciary. Can I be held in contempt for this? Heh.

              • Joe America says:

                Haha, no, a sense of humor softens many a great blow upside the head. If Mr. Duterte has trouble with the way the laws are dealt with, he has control of the legislature and could easily recast the laws to fit what works. That is the better approach versus killing people who are largely innocent of creating the problems with the laws. I’m working on a blog that touches on what police regulations say about use of force. If I’m not too lazy, that will be out in a day or two.

                Some use of force is necessary. I’d guess that 500 deaths in a few weeks suggests force is being levied in ways regulations are intended to stop. If there is a new set of regulations, or rules of play, in force, they ought to be communicated clearly so that all players in the field know the rules. And they ought to be developed and have input from all agencies or stakeholders, including the Human Rights Commission. It is NOT contemplated in the Constitution that the President would autocratically rewrite and implement laws off the top of his head. Process is important. Campaign promises ought not mean processes and laws are ignored.

        • Joe America says:

          I smile as I read you talking your way in circles. Chickens and eggs, and they are all murdering one another. I break through the cycle by saying that a human killing another human is wrong, and from there go to the belief there are ways other than slaughter to stop the flow of drugs. Like, pinch the pipelines, educate people, give them jail or treatment. It is fruitless to try to kill off the marketplace, the retailers and buyers.

          • Joe America says:

            I would add that, in most instances, drug use is a victimless crime. Like drinking. And I’d bet there are more deaths and trouble from alcohol across the land than from drugs. But maybe I’m clueless . . .

            • Drug abuse, like one of the synthetic drug kind IMO is far from a victim less crime…heinous crimes (multiple stab wounds numbering to more than 50 in some cases, raping even old women – who will do these if they are still in their sensible minds?) are committed by those under its influence, theft starting from the abusers’ own homes, then from neighbors’ then from the rest of the community. The immediate family is a victim too, the problem of the high cost of rehab, if the synthetic drug abuser, can still be rehabilitated (I learned from LCpl_X (@LCpl_X) that the human mind rarely recovers from synthetic drug abuse) broken families, broken society. To finance their addiction, they become users/pushers, in and out from prisons and.or rehab centers. Drug lords, drug manufacturers should be burned at the stake, or killed by firing squad or hanging – through due process, of course.

            • “But maybe I’m clueless . . .”


              This comment actually got me thinking.

              I know there’s a difference between drunks and druggies… most drunks I know, will never do drugs (or have done so, and just weren’t fans of it).

              Druggies however I know are closer associated to crime, either predatory crimes or “victimless” crimes, such as prostitution, etc. If you’re rich and a drug addict you don’t have to worry about getting creative.

              So though I agree alcoholism, is “victimless” (not counting self debasement, public nuisance, and screwing over loved ones),

              I disagree that drug addicts are of the same stuff… drug addiction usually means more prostitution, more burglaries, more thefts, more robberies, etc.

              There is a difference, but I can’t

              quite figure out why alcoholics are more tame, than drug addicts? Maybe because alcohol is easily available? or cheaper? One can simply spend 10 minutes standing at a freeway exit, and get enough to buy a 40 oz..

              Or maybe because as a whole getting drunk is a social affair, where as shooting up or free basing is done in private… so less taboo equals acceptance of one particular addiction over another.

              >>> This is a good point, Joe… plenty of stand-by’s over there, just drinking their lives away, what’s to be done about these good-for-nothings? Since DU30’s already got druggies on their toes over there, why not stretch it out further to target those drunks that hog the karaoke machines—- other Filipinos wanna sing too, LOL! j/k although in some barangays that’s a serious issue, LOL!

              But seriously now, most of those incest kids in orphanages were products of drunken nights… Dad, grandpa, uncle, brother, etc. got drunk, returned home and decided to do the unthinkable. I’m sure drugs also play a role, but from what I heard most were simply drunks.

              So who’ll target the beer, liquor industry over there?

              • Joe America says:

                You may copy/paste this comment in my blog for tomorrow morning in which I ask why we are not shooting the manager of Robinson’s supermarket, where Jack Daniels can be had, and Red Horse? Some users imbibe and climb into their weapon of choice, Ford or Mitsubishi, and mow down dogs, kids and tricycle drivers. Or go home and beat the wife and kick the dog.

              • Probably a social thing.


                “One of the ways this theory was first established is through rat experiments — ones that were injected into the American psyche in the 1980s, in a famous advert by the Partnership for a Drug-Free America. You may remember it. The experiment is simple. Put a rat in a cage, alone, with two water bottles. One is just water. The other is water laced with heroin or cocaine. Almost every time you run this experiment, the rat will become obsessed with the drugged water, and keep coming back for more and more, until it kills itself.

                The advert explains: “Only one drug is so addictive, nine out of ten laboratory rats will use it. And use it. And use it. Until dead. It’s called cocaine. And it can do the same thing to you.”

                But in the 1970s, a professor of Psychology in Vancouver called Bruce Alexander noticed something odd about this experiment. The rat is put in the cage all alone. It has nothing to do but take the drugs. What would happen, he wondered, if we tried this differently? So Professor Alexander built Rat Park. It is a lush cage where the rats would have colored balls and the best rat-food and tunnels to scamper down and plenty of friends: everything a rat about town could want. What, Alexander wanted to know, will happen then?

                In Rat Park, all the rats obviously tried both water bottles, because they didn’t know what was in them. But what happened next was startling.

                The rats with good lives didn’t like the drugged water. They mostly shunned it, consuming less than a quarter of the drugs the isolated rats used. None of them died. While all the rats who were alone and unhappy became heavy users, none of the rats who had a happy environment did.

                At first, I thought this was merely a quirk of rats, until I discovered that there was — at the same time as the Rat Park experiment — a helpful human equivalent taking place. It was called the Vietnam War. Time magazine reported using heroin was “as common as chewing gum” among U.S. soldiers, and there is solid evidence to back this up: some 20 percent of U.S. soldiers had become addicted to heroin there, according to a study published in the Archives of General Psychiatry. Many people were understandably terrified; they believed a huge number of addicts were about to head home when the war ended.

                But in fact some 95 percent of the addicted soldiers — according to the same study — simply stopped. Very few had rehab. They shifted from a terrifying cage back to a pleasant one, so didn’t want the drug any more.

                Professor Alexander argues this discovery is a profound challenge both to the right-wing view that addiction is a moral failing caused by too much hedonistic partying, and the liberal view that addiction is a disease taking place in a chemically hijacked brain. In fact, he argues, addiction is an adaptation. It’s not you. It’s your cage.”

            • Bill in Oz says:

              Well we disagree sometimes Joe.. But I am not talking my way in circles. Simply thinking aloud and offering ideas….I agree with your suggestions about stopping the flow. educating people etc.. for my country ! Whether they would work in the Philippines or other countries in the region is an interesting question.

              And one for locals to offer suggestions on.

              Your statement that drug taking is a ‘victimless crime’ is wrong. The funds used to buy drugs are often stolen as the persons taking the drugs are unable to work or work effectively and have low incomes. So there are al the people who are directly robbed or have their homes or vehicles broken into as part of the search for money or valuables to steal.They are victims.

              Living in a community which has even a few of these individuals is a real source of anxiety…The Enquirer 10 days ago reported an instanse of a baranguay terrorised by a drug pushing group. until the police intervened and the group got involved in a shootout.They all were shot.But the police found a fourth body hanging dead inside. The local person who went to the police and brought the gang’s activities to their attention. Would you say ‘informer’ to describe this person ?

              Finally there is the way that drugs like shabu changes the behaviour of drug takers. In a word they become ‘agressive’ & extremely violent. Here in my home town there are constant reports of Meth takers winding in hospital casualty ( emergency ) wards, brought there by friends or family, and then attacking/injuring hospital staff…It’s also been a total waste of precious medical resources.

              In the Philippines I have seen many reports of murdurous knife attacks committed by persons under the influence of shabu…

              • Joe America says:

                Copy paste this tomorrow. I have a response, but will save it until then. It will be our weekend joy, sorting out the agents that warp our personality and drive us to behave badly.

              • Bill in Oz, I’ve known Joe for quite sometime…and I must say, I can distinguish when he is in a satire mood from more serious posts, when his posts oozing with sarcasm and all….please read again:

                Joe America says:
                July 28, 2016 at 9:41 am

                I think we should kill alcoholics.

                Joe America says:
                July 28, 2016 at 9:44 am

                And liquor store owners including the manager of Robinson’s Supermarket in Tacloban . . .
                Joe America says:
                July 28, 2016 at 9:46 am

                And old people who become a burden to society.

                Mary Grace P. Gonzales says:
                July 28, 2016 at 1:03 pm

                On a satire mode, again Joe, I see….

                Joe America says:
                July 28, 2016 at 1:17 pm

                When sense can’t make the point right, go to nonsense.:)

          • I know. I’m aware of the circular logic hence the supposed dilemma. This is probably the case with many Filipinos as well. Minus the awareness. -_-

            As for breaking the cycle, well, sorry mr. Joe but though I somewhat agree that what you said is indeed the way of breaking the cycle, it should be noted that it is not just you that should say it. It is the Filipino in general that should say it. And as I asked on the post above, how do you suppose will you make Filipinos take this action? And no matter how much it sucks, you’ve said it yourself: This conceptual argument seems to makes sense. Yes, there is this one flaw, but IMO, we just have to try our best to minimize it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: