Playing on a strong team

Man to man. [Photo source: manillenials.com]

By Joe America

Let’s talk man to man . . . and man to woman.

I recently had debates with two social media friends who had critical words about Senator Trillanes. One said the Senator made a “hash” of the hearing in which he asked to see Paolo Duterte’s tattoo, and the other said he would support Trillanes even if he was an “arrogant asshole”.

This reminded me about how people had diminished Mar Roxas by complaining about his photo ops, or buying into the fake news about Yolanda and his DILG or DOT service. I don’t think Roxas was defeated by 16 million “bobo” Duterte voters. He was defeated by thousands of right regular people who had a minor bone to pick, complained out loud, and thus turned millions of borderline voters against him.

So I flinched when I saw the same thing occurring with Trillanes.

Do you know why I received a SONA mention and was invited to lunch with President Aquino? It wasn’t because I kissed up to the Administration and spouted yellow blood. It was because I accepted that he was entitled to have a personality of his own, he was entitled to do things differently than I would do them, and he was even entitled to make a mistake and it would not take away my ability to look at the TOTAL PICTURE and support him for the overwhelming amount of good work being done.

We did not elect Jesus back in 2010. We elected a president, and a downright proper one, too. One who could appear on any global stage as an equal, could battle China man to man in a court of law, and who could get a standing ovation in Japan’s legislature that was about the last time anybody cheered for anything about the Philippines.

Yet a lot of anti-Duterte people continue to carp about President Aquino. And so do the pro-Duterte people, obviously.

I think too many Filipinos are often self-centered, fair-weather friends who don’t want to associate with anyone having flaws that they think might reflect badly on them. It’s like, “okay, if I support someone who is flawed, people will think I’m dumb.”

My advice?

GET OVER IT!

Your cause will never be carried by a band of virgin angels. They will have flaws. Your cause will never have a father figure, a nobel prize winner, a hero, or a Jesus. If you vote well, it is possible that you’ll get a human being who goes to the crapper just like you do, snores, had an affair sometime in history, guesses on big issues now and then, but EVERY TIME does the best that he is able to do.

And if you elect a person of principle, why would he or she do otherwise?

Do you really think that President Aquino was a scheming manipulator, a trapo of no redeeming qualities, a lazy guy of no distinction whatsoever? A slouch? A softie? A mistake riddled guy who commissioned Mamasapano because he was foolish?

If so, I’d say you don’t know your ass from a hole in the ground.

Look, I’m calling it straight today because it is important.

You HAVE to be more forgiving of your teammates, or you will have a lousy team. You’ll never win anything. If you air every grievance you have, and others do the same, you are sunk. Dead in the water. A crabby collection of carping losers.

That’s why players on winning teams leave their arguments in private, in the locker room, and keep the public view clean and positive. Public criticisms have meaning. They diminish people.

It is in your best interest to keep Trillanes strong. A hero. So the idiots he is fighting see unity and strength in the opposition, not a pack of hyenas gnawing on one other.

That is true for everyone else on the team. Senator De Lima had an affair with her driver? So the hell what? She’s a regular human being, a smart and good one, not a robot. Leni Robredo is nice, almost a nun, do you want her in charge of the AFP killing machine? HELL YES! She’d use might right. Senator Trillanes is stubborn and so righteous that he’s gotten into coup trouble. GREAT! A guy with good values AND courage! Senator Hontiveros, wrong party and people say she’s made mistakes in the past. Well, we’re not in the past, and experience is WHY she is so smart now!!!! I love that lady’s courage and ability to speak right to the point.

Make them strong.

And your cause will be strong.

 

Comments
174 Responses to “Playing on a strong team”
  1. NHerrera says:

    Joe Jr — Yes Dad; you are Ok with that one too. Can we now have breakfast; Mom is waiting.

  2. Miela says:

    I think too many Filipinos are often self-centered, fair-weather friends who don’t want to associate with anyone having flaws that they think might reflect badly on them.

    You nailed it here, Joe Am. I think this is the very reason why many Filipinos won’t directly criticize the current government for giving away Philippine territory to China and about the EJK. The standard response is, “Don’t be so nega”! (In conyo accent). It’s so bad for their image if they admit they made a mistake supporting Duterte.

    But my assessment is, they can’t do to Trillianes what they did to Mar Roxas. Mar is “too nice” while Trillanes has the strong-willed, young military officer character. Palaban. He’s been through worse, so I don’t think Duterte can taunt him.

    • NHerrera says:

      Historical fact from my recollection: to Joe’s credit and some others here in TSH — he and others were earlier supporters of Grace Poe but turned strong critics on her, not for minor flaws but some fundamental flaws in her character as the events unfolded.

      And if I can recall too: the earlier critics of Trillanes here have become admirers.

      I suppose the main reason for that is The Big Picture that they see in things both in the cases of Poe and Trillanes.

      • Miela says:

        I think culturally, the “enduring” support for Duterte comes from the “saving face” attitude common among Filipinos (not all, but still common). Can’t look bad, can’t admit mistakes — this becomes more evident as they are “higher” in the social hierarchy.

        • Diego Masken says:

          You’re right! Many relatives and friends who voted/supported Duterte can’t look me in the eyes when I point out his flaws, double-talks and treachery, but just keep silent or nod hesitatingly. But I notice and believe they are regretful of their previous vote and support of him. I think they were taken for a ride.
          By the way, I’m a long time follower of this blog but seldom comment.

          • NHerrera says:

            I am sure Joe will drop a line of greetings, but if I may: nice to read your post; please continue with your posts here — it will be nice to read some more of the reactions of your relatives and friends as the events in the Philippines unfold.

          • Well thanks for the observation, Diego, and especially for being a blog loyalist. Encouraging, both points.

  3. karlgarcia says:

    I like the locker room analogy.
    I will no longer blame twitter for public bashings, it is already part of life, the only way is to find ways to keep it in the locker room, and I am not talking of boy talk and girl talk.

    I know this is hard, even in actual games, you see coaches scolding their players, all those though love talk, etc.

  4. Wilfredo G. Villanueva says:

    We, collectively, need a good spanking. My favorite turn-off: “I don’t like Duterte; I don’t like Noynoy either.” As if we had all the time in the world and a billion choices. Billion, get it? The bus has left a long time ago and we are still debating on itinerary. That basic. A snake has slithered through the cracks of our culture and we are undecided on what to do with it. Oh yes, the snake is venomous, but snakes are that way. Besides, we don’t have rats in the house, don’t we? But do we really need a snake to rid our house of rats and mice? Won’t a cat do? Ah, we don’t like cats. They will scratch the sofa. We hate cats. And so on while the snake with its deadly bite waits in the wings smirking and being a snake.

    • NHerrera says:

      Oh yes. Joe, you struck a gold seam there. You got Wil using: snakes, venom, rats; the bus left, we are still debating where to go; we need a good spanking. It’s when Wil starts using those when I get a little scared (of the spanking on my bony butt) but mostly inspired.

  5. During the Clinton-Lewinski scandal, a Sacramento Bee reader wrote to the editor, “Send all the girls to the WH if that makes this economy so good!”

    Here in the PH the typical reader would be thinking, “If you’re good to all (country) but flawed, down with you! If this country has turned into a killing field and is turning the Peso to zero, but you’re good to me (think Catholic Mocha & Co,) you’re an unblemished God, bossing!

    • andrewlim8 says:

      Moral tradeoffs is the common thing for many of our leaders today.

      Pimentels: Anything for federalism, even if thousands die and the Marcoses come back

      Sotto: Couples for Christ and anti-RH stalwart, but suspends all that to support fascism

      Villars: Anything for our business, even if the country goes down the path of the depraved

      Pacquia: Bible toting when convenient, self indulgent when not

      Duterte’s economic team: build build build on the bones of the dead

  6. andrewlim8 says:

    Joe,

    In the previous blog, I put out a warning to readers that these could be “commenters” exploring a new form of trolling, specially on blogs with informed discussions like this one.

    With minor variations, it takes on the form of “I don’t support Duterte/Marcos BUT…” or the reverse:
    “I understand/support Trillanes BUT,,,”

    It is an opportunity to insert their propaganda.

    There was one guy who was pissed off at Trillanes’ “arrogance” but speaks about nothing else about the issues that Trillanes deals with. When they refuse to reply when you bring up proportionality and moral equivalence issues, then that may confirm it.

    Inability to think critically and weigh things or a more sophisticated form of trolling?

  7. karlgarcia says:

    From an FB friend: Jon Limap
    Take it for what it is worth.
    I still can’t say if this is the exact opposite of what Joe wants to tell us.
    ( edited one word)
    —–
    Let’s get things straight. Again.

    We CAN protest what the government is doing or how it is doing things WITHOUT wanting the President to resign or be removed.

    We CAN oppose the current administration (e.g., Duterte) and its allies (e.g., Marcos) WITHOUT liking, admiring, or advocating their detractors (e.g. Trillanes) or opponents (e.g. Aquinos).

    We CAN root for the War Against Drugs WHILE condemning its current methods (e.g., haphazard police work, social media as evidence, wanton carelessness leading to deaths) or those taking advantage of it (e.g. random lists, officers killing kids for quotas).

    We CAN oppose China AND the US at the same time.

    We CAN love the Philippines WITHOUT loving Duterte.

    So if you wanna proclaim your monopoly of righteousness or love for country, f- you. You don’t know jackshit.

    #politics

  8. jym says:

    I love this piece Joe…keep it coming. Thanks!

  9. Gemino H. Abad says:

    Right on, Joe! — We’ve go to mend ourselves first — individually — then, only then, we’ll have a “national team” against would-be dictators, tutas, trapos, sycophants, mendicants, that pack of hyenas!

  10. Edgar Lores says:

    *******
    1. I do not mind criticism of a teammate.

    2. I think I would be able to see the criticism in perspective.

    3. The perspective is:

    3.1. What is the essential character of the teammate?
    3.2. What are his flaws?
    3.3. What are the essential functions of the teammate?
    3.4. And do the flaws impede functions?

    4. I believe I would be able to sense the essential character of a teammate, and his flaws would be as nothing as long as they do not impede function.

    5. The other aspect of criticism is whether it should be kept within the team or publicized outside the team.

    5.1. First of all, criticism is essential. There can be no improvement without knowledge and acknowledgment of flaws.

    5.2. As a truth-seeker, my tendency is toward openness and transparency. But certainly, there are issues: (a) an issue of privacy and (b) the need to know. These two issues relate to relevance.

    5.3. So the question is: what is the relevance to the public of knowing the flaws of teammates? If the flaws are personal or if they do not impede function, then there is no relevance.

    5.3.1. Therefore, in the matter of Senators De Lima and Hontiveros, I would dismiss their past flaws. Their essential characters are pure.

    5.3.2. In the matter of Mar Roxas, we are dealing with spin, and we should have been able to see through it, and detect the essential character of the man.

    5.3.3. In the matter of PNoy, I do not see DAP or Mamasapano as flaws. These were efforts to do the right thing, to accelerate the pace of development and to capture a terrorist. The stubborn loyalty to subordinates may indeed be a flaw – as is Trump’s lack of that virtue. But, again, the essential character of the man is one of incorruptibility and dedication to duty.

    6. The criticism of Senator Trillanes that he made a hash of his interview with Paolo is opinion. I watched the Senate hearing, and I must confess my reaction then was that the Senator had stuffed it. With the advantage of hindsight, I now see it was brilliant theater.

    6.1. Upon whose head does the Sword of Damocles hover? Is it not over the head of the one with the alleged dragon tattoo?
    *****

    • There is criticism for learning and criticism to raise one’s image and esteem. The former has proper forums (the locker room) and the latter weakens the team. Buncha ball hogs.

      • Edgar Lores says:

        *******
        Ah, then we are looking at motivation.

        Still, the veracity of the criticism remains — regardless of motivation.
        *****

        • I would agree, except I don’t want to lose the point that team play is hard to find among even those who agree Duterte is damaging the nation. It is imperative that people stop tearing teammates down if they want to win.

          • Put another way, I think a lot of Filipinos don’t have your rational balance or maturity. They need to learn new disciplines to succeed.

          • Edgar Lores says:

            *******
            1. Interesting discussion.

            2. The call for unity is not misplaced.

            3. In-fighting is deplorable.

            4. My main point is that we should take great care not to discourage internal criticism by any means. Dissent can be properly evaluated and handled. Internal criticism does not necessarily result in the weakness of the team. It may have the opposite effect because flaws are not hidden and are properly addressed.

            4.1. Yes, perhaps a certain kind of maturity is required. (And thank you for the confidence.)

            4.2. Recall that Duterte fired someone because he disagreed with Duterte on the number of drug addicts. This happens when the impulse to stifle internal criticism is coupled with the power to do so.

            4.3. Fortunately, the above case does not apply… but one can see the danger in unquestioning conformity.

            5. All eyes should be on the prize. But the prize is also the method.
            *****

        • NHerrera says:

          I would like to wade into this, if I may.

          Sometime back, I referenced Max Weber’s rationality concepts, particularly two: instrumental rationality and value rationality. If we are in a perfect world we may satisfy both types. But we are not.

          I believe with Joe that edgar has that unique balance and maturity so that in most instances he is very comfortable being right of the instrumental rationality – value rationality divide; whereas I believe in the case of teams, say, of sports, where players, human as they are, have sensitivities quite unlike edgar’s, Joe sees the advantage of being left of that divide for his Team.

          • Edgar Lores says:

            *******
            1. There is a certain truth that the issue belongs to the dichotomy of instrumental rationality vs. value rationality. Just as an aid:

            1.1. Instrument rationality is about the ends justifying the means.
            1.2. Value rationality is about intrinsic values.

            2. JoeAm’s position, one of instrument rationality, is that criticism of teammates should be avoided because it weakens the team. And a non-unified team cannot win. If there is any criticism, it should be kept within the locker room.

            2.1. My position, allegedly one of value rationality, is that criticism should not be discouraged or stifled but should be evaluated for veracity. (I am not necessarily encouraging criticism. It just is.)

            2.2. Your point that JoeAm’s position is consistent with current norms in sports teams is undoubtedly true. But, at the same time, the weaknesses and strengths of great sports teams and their individual members are endlessly dissected in the media. To me, it matters not whether the criticism is within the locker room or outside.

            3. Is this issue one of instrumental vs. value rationality? In a way, yes, and in a way, no.

            3.1. The value of criticism is whether it mirrors the truth or not. Truth is the intrinsic value. To me, the truth is both the means and the end. If the criticism is untrue, discard it. If the criticism is true, handle it. So, for me, there is no dichotomy.

            3.2. Additionally, I do not hold that internal criticism is necessarily counterproductive. On the contrary. It depends on the attitudes of the participants in the team. Proper evaluation of criticism should lead to a stronger team.
            *****

            • NHerrera says:

              Edgar, I share most of what you wrote, and in fact highlighted your Item 5.1 in my post in

              NHerrera says:
              September 29, 2017 at 12:00 pm

              Another point: instrumental rationality based on my reading of Max Weber is not a simple case of end justifying the means. Weber says — I am paraphrasing here — that in instrumental rationality one looks at the elements or “objects” of the situation or environment and realistic expectation of what the opposition will do, if one is acting against the opposition, and act according to those elements. When Weber uses the word “means” he takes those elements as “conditions” as a premise to his actions. Such action, I may add, includes high-principled values to the extent that the big picture can accommodate it.

              On the other hand, he notes that value rationality, again paraphrasing here, gives a high regard to admirable values — ethics, morality and other high-principles — independently of the prospects of success.

              I am an engineer. In building a bridge one takes account of safety, costs, and other relevant considerations. To make it ultra safe, the cost may become prohibitive. There are, of course, codes approved for use of the engineer that relieves him of the pain of decision in designing the bridge that is not very very safe — but this code is the result of instrumental rationality considerations by a committee of sorts.

              • Edgar Lores says:

                *******
                NHerrera, thanks.

                I am guilty of reductionism. The two short “definitions” just served as anchoring points. I realize they are a vast simplification.
                *****

            • If the truth is a device used by the untruthful to kill off truth-tellers, one might be wise to set truth aside as an ultimate value until all parties agree it is the ultimate, unassailable value and are intellectually and emotionally healthy enough to debate what it is without prejudice. A better interim ultimate value might be gaining the political strength needed to defeat the untruthful and rid them from the deadly playing field.

              • Here is an example of the truths being dispensed these days: http://news.mb.com.ph/2017/09/29/trillanes-gang-wrecking-the-senate/

                If one is honest (those who are rubbed wrong by Sen Trillanes) and says Trillanes comes across as arrogant or ineffective, it supports this version of the truth.

              • Or, “An idealist and a pragmatist walk into a bar . . .”

              • Edgar Lores says:

                *******
                And the pragmatist turns around and says, “Hi, my name is Ed. What’s yours…?”
                *****

              • Edgar Lores says:

                *******
                This opinion piece is slanted.

                1. Juana’s post adequately rebuts the Pangilinan issue.

                1.1. What people miss in the controversy over the “Seven Deadly Sen” is that a remarkable unity has been achieved among the senators. They have unanimously condemned the killing of innocents, in particular minors, in the Drug War.

                2. The allegation against Trillanes misses the crucial point that his revelations detail specific banks and bank accounts. Duterte disowned having the BPI accounts but was proved to have lied.

                Trillanes may be arrogant — it is a necessary quality to counter the arrogance of Duterte — but it would be hard to argue that he is ineffective. True, there is no confirmation of his allegations regarding the bank accounts and Polong, but he is creating huge waves. As in a typhoon, the surges may be deadlier than the blustery wind.

                So one reads the opinion piece, and either one’s faith in Duterte is confirmed or not. It depends if one sees the kernels.
                *****

              • Re: Getsy Tiglao’s opinion piece.

                She does not have the whole truth and just stating her opinion. Rappler has a well researched article to uncover the truth. I leave readers to opine on whose truth prevails.

                “But lawyer Herminio Bagro III, Pangilinan’s chief-of-staff, refuted this and said the measure was sent to the “publicly available” and “official” e-mail addresses of Senators Sotto, Gordon, Villar, Zubiri, and Gregorio Honasan.

                Pangilinan’s office did not route it to Senate President Aquilino Pimentel III and Manny Pacquiao, party mates of President Rodrigo Duterte in the ruling PDP-Laban.

                Bagro said they sent the copy to the 5 senators on Thursday, September 21, or 4 days before they filed the resolution signed by 16 senators. They also sent a screenshot to prove that they sent it to the 5 senators.

                “As Senator Pangilinan wanted to gather more signatures, on Thursday, September 21, at 12 noon, we sent the copy through the publicly available (http://senate.gov.ph/senators/sen17th.asp) and official email of Senators Richard Gordon, Gregorio Honasan, Cynthia Villar, Miguel Zubiri, and Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III. This was done to inform them about the resolution and to show the number of signatures, and to ask them if they want to sponsor it,” Bagro said in a statement on Friday, September 29.

                He said Gordon “acknowledged receipt of the email on the same day.”

                A day after filing it, the resolution and the names of the 16 co-authors were read on the floor. At the time, there was no manifestation from any of the 7 senators that they wanted to be co-authors.”

                https://www.rappler.com/nation/183792-kiko-pangilinan-resolution-killings-sent-senators-before-filing

              • Edgar Lores says:

                *******
                1. The first premise is faulty. By definition, the untruthful cannot use truth as a device because they cannot assimilate its greater shape. They can only use their versions of the truth, and that would be propaganda.

                2. In the public sphere, it is hardly wise to set “truth” aside. There are many versions of the truth. The “team” should refine the versions to get at the kernel. True, a lot of the versions are noise, and I agree their authors should be disciplined and use critical thinking before releasing their “truths.”

                3. Right now the “team” is really a conglomeration of teams. There is the left, the center, and the right. There are those who are silent and those who are silent no more. Inevitably, there will be differing opinions and approaches.

                4. The differences among the various teams should be set aside for purposes of unity. Unity can be achieved by eliminating in-fighting. This is the main point of the blog and, to a certain extent, indeed to a great extent, I agree.

                5. At this point, there is no central leadership to manage conflict. So the various groups should indeed self-manage themselves. I also agree to this.

                6. My main point is that differences should be allowed to be expressed and to be handled in a forthright and mutually respectful manner. As much as possible, differences should not be suppressed. Unity of purpose can be achieved while recognizing and allowing for diversity.

                7. The successful protests on September 21 — at the Luneta and other places — support my assertion. Note that there was a huge disagreement about the main venue, but that was internally resolved.

                8. The strength of the current administration is diminishing and unraveling because they have set truth aside. Hence, the “team” should not adopt the same tactic.
                *****

              • I agree if point six is employed. And a part of the respect would be to deliver opinions to the subject’s person rather than to the audience. Speaking only to the audience teaches the subject nothing but weakens his ability to advocate for truth. Rallying a mob behind one’s opinion is also not of the forthright manner of which you speak. It might inflate the speaker’s hubris, but it destroys trust. Going on social media to say a truth-seeker is an ‘arrogant asshole’ does nothing constructive as far as I can tell.

              • Edgar Lores says:

                *******
                From the first paragraph of the post, the term “arrogant asshole” was uttered by a Trillanes supporter. It shows that the battle lines are drawn around emotional ties. The same goes for Duterte supporters.

                Not instrumental rationality, not value rationality, but affective rationality (not Weber’s definition).

                This is a huge problem. One cannot argue rationally against this type of emotional rationality.

                In cases where love turns to hate, there is a triggering event. For the Marcos dictatorship, it was the assassination of Ninoy. For Duterte, it was perhaps Kian’s.

                It seems we require the shedding of blood to persuade us — one way or the other. God help us.
                *****

              • Yes, agree. Enjoyed the discussion. Criticism is important. Trolling is not criticism, it is a technique. Teamwork requires each player give of himself for the team. Because one CAN criticize does not mean that one always should.

              • NHerrera says:

                The blog is rich in being able to draw such discussions as in this thread, made particularly rich by the evidence of the happenings surrounding the Senate Resolution on the killing of minors and the neighboring events which rolled down like an avalanche the Administration is not used to coping.

                The Administration allies in the Senate had to scramble but the effort seem laughable if not pitiful. Correction — the whole bunch from the President came down laughable.

              • The discussions are good, I agree. And arguing with Edgar is something special. 🙂

              • karlgarcia says:

                By the way thanks Juana,
                I had the impression that the office of Sen. Pangilinan did not gave a copy of the resolution to any of the 7 based on early news reports.

                http://www.interaksyon.com/senators-hit-silly-blog-for-tagging-them-as-malacanang-dogs-sotto-to-file-libel-case-vs-silent-no-more-ph/

                Now interaksyon has the hindi itinago report.

                http://www.interaksyon.com/hindi-itinago-kikos-camp-shows-proof-resolution-vs-killings-was-not-withheld-from-majority-senators/

              • It’s a problem with the ‘he says, she says’ style of reporting. It further raises emotions to the advantage of the publisher, but detriment of democracy.

              • karlgarcia says:

                Exactly !

              • NHerrera says:

                Meaning special and exhausting? 🙂 But the beauty is that in the end, there is learning all around!

              • NHerrera says:

                Say, karl, how do you make your post immediately below the item you are replying when there is no reply button?

              • You are at the end of the indentations on a long thread. Go to the last reply button and use the @addessee to indicate who you are responding to. Remarks will line up in order posted.

              • karlgarcia says:

                If its a reply to one of my posts, I can, if I am logged in.
                Otherwise I got to rely on the reply button too.

              • NHerrera says:

                @The Society of Honor

                I am posting this in reply to The Society of Honor regarding my query on posting intended for an addressee. Will see how it works.

                In any case thanks to Joe and karl replying to my query.

              • karlgarcia says:

                NH,
                Welcome.

    • NHerrera says:

      5.1. First of all, criticism is essential. There can be no improvement without knowledge and acknowledgment of flaws.

      How very true and essential in the scientific and technical realm. Of course, there are also proud, selfish scientists/ technical people. Even the great Isaac Newton, from historical writings, was not immune to this human flaws.

  11. OFF TOPIC:

    Yay, Taiwan! Do not let him get away with throwing shade at you without evidence.

    “Taiwan on Wednesday asked the Philippine government to provide information and evidence on the alleged Taiwanese drug cartel referred to by President Rodrigo Duterte as the major supplier of illegal narcotics in the country.

    Taking note of Duterte’s statement, Taiwan’s representative to the Philippines Gary Song-Huann Lin said he has already “requested our related agencies in Taipei to look into and investigate this matter.””

    Taiwan’s representative offered proofs contrary to PRD’s claim that Taiwan based Triads are the main exporter of drugs to PH.

    ““Taiwan do not export drugs to this country,” Lin said.

    The Taiwanese official cited data by the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency stating that 50.7 per cent of the drugs seized in 2015 were manufactured in the Philippines, with only 8.75 per cent were smuggled from foreign countries while the remaining drugs cannot be traced.

    “Between 2011 and 2015, the Philippines apprehended 61,303 drug suspects, only 112 were foreigners, and only 0.04% or 24 were Taiwanese,” Lin said.”

    So approximately 40% of drugs distributed in PH has unknown provenance?

    So much could be deduced from the two paragraphs worth of revelation/research by Mr. Lin.

    http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/627442/taipeh-asks-duterte-admin-for-proof-of-taiwan-based-bamboo-triad/story/

    • NHerrera says:

      Reminds me of Trump’s guilty on both sides statements after the Charlottesville white supremacist incident. Since the beloved China cannot be tarred alone, tar too the minor leaguer, Taiwan.

  12. andrewlim8 says:

    ICELAND, LAND OF YELO

    https://www.rappler.com/nation/183755-iceland-40-states-climate-impunity-killings-philippines-united-nations

    Even in international affairs, ‘YELO” comes out against Duterte. 🙂

  13. manangbok says:

    Hi Joe! Totally agree 🙂

    The problem with Pinoys (as with a lot of other nations that grew from the banding together of different tribes) when choosing our leaders is that we always want a ka-tribu (someone of the same tribe). If he/she is not a ka-tribu, then he/she has to be perfect — which, of course, will be an impossibility.

    (America is not so different, I think. The way some white Americans looked down on Obama just makes me cringe and wants to wonder if some people have been transplanted from a different century to ours.)

    In any case, a strong nation should consist of like-hearted people who can stand together and muster the balls to defend their principles (of course, they should first have common principles to defend for). Sadly, my dear Filipinas is still an amalgamation of warring tribes, bruised egos confused hearts and unprincipled testosterones 😦

  14. I see Senator Trillanes as a righteous warrior. He uses nonviolent and lawful means to fight for what is right.

    Nobody is perfect. We all have character flaws so the right thing to do is to respect others for who they are and hope that they return the gesture.

    We are like snowflakes, very unique and distinct. We need to practice tolerance for we are all different. We cannot judge others with our own measuring stick because of this.

    We know what is right and what is wrong. We should give ourselves permission to practice zero tolerance for what is blatantly wrong and put forth effort to stop it. In that context, we are not personally judging the person but the behavior.

    • Sup says:

      Was it RBC?

      If joint it can not be done online..

      ”Closing a personal account”

      You will have to visit your branch to close your account if:

      you are not transferring the balance to another RBC account, OR
      if your account is one of the following types:
      Alliance
      RateLink
      V.I.P
      Estate
      Staff
      Joint ‘AND’

      You’ll be able to close your account by phone at 1 800 769-2511 or by sending us a secure email – click on the ‘You have messages’ or ‘Go to message centre’ link at the top of your Online Banking Home page, if

      it isn’t one of the types of accounts listed above, AND
      your account has a zero balance, OR
      you’ve instructed us to transfer the balance to another RBC account in your name.

      You can expect your account to be closed within 5 business days of submitting your request to close it.

      After we’ve closed your account, any pre-authorized payments or cheques to be deposited into or debited from your account will be returned.

      There’s a $15 fee for closing your account 16 to 90 days after you’ve opened it, unless it contains a balance that you’re transferring to another RBC deposit or investment account.

      Please Note: Once the account is closed, the listing will be removed from Online Banking within 30 days.
      If you get electronic statements with this account, you may want to print them for your records — you won’t be able to view them through RBC Online Banking once your account is closed.

      https://www.rbcroyalbank.com/onlinebanking/bankingusertips/accounts/#9

    • I don’t know the rules in Singapore but in the US, you can. There is a tight verification process involving an e-mail request and then the bank using your records to call you to verify your request on the phone. If you have an account balance, even the bank receiving your transfer will hold the deposit for 10 days to make sure everything is on the up and up.

      I read the comments on the link and majority of the commenters do not believe PRD. They are amplifying Trillanes’ dare for PRD to sign a waiver.

      At this stage, the only thing that he can do to douse mass skepticism about everything he says is for him to sign a waiver like Trillanes. He said it himself, “You know, when you lie, you put another lie to cover this lie… To cover this lie, patong-patong na ’yan.”

      http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2017/09/20/1740901/bank-clearance-trillanes-fell-my-trap

      • andrewlim8 says:

        But bank records will still confirm that you HAD an account. Duterte’s not making sense at all.

        • Sup says:

          And a joint account must be done in person. Duterte did mention 2 other persons as owner of the account
          Also the existence of the account will be confirmed and there will be several days needed to close it, not in one night….
          It is a nonsense story…..

      • karlgarcia says:

        Thanks JP.
        If you ask me I do not believe anything that Duterte says, all the benefits of the doubt can not be given to him.

    • chemrock says:

      Before I answer the specific question, let me just put to rest the implausibility of a Trillanes and others joint account in Singapore. In financial institutions there is a class of customers called PEPs (politically exposed persons). These are the various politicians and govt executives at the higher echelons. This class of people are high compliance risks personnel so their account opening have to undergo stringent due diligence checks. (Because of bribery and corruption). Included are their family members. It is next to impossible for a PEP to open a joint account with non-member parties because it tells in your face something is not right.

      There are foreign PEPs and local PEPs. Obviously, it is apparent that Philippine financial institutions take care of their PEPs well rather than with extra caution. Not so in other countries.

      Most banks would have their policies regarding account closure. Important ones are :
      – Banks have the right to close customers’ accounts without the need to give reasons.
      – Customers cannot close their accounts if they are in debit, ie with overdrawn balances.
      – Even when customers closed their accounts, they are still liable for any charges or interest not yet charged at the time.
      – When the accounts are closed, all unused cheques are considered the property of the bank. You either destroy them yourself or return them to the bank. You cannot use htem.
      – Customers can close their accounts by simply giving the bank a written notice signed by authorised signatories.

      In practice, most customers simply clear out their balances and let the account remain inoperative. After several months of nil balance and no activity, banks normally close out the account.

      As regards Trillanes he would be more interested in taking out the millions than closing the account. I don’t know how a customer can close his account online. Perhaps Mr Duterte can show us. Is there a button on the menu to press? I have not seen any. Trillanes would have to send in a written request properly signed.

      The DBS at Alexandra Branch said “Mr Trillanes, you do not have any accounts with us”
      Q – If Trillanes closed his account on Sep 8, and then show up on Sep 19, how would have the staff responded?
      A – She would have pressed the Panic button to call security and the manager. (Why would a guy who closed his account turn up and ask about his account?)

      You can fool some of the people some of the time.
      You can fool 16m people all the time.

      • NHerrera says:

        Thanks for the useful info, chempo. I laughed reading the line:

        A – She would have pressed the Panic button to call security and the manager. (Why would a guy who closed his account turn up and ask about his account?)

      • karlgarcia says:

        Thanks Chemrock,
        There is a saying here,”Ang isda ay nahuhuli sa bibig”.
        A fish gets caught through its mouth.
        A fishy person like him should get fish hooked.

        I know he chose the wrong country to pin Trillanes.(I mean Singapore with its strict financial institutions)
        It back fired big time.

      • Istambay sa Kanto says:

        Thank you Sir for the info and for the laughter it generated.

  15. andrewlim8 says:

    The circumstantial evidence Duterte is hiding something is mounting.

    1. He absolutely refuses to sign a waiver.

    2. He threatens the institution (Ombudsman) that will investigate him. Reminds you of Trump firing FBI director Comey or Nixon firing the special prosecutor that would have handled Watergate.

    3. He comes up with a nonsensical story on Trillanes’s non-existent accounts, and does it on taped sessions, making it impossible to subject it to inquiries and clarifications.

  16. Sabtang Basco says:

    Here is why Filipinos drool and roll with Duterte. Duterte makes it happen others do not. The 16.0M Filipiinos who elected him are poor people. They are poor because they are dumb. The dumb and the poor are the ones who are victimized by dual-tiered-tired justice system: One for the poor and one for the rich.

    There is also parallel universe in Philippine Media: One for the poor (they are named, arrested immediately) One for the mestizo class (they are unnamed until there is preponderance of affidavits and gossips)

    The majority of the victims are the poor which comprises the majority of the Philippines.

    The poor are tired of diplomatese and politically correct appearances and utterances. THEY WANT ACTION ! NOT THEN. NOT LATER. NOW! And , they want to see it splashed in the judicially-clueless Philippine Media. Duterte answered their clamor.

    The poor are victims of the protected-class: Drug Addicts, Criminals, Drug Lords, mestizos, rich, famous and wealthy. They are protected by “Justice System”. The poor love the bullets not affidavits. The poor USD$2.0-a-day Filipinos are dead people walking.

    When 16.0 million dumb Filipinos elected Duterte, the representative of the people elected by the people carried their votes with them to support Duterte.

    DUTERTE GOT SUPER MAJORITY by way of 16.0 dumb Filipinos and dumb representative of the people who clambered over jumped the fence to Duterte.

  17. Rod Fermin says:

    I made a big mistake on Pimentel and Gordon, but Trillanes outweighs those two wrongs! His selflessness has brought us to the doorstep of Duterte’s house of corruption!

    • Miela says:

      Gordon seemed like a decent politician (on the layer) until Duterte. The younger Pimentel just piggybacked on his father’s legacy. Seems like Duterte is good in bringing out the worst of the fencesitters in the congress and senate. Lol

  18. Sup says:

    O’T.

    1 in 4 cops in to drugs?

    https://www.rappler.com/nation/183828-duterte-9000-policemen-illegal-drugs

    Don’t think the ”decent” cops gonna like this kind of talk….

  19. karlgarcia says:

    I posted this earlier in the previous blog.

    Jacinto Paras is in the prowl waiting for an endorser of VACCs impeachment complaint against the ombudsman.

    http://www.philstar.com:8080/headlines/2017/09/30/1744106/impeachment-case-vs-ombudsman-ready

    • karlgarcia says:

      Paras said the presidents statement about the commission could strengthen the casefor the impeachment.

      So the commission are for the other officers of the ombudsman’s office, the ombudsman will just be impeached.

      Let’s say Ombudsman is not impeached and a commission of sorts is formed.

      Fast forward 2018, when Carpio-Morales steps out and Calida steps in, the said commission will be dissolved.

      • It is beginning to sound like independent bodies formed are under attack. Dissolving them will require Constitutional amendments or it will be unconstitutional, right?

        Why is no one trying to sue VACC for being instrumental in exacting the admin’s vengeance?

        • karlgarcia says:

          Yes,the ombudsman,CHR,Comekec can not be dossolved (can only be bluffed of a 1000 budget)but this ad hoc commissh to hound the ombudsman’s office. When the one who will replace Carpio-Morales, if he or she is a sychophant, that ad hoc commish will be no more faster than 4’o clock.

      • Sup says:

        V.A.C.C.

        Vultures Are Collecting Cash…

        🙂

  20. andrewlim8 says:

    It just occurred to me:

    TRILLANES’ BALLS ARE LARGER THAN THE BALANGIGA BELLS (even if Duterte manages to get them back.)

    🙂 🙂 🙂

  21. andrewlim8 says:

    POINTS I WANT TO RAISE WITH TRUMP WHEN HE VISITS IN NOV 2017

    1. The Resorts World incident was no terrorist-related incident, which you claimed WITHOUT any proof or evidence to back it up, even before our own police could start investigating.

    2. Do not attempt to back up Duterte because the backlash against the US will be severe and it will even strengthen forces who are sworn enemies of the US (ISIS, Abu Sayyaf, CPP-NPA) There are moderate forces that share your country’s democratic principles and ideals.

    You lost the US bases because you backed up Marcos. Do not play that game again!

    3. Filipinos know how to fact-check and verify. Both you and Duterte may have gotten away with fooling large segments of society to win, but both of you have been exposed by now.

    P.S. If I were an NFL player, I would have knelt and raised a fist as well.

    • Trump will catch more hell . . . if he is still in office and if he pumps Duterte up. The American press know what is going on here . . . better than most Filipinos I think. Good for you for kneeling to respect the American Constitution’s freedoms, responsibilities, and human rights.

  22. popoy says:

    Can an artist BARE his soul, paint the creatures of hell by just putting into words his thoughts? The analogy or whatever it is, is that TSOH with its body and soul is now fighting what is really happening in the Philippines, which is yet to improbably happen in America .

    Dave Merrick, Davemerrick.us is an internationally known and published artist whose works reach into the greatest diversity of audiences. Many of his published wildlife pieces have become some of America’s most popular animal imagery. He has more original work in the Pro-Rodeo Hall of Fame than any other artist.

    http://canadafreepress.com/article/rebels-without-a-brain?utm_source=spotim&utm_medium=spotim_recirculation&spotim_referrer=recirculation

    http://canadafreepress.com/members/1/DaveMerrick/941

  23. Sabtang Basco says:

    Trillanes vs Duterte: BATTLE OF SMALL MINDS

    SEPT 29 : INQUIRER : HEADLINE : Duterte: Trillanes closed SG account online days before trip.
    Brilliance Check: Duterte is DUMB ! Closing an account does not mean THERE IS NO TRACE OF THE ACCOUNT ! DUH!!! 5-STAR DUH! If PRO-Duterte debates the premise of Duterte, therefore, the debator has no iota of inkling at all how records are kept.

    SEPT 29 : INQUIRER : HEADLINE : Trillanes chides AMLC: Expedite report on Duterte’s bank account. ““The supposed AMLC statement is improper in its necessity for release and in its tenor, which sounded like the AMLC was defending and absolving Duterte,” Trillanes said.
    Brilliance Check: Trillanes wanted AMLC to change the tenor so it doesn’t sound they are defending and absolving Duterte. DUH! 5 STAR DUH! “Lawmaker” Trillanes wanted AMLC to find Duterte guilty without due process of law … the very law supposedly “lawmakers” made. Trillanes have not lost his mettle the same that he used against Binay who stood him up in Peninsula Hotel “siege”.

    Ignorance of super-majority.

    If all of them are 5-star Duh! Why are the Filipinos picking one of the other? BECAUSE THEY DO NOT KNOW WHAT MAKES AN ISSUE A DUH !!!

    The Filipinos are played against each other by Philippine Journalists that lacked simple elementary analytical minds.

    • The negativity of your comment continues the pattern that I think needs to be restrained by those who seek a strong opposition to killings and other government practices that hurt the nation. I tend to think that being negative is your specialty, and you do not really try to build anything. Thanks for providing an example of enduring negativity that divides.

    • chemrock says:

      I believe Trilanes was referring to a so-called listing. It simply listed the transactions going in and out of a named account.

      Under AMLA reporting requirements, banks that entertained transactions exceeding 500,000 pesos make a report to AMLC. But beyong making a routing report, banks must ascertained to their own satisfaction the nature of such large transactions. So they would have interrogated account holder and indicated commentaries in the reported transactions. Such as where the funds come from, where it is going to, for what purpose, etc.. I think Trillanes is referring to these commentaries that was missing in the AMLC listing.

      • Sabtang Basco says:

        Chem, PNB does not allow me to receive over USD$2,000.00 … fortunately that PNB Filipino manager showed us how to jump the hoop, less than two here and there to avoid Central Bank reporting requirement by breaking it into two. Thank goodness we do not spend that much in Batanes.

        • Sup says:

          With the new flights you can go to Jollibee in Clark and spend some cash….

          🙂

        • chemrock says:

          Hey Sabtang, try splitting S$40 million into $1,000’s.

          I don’t know know why PNB does not allow US$2,000. I understand cash transactions OTC, upwards of US$10,000 is reported. Maybe it’s card restriction, not AMLA considerations. Card withdrawals have limitations for the basic reason that ATM withdrawals are for convenience purposes to buy small stuff, not for big ticket items.

  24. karlgarcia says:

    Joe did not tell us not to constructively criticize.
    When GRP was still a toddler, MLQ3 kept on reminding us that it is Benign0’s form of tough love, until one day he got tired of it himself.
    The Antipinoy site was described by Ben Kritz as like a coach’s approach to a player that is also like a form of being rough to them so they can improve.
    In these negative times, we do not need more negativity.
    Sure we should learn to adapt, but what is wrong with encouraging positive reinforcement.
    But it is so damn hard to do that!
    The president says he is just being his true self with no pretenses.
    But actually he is not telling the truth and always pretending.
    Who says it would be easy?

    • I think the problem is mainly that of being critical of one’s partners. We should work on ways to make suggestions without tearing down. On the other hand, at some point devil’s advocates or mid-ground rationalizers of bad deeds become enablers. Being critical of bad deeds is necessary. ‘Silence is shame’ as we will learn next Wednesday.

      • karlgarcia says:

        That reminds me of sorry to say this LCX, your way of devil’s advocating, it is ok to put test some one, but knowing when to stop is Very important.
        So as to MRPs style of equal opportunity bashing, saying everything in this part ofthe world is wrong and it is always right in my fantasy world makes no sense too.

        We shoulld be critical of bad deeds, yes.
        Though at times I admit that not having an alias and having an old picture as an avatar, I do get nervous, and paranoid,but I get over it.

        • Yes, I admire your being forthright on who you are. I sometimes get tired of the alias, but it seems somehow wise and sure irritates a lot of people. It serves as a mirror as to where people are coming from. I notice I get fewer attacks from nationalists these days like that P guy at Raissa’s. It also serves to teach me how to “let go” of that which I can’t control, which is other people’s point of view. I think there is a loyalty building amongst the yellows, an appreciation for those who are still here and still advocating. I think a lot chose to give up on the PH.

          • karlgarcia says:

            I remember asking the P guy what’s his problem with you?
            We (including Irineo)eventually got a long.
            I remember you saying he has a right to have a personality and all that.
            About the nationalists, even here at TSH. The late RHiro, if I have not read about him, I could have never known was a nationalist.
            Parekoy too, I got too hear him telling me that he is a nationalist.
            I just did not like calling us colonialists.

  25. The link below is a validation of the progressive turning of the tide in PH. The team is getting stronger.

    “Apparently rattled by the spreading opposition to his strong-arm moves — his handlers better apprise him of his waning standing in media and in surveys — Duterte and his followers have started to show signs of desperation, while the opposition has grown bolder.”

    “The number of doubters seems to be growing despite the propaganda, the game of trolls and the endless lies.”

    http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2017/10/01/1744354/can-duterte-push-back-rising-dissent

  26. NHerrera says:

    Off topic

    Pulitzer Prize winning Lin-Manuel Miranda — the creator of “Hamilton”: A Broadway Musical about the life of American Founding Father Alexander Hamilton — tweeted Trump, “You’re going straight to hell … No long lines for you. Someone will say, ‘Right this way, sir.’ They’ll clear a path,” because of Trump’s bashing of Puerto Rico’s Mayor of San Juan and the Puerto Ricans at their hour of greatest need. Puerto Ricans are Americans like those in Florida or Texas.

    Can you imagine the likes of, say, Lea Salonga doing a similar tweet on Duterte? We may criticize or praise Trump and Duterte, but oh what a difference in the two countries.

    • NHerrera says:

      Re Trump’s tweets on Puerto Rico, here is another note from a CNN writer:

      A good man who has empathy, or even knows how to pretend to have it, would not make the unfolding tragedy about himself. A confident President would not accuse Puerto Ricans of wanting “everything done for them.” A self-reflective leader able to critically assess would question and push his team to send more resources and get the federal response moving. A strong Commander-in-Chief would know that his main duty is not to praise himself or lash back because of a bruised ego, but to use his global platform to provide two key needs: numbers (responders, commodities, ships, food, water, debris removal, etc) and hope.

      Hope. It’s the easiest thing to do, to let Puerto Ricans, our own citizens, know that we understand their frustration and fear and we will not accept anything short of resolution.

      I posted the above because I see parallels here in the PH.

    • I’m amazed President Trump is still in office. People are shifting from dislike to outright hate for the guy. Lead Democrat Pelosi observed yesterday that the democrats are making good gains without doing anything at all. It’s all Trump shedding on the Republican Party.

  27. Bam Aquino says:

    Hi Cocoy Dayao. How are you.

  28. Edgar Lores says:

    *******
    Congratulations!

    You got the italic: italic string. This uses the “i” or “em” command.

    You got the bold: boldt string. This uses the “b” or “strong” command.

    This is underlined: underlined string although it may not work. This uses the “u” command.

    This is strikethrough: strikethrough string. This uses the “del” command.
    *****

Trackbacks
Check out what others are saying...


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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s