Category: marcos

“Congenital liar” ATBP #MartyrNOTMurderer

Sorry natagalan itong pangako kong next post na WHO’S “THE CONGENITAL LIAR”?  I had actually decided to wait until the film is released. Baka naman kako yan mismo ang pinapa-cut out ng Viva Films, yung sinabi ni Marcos nang face-to-face kay Ninoy na “congenital liar” siya, na isinalin into “Napakasinungaling mong tao!”

Ang knee-jerk response ko was, wow! nagsalita ang hindi sinungaling, sabay flash back, running through things Marcos had lied about over some 50 years, of which parang there are too many to mention so I decided ‘wag na lang, too much work tracking down documented sources that I don’t have time for right now. Besides it might be taken to mean I’m agreeing that Ninoy was a liar, too, which I’m not, not at all.

Right now, all I have time for is to note down, for the record, two specific items that Viva is reportedly wanting to cut out, and “congenital liar” is not one of them.

Adobo Chronicles’ star correspondent Jake D. caught up with the controversial director while he was dining at Mang Inasal. It turns out that the scene Viva Films wanted to cut was that of Ferdinand E. Marcos singing “Pamulinawen” to a tickled Imelda Marcos.

Yap told AC that he will not agree to censoring history and reality in any of his films. https://adobochronicles.com/2023/02/10/why-director-darryl-yap-almost-quit-martyr-or-murderer/

Natawa ako because, of course, we boomers are reminded of Dovie Beams and the audio tape that had a man who sounded very much like Marcos singing the same song to her at bedtime. Pero puwede naman na in happier days Marcos did also sing “Pamulinawen” to Imelda, as it is an Ilocano ditty of courtship and love. Puwede naman.

But this other one, Viva has a point. And here’s the director refusing to remove it:

I am about to give up.
If Viva insists on removing this sequence I’ve been fighting for 2 hours;
let them remove me as well.
don’t show it if it’s not included.
Tired. Motherfucker.
I just want to tell a story, there’s evidence,
may source, may basis!
I DON’T WANT A DIRECTOR’S CUT.
MARCH 1 must contain the ONLY CUT.
GOD!
#MoMNOCUTS
https://www.facebook.com/YouthAndPower2016/

And here he is saying why he is fighting the cut:

When I said, MARCOS did not kill AQUINO—
I meant it with certainty, I know it 100%
and if you symphatize with the former Senator, you will realize we are all entitled to know the whole truth; for his supporters’ peace, for the justice we all deserve to feel.
So who really did it?
#MARTYRorMURDERER HOLDS THE ANSWER.
https://www.facebook.com/YouthAndPower2016/

Grabe. He is 100 % sure that Marcos did not kill Ninoy. Ang sarap sana patulan. But for now the better part of valor is to wait, and see kung anong context. Kasi puwede naman talagang sabihin with 100 % certainty na Marcos did not kill Ninoy. I’m sure marami sa atin ang 100 % sure na hindi si Marcos mismo ang bumaril kay Ninoy on the 21st of August 1983. Pero malinaw ang 1984 Agrava Reports, Majority and Minority, that Ninoy was shot on the stairs by one of his military escorts, not on the tarmac by Galman, and that it was a military conspiracy on top of which was Ver who we all know was a Marcos stooge.  Certainly, 100 %, kay Marcos at kay Ver ang command responsibility.

What we might be seeing is a whole new genre, first with Maid in Malacañang, now with Martyr or Murderer:  creative-fiction-based-on-facts-taken-out-of-context, if that’s what it turns out to be.

Mga Kuwentong Marites  #NinoyImelda #NinoyFerdinand

Umiikot ngayon sa tiktok ang isang video na pinost ng isang empanadaeditx tungkol sa “one of the most controversial chismis of the history” (sic) that the upcoming Darryl Yap film, Martyr or Murderer, “might tackle” daw.

Might pa lang? Kung sabagay, medyo sablay ang tsismis:

i  That back in the 1950s Ninoy was courting Imelda who “wasn’t wealthy or powerful” and Ninoy’s family disapproved of the relationship “in favor of Cory Aquino” and so he turned his eye to Cory, whose father was “a wealthy politician and businessman of Tarlac”.

ii  That “As Ferdinand and Ninoy became friends before, as they went (sic) in the same fraternity, Ferdinand actually helped Ninoy get heart surgery, with Imelda’s help.”

ANG TOTOO

NINOY & IMELDA were dating for a while but not exclusively. They were both playing the field.  That Ninoy later started dating Cory exclusively was not because his family disapproved of Imelda but because he fell in love with Cory who was, among other things, a math major, minor in French. As for Imelda the beauty queen, the story is that she was actually in love with a certain Nakpil when Ferdinand swept her off her feet in that whirlwind courtship of 11 days. (Read Nick Joaquin’s book on the Aquinos, and Betsy Romualdez Francia’s on Imelda.)

ANG TOTOO

NINOY & MARCOS were never friends in the true sense of the word. They were both Upsilonians but Marcos was batch 1937 and Ninoy batch 1950; hindi sila nag-abot sa U.P.  Sabi ni Kiko Pangilinan sa Twitter: “Pareho naming silang brods kahit na magkasalungat ang kanilang pulitika.” Marcos considered Ninoy his political nemesis, a threat to his dream of dynasty and reigning forever and ever. Kaya niya ito ikinulong. And when Ninoy urgently needed heart surgery, he didn’t agree to let Ninoy fly to Texas out of friendship or generosity but out of political expediency.

SANDRA BURTON. Although Marcos was reluctant to let Aquino leave the country, Imelda was quick to see the advantage of the proposal. “If he is operated on here and he dies, everyone will think there was monkey business,” she remarked. On the other hand, if he were flown to the U.S., the Marcoses could wash their hands of the troublesome prisoner. She won the argument, as she often did. [Impossible Dream page 107]

LUMANG TUGTUGIN. Dati nang ipinipilit ng Marcos propagandists na, dahil magkaibigan ang dalawa, imposibleng may kinalaman si Marcos sa pagpatay kay Ninoy. Sinabi pa nga daw ni Marcos sa kanyang generals na “my best successor is Ninoy.” But it was only a statement of fact (meant to agitate the generals into a conspiracy, I imagine), and not a statement of intent. Ang totoo, matagal na niyang naipangako ang puwesto kay Imelda.

RAYMOND BONNER. On June 7, 1975, in his own tiny scrawl, Marcos wrote out Presidential Decree Number 731. “By virtue of the powers vested in me . . . , I, Ferdinand E. Marcos, hereby decree” that “in the event of my death or permanent incapacity,” a commission shall exercise power. And the chairman of the commission, he also decreed, shall be “Mrs. Imelda R. Marcos.” [Waltzing with a Dictator, 156. See also Imelda Marcos: The Rise and Fall of One of the World’s Most Powerful Women by Carmen Navarro Pedrosa]

NEXT: WHO’S THE “CONGENITAL LIAR”?

Sympathy for Remulla’s son

Thought-provoking indeed: “Marcos Jr. and the older Remulla must make a sacrifice. Specifically, Remulla, the father, must resign from his being Justice Secretary. And Marcos Jr. must encourage him to do so.”

By FILOMENO S. STA. ANA III  

The title is meant to provoke. I differ from those who think that the son of the Justice Secretary must be punished for possession of illegal drugs.

My stand: The son deserves humane treatment. In fact, in a kinder world, the son does not deserve harsh judgment and heavy punishment.

But to spare the son from the law’s harshness, the father must make a big sacrifice beyond what he has offered.

I do not deny that this piece is political. But I veer away from partisanship as I declare my sympathy for the devil. (My apologies to the Rolling Stones.)

But before I explain why I have “sympathy for the devil,” let us critically examine the troubles of the Remulla family. How this issue is handled will also have repercussions, for better or for worse, on President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr.’s government.

Illicit drug enforcers arrested Juanito Jose Remulla III, the son of Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla, through a “controlled delivery operation.” That is, instead of immediately confiscating the contraband at the port of entry, the operatives allowed the parcel containing 937 grams of high-grade cannabis delivered to the young Remulla. Under the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, a person convicted of possessing 500 grams or more of marijuana faces the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine ranging from P500,000 to P10,000,000.

But the Philippines is way behind the curve with respect to drug rules and enforcement. We witness an increasing number of countries or societies accepting the use of marijuana and hallucinogens. Cannabis legalization is spreading all over the world. Among countries that have legalized the recreational use of cannabis are Canada, Mexico, Uruguay, South Africa, and neighboring Thailand.

In the US, a growing number of states have made recreational marijuana legal. At the federal level, US President Joe Biden has pardoned thousands convicted of mere possession of marijuana.

Other countries have limited the scope of legalization to medical use or have decriminalized drug use (not just cannabis consumption).

This shift from punitive action to a humane policy is a recognition of the failure of the violent war on drugs. Harm reduction is the emerging framework and strategy.

Indeed, it makes no sense that cannabis use is criminally punished, but the sale of alcohol and tobacco is legal. Yet, the scientific evidence shows that alcohol and tobacco are more harmful than cannabis. (Our society should then be understanding towards the younger Remulla and sterner towards politicians who peddle tobacco and alcohol.)

Prohibition, as economic history has demonstrated, is costly and damaging to society. A “war on drugs” is less effective in curbing consumption, for this merely drives users underground. Worse, it abets corruption and violence (including extra-judicial killings especially during the time of Rodrigo Duterte).

Strong regulation — by distinguishing between hard and soft drugs and using a variety of tools to discourage consumption and apply harm-reduction strategies — is more effective to address substance abuse.

As pointed out by a Time article (Aug. 1, 2018), “Want to win the war on drugs? Portugal might have the answer.” What Portugal did in 2001 was to decriminalize the use of all drugs if individual consumption does not exceed a certain amount for 10 days. According to Portugal’s Health Ministry, 15 years after decriminalizing drug use, heroin use went down by 75% and death from overdose dropped by 85% although this increased slightly in the wake of an economic crisis. Overall, Portugal’s drug mortality rate is one of the lowest in the whole of Europe.

The explanation above should lead us to rethink our drug policy. It should also lead us to sympathize with the younger Remulla and many others accused of or convicted for using drugs.

Moreover, the Remulla controversy is an opportunity for Marcos Jr., to overturn Duterte’s failed war on drugs. Was it Winston Churchill who said: “Never let a good crisis go to waste?”

Turn the Remulla crisis into an opportunity to reform. Marcos Jr. in fact has already taken a different approach, having rejected the violence and brutality that characterized Duterte’s drug policy. He can take a bigger, bolder step by overhauling the Dangerous Drugs Act. At the minimum, decriminalize drug use. (Note that decriminalization is very different from legalization.)

But to do this, Marcos Jr. and the older Remulla must make a sacrifice. Specifically, Remulla, the father, must resign from his being Justice Secretary. And Marcos Jr. must encourage him to do so.

Secretary Remulla’s pronouncement that he will not intervene in his son’s case, nor will he influence the process is nonetheless insufficient. Similarly, Marcos Jr.’s statement that the calls for Remulla’s resignation “have no basis” is off the mark.

Those demanding Remulla’s resignation have raised the questions of delicadeza* and potential conflict of interest. Delicadeza and avoidance of conflict of interest are strong reasons why Secretary Remulla should resign.

I do not doubt Remulla’s statement to “let justice take its own course.” But this is objectively difficult to happen so long as he heads the Department of Justice. Remulla may not intervene, but his employees or subordinates will still regard him as their boss and will continue dealing with him even after the resolution of his son’s case. It is but natural for them to butter up and please their chief.

Here’s the dilemma. The law is the law, and the law is hard. The law must apply to the younger Remulla.

Aspiring for a new direction regarding drug policy, we want the harm reduction approach to prevail. That means giving the lightest sentence to Remulla if he is found guilty.

Prima facie, the case against the younger Remulla is strong. But having a light sentence is the way to go. Doing this sends a clear message that the whole of government will, from now on, lean towards harm reduction.

But giving Remulla, the son, a light sentence in a situation when the father remains Justice Secretary will arouse public suspicion and anger. That will lead to a political backlash.

The public will accuse the administration of having a double standard of justice. The poor are severely punished, even killed, in the course of the war on drugs. The son of a powerful politician gets a light sentence. But as I have argued, everyone charged with drug use or possession deserves humane treatment.

Upholding harm reduction means sparing anyone, including the younger Remulla, from heavy punishment. For Marcos Jr. and Secretary Remulla to show credibility in doing the right thing, they must make the ultimate sacrifice: Remulla, the father, must resign. It is for their own good.

Having himself acknowledged that he used drugs, Marcos Jr. has sympathy for drug users and understands the need for reform. At the proper time, Marcos Jr., using his political capital, can announce that henceforth, government will terminate Duterte’s war on drugs, amend the Dangerous Drugs Act, and adopt harm reduction.

This essay is written in memory of Edgardo Araneta Kalaw, Jr. He was a Filipino pioneer in championing harm reduction.

* Maintaining dignity by avoiding embarrassing situations and comporting oneself properly. A sense of propriety.

 

Marcos Is Already Undercutting The Philippines’ Economic Future

WILLIAM PESEK
Forbes.com
Sep 27 2022

History just doesn’t seem to be Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s thing.

The most obvious example is how his administration, just 88 days in, is trying to whitewash his father’s disastrous 20-year reign that ended in 1986 amid a massive “people power” revolt. Now, though, Marcos is angling to rewrite far more recent history concerning his troubled economy.

In a September 23 interview with the Associated Press, Marcos said he wants to “reintroduce the Philippines” to the world and raise Manila’s profile on the international stage. The reaction from many global investors: Huh?!

Whether it be delusion or not, Marcos is glossing over how former President Benigno Aquino III already achieved that. During his 2010 to 2016 tenure, Aquino didn’t just say over and over that the one-time “sick man of Asia” is “open for business.” He proved it in ways that scored Manila’s first-ever investment grade credit ratings. READ ON…