Category: ninoy

in defense of ninoy

i wonder how leloy claudio feels to find that his essays painting ninoy aquino red were widely posted and shared on facebook by pro-marcos peeps on ninoy’s 35th death anniversary.  in his place i would be soooo mortified.  imagine.  wittingly or unwittingly, giving credence to ferdinand’s charge that ninoy was a communist-coddler.

read gmanetwork‘s Ninoy networked with everyone, Reds included and rappler‘s Ninoy linked up with the Left to aid presidential ambition, and weep.  claudio draws from nick joaquin’s The Aquinos of Tarlac (1983), his own interviews of communist personalities led by jose maria sison who confirm, of course, the links with ninoy (it is in their interest, after all, to do so), and on US embassy documents, most of the material finding their way to his book Taming People’s Power: The EDSA Revolutions and their Contradictions  (Ateneo de Manila Press 2013).

what claudio’s work lacks, and glaringly, scandalously, disgracefully so, is ninoy’s side, that is, ninoy’s own account of his relations with the left that, along with his critique of the communist ideology, is painstakingly spelled out in Testament from a Prison Cell (1984).  written 1975 to 1977 it was meant to be his closing statement before military commission no. 2 that sentenced him to death by musketry for subversion, collusion with communist dante buscayno in a 1957 murder, and illegal possession of firearms.  the closing statement that he was not allowed to read/from in open court.  the closing statement that cory published the year after ninoy’s assassination.

In this statement, Aquino explains the meaning of his obstinate struggle, his ideology and his proposed strategy for national survival.  He seeks to focus the attention of the Filipino people and the world on the wanton violations of human rights by the martial law administrators.  He identifies the victims of torture and their torturers, and reveals the torture methods used by Marcos’ military investigators. By citing case after appalling case, he describes how detainees have been framed with confessions brutally tortured out of them — and how others, especially Marcos’ uncompromising political enemies, are framed with similarly secured confessions.  It is Aquino’s most powerful indictment of the Marcos dictatorship which held him prisoner for more than seven years.  [Introductory Note]

This brief but moving testament of one man’s convictions–a man self-described as “a humanist, a democrat and a romantic”–was written in a prison cell <…>  What is presented here is Aquino’s elegant, reasoned defense of his political views (Christian Socialist), his outline for an ideal society (freedom of the individual is all-important), and a family history of patriotism (both his father and grandfather were “imprisoned for serving the Filipino people”). Bleeding through the text’s rationale and legalese is a current of unabashed passion from a man who believed in his cause.  [https://www. publishersweekly.com/978-0- 9621695-1-9]

can it be that claudio does not know about, and therefore has not read, the book?  or did he choose to ignore it because he would have had to rethink his sophomoric conclusions re ninoy’s alliance with the left?

NINOY AQUINO: I am not a communist.  I have never been one.  I have never joined any communist party.  I am not — and never have been — a member of any illegal and/or subversive organization, or even a front organization.

Yes, I have met with communist leaders and members of subversive organizations both as a newspaperman and as a public servant as far back as 1954.  In fact, the government awarded me the highest civilian award precisely for what my pacification parleys with rebels and subversives had achieved.

President Magsaysay made use of my services as a negotiator not only with the communist-led dissidents in Central Luzon but also with Muslim outlaw leaders.  Indeed, I consider my ability to communicate with the leaders of the various dissident movements as well as my understanding of their causes as one of my special qualifications for high office.

I have been a student of communism, especially the Philippine communist movement, for the last two decades.  I have written many papers, delivered many lectures on the Huks, who later became the HMBs and who, still later, became the CPP/NPAs, their aims, their inner dynamics, and motivations, both in the Philippines and abroad.

If I had planned to seek the Presidency in 1973,  it was because I sincerely believed I had the key to the possible final solution to the vexing dissident (communist) problem.

I was first exposed to communism as a young teenager shortly after the war, in 1945, when my hometown of Concepcion was literally occupied by the Hukbalahaps.  Our town mayor, an avowed Huk, was appointed by the dissident group.

In 1950, I was assigned by the Manila Times to cover the UN police action in Korea with special emphasis on the participation of the Philippine Expeditionary Force to Korea (PEFTOK).  I witnessed the brutal massacre of innocent civilians by fleeing communist forces.  Barely 18, I learned firsthand from North Korean survivors how the communists governed and regimented their people, how all freedoms were suppressed, especially the rights to peaceful assembly, religion and free speech.  Some of my most poignant early newspaper stories dwelt on the grimness of existence under communist totalitarian rule.  [pp 14-15]

… I have been a student of theoretical Marxism.  I have followed every twist and turn of our local communists.  I have read practically all the published works of our local Reds. Whenever possible, I interviewed communist intellectuals to get first-hand information.

This, however, does not mean that I have embraced communism, much less joined any communist or subversive organization. On the contrary, I would like to believe that I convinced some of the dissidents to return to the fold of government, as in the case of Mr. Taruc.

I have never advocated the overthrow of the government by force and violence, much less the establishment of a totalitarian regime. Or worse, placing this country under the domination and control of an alien power. [15-16]

… In my speeches, both in and out of Congress, I advocated a more humane approach to the dissident problem.  I denounced the use of para-military units, like the Monkees, who summarily executed barrio residents suspected of NPA links.  My exposes brought me  into a collision course with Mr. Marcos and his military subordinates.

In May 1966, barely five months into office, Mr. Marcos branded me a “Huk coddler and sympathizer” when I, as governor of Tarlac, denounced the massacre of farmers in Barrio Culatingan, Concepcion, Tarlac, by a group of Monkees led by a PC Ranger.  It is indeed an ironic twist that while I stand today charged with communist subversion, Mr. Marcos is adopting some of my recommendations in 1966: a liberal program of amnesty for returning dissidents, resettlement and a vigorous land reform program.

…Many of our countrymen have been conditioned to automatically believe that the dissidents, be they Huks, HMBs or CPP/NPAs, are not only communists or communist-led, but are evil personified.  I do not believe they are per se evil.  Assuming they are evil, they are a necessary evil.

Were it not for the Huks, President Magsaysay would never have pushed through Congress the landmark Rice Tenancy Act, which provided for tenants’ security of tenure and the itemization of the division of produce.  Known as the 70-30 Rice Law, that law for the first time gave the tenant the sole option to remain a tenant or become a lessee.  [26]

… And when Macapagal, a son of Central Luzon, was elected President, the country witnessed the enactment of the first comprehensive Land Reform Code in the Philippines, seminal though it was.  Congress passed it in 1963; but only after President Macapagal had called the reluctant Congress to several special sessions, wearying the landed interests in the Senate and the House until they gave in.  This is the Land Reform Code now being implemented by Mr. Marcos.

Indeed our wealthy Filipinos have yielded only under mounting social pressure — never of their own volition.  Without the Sakdals, without the Huks, without the NPAs, our toiling people would still be serfs in a kasama or land tenancy system as feudal as in any feudal state.

The dissidents, I concede, have committed many acts of murder and depredation.  Many have already paid for their crimes with their lives or with long prison terms.  But it must be equally admitted that because of their unremitting struggle, our society and our people’s social conditions have improved. [27]

… let us not forget: This Republic was founded by rebels and insurgents who were hunted down like mad dogs in their own time.  My own grandfather was one of those hunted men.  Some of our greatest heroes — Frs. Gomez, Burgos and Zamora; Jose Rizal and Andres Bonifacio — were all executed for treason.  Yesterday’s traitors are today’s heroes!

… If I have gone out of my way to meet with insurgents, if I have given them shelter and medical aid when they came to me, bleeding and near death, it was because I was convinced these dissidents were freedom-fighters first — in their own light — and if they were communists at all, they were communist last.

… They might have been dissidents.  But to me they were brother Filipinos who deserved the right to be heard.  My intention was to prevent them from becoming hopelessly desperate — and to give them a feeling of belonging.  By lending them a hand and a sympathetic ear, I wanted to hold out to them the hope for a better future. [28]

… I believe that freedom of the individual is all-important and ranks above everything else.  Every citizen must be given the equal opportunity to self-fulfillment, to better himself.  While it is true indeed that not all men are equally endowed, I believe that every man should be given the equal opportunity for advancement through free, universal and quality education.

Confidence between the majority and the minority, between the government and the governed, is indispensable to the vitality of a democracy.  There can be no confidence where established rights are destroyed by fiat.

… The supreme value of democracy is freedom, not property.  The democratic world will meet the communist challenge if it upholds and unites on the issue of freedom as the fundamental element of human survival.

… A free media is indispensable if a democracy is to function efficiently, if it is to be real.  The people, who are sovereign, must be adequately informed all the time.  A reasonable case, reasonably presented, will eventually win the hearts of the people.  But the people must know the facts if one expects them to decide correctly.

I  believe democracy is not just majority rule, but informed majority rule, and with due respect for the rights of minorities.  It means that while the preference of the majority must prevail, there should be full opportunity for all points of view to find expression.  It means toleration for opposition opinions.  Where you find suppression of minority opinion, there is no real democracy [30-31]

The basic flaw of capitalism is its primary concern for political liberty; it cares comparatively less about social and economic equality.  Communism, on the other hand, aims at social and economic equality but ruthlessly opposes and destroys political liberty.

I believe in a Christian Democratic Socialist ideology that will harmonize political freedom with social and economic equality, taking and merging the best of the primary conflicting systems — communism and capitalism.

… I believe in evolutionary reform and I regard all human life as equally priceless, regardless of circumstances.  I hold individual freedom most sacred, because it is God’s gift.  I cannot accept any form of dictatorship, whether of the left, the right or the center. [31]

… I adhere to an evolutionary program.  This must always stand the test of national approval as expressed through periodic elections, plebiscites, referenda, which will ensure that the program is implemented — and will continue to be implemented — only with the consent of the majority freely expressed. [32]

a primary source such as Testament from a Prison Cell is a must-read, especially for an academic, a historian yet! like claudio, who dares write on, and devalue, the legacy of ninoy aquino.

bad enough that the marcoses continue to revise EDSA history.  worse, that claudio, wittingly or unwittingly, has given the marcos camp ammunition to shoot down ninoy yet again.  claudio should be apologizing to nation for irresponsible “scholarship.”  the same goes for his editorial team and academic consultants.

*

read gary devilles’ review of claudio’s book here  https://muse.jhu.edu/article/ 620451/summary

more from ninoy’s Testament:
The Filipino as Dissident  
A Christian Democratic Vision  
Manifesto for a Free Society

independence day blues in the time of duterte (kris rises and falls, yet again)

One hundred and twenty years ago, our ancestors raised the Philippine flag from a balcony in Kawit, Cavite to signify the beginning of our journey as a free nation. Hijacked by the United States of America right at the start, and interrupted by Japan during World War II, the quest for an independent Filipino nation has been an arduous process. It tested our fortitude and persistence as a people. It brought out the best, but also the worst in us.

read the rest of randy david’s The challenge of nationhood in our time.  what he says about our postwar leaders continues to apply to our leaders until today.

… if the revolutionary struggle had been painful and costly, the aftermath was perhaps even more so. The moral and political choices that had to be made under conditions of formal self-rule were less clear. In the immediate postwar years, our leaders found it hard to resist the easy path offered by those who sought to control the nation’s future. Political opportunism grew in the fertile ground of the popular thought that the country had suffered enough and badly needed relief.

… In the process, perhaps without realizing it, we gave up the opportunity to rebuild our people’s inner strength, tap their skills and talents, and create the basic foundation for a strong nation. The examples of Japan, South Korea and Vietnam demonstrate the truism that the rebuilding of a country destroyed by war begins with the rekindling of the people’s energy and belief in themselves.

… The quality of leadership, both at the national and local levels, has undoubtedly been at the core of this national inability to rebound from misery and soar into greatness. Lacking in vision and selflessness, our leaders have done well for themselves, using political power to bolster their own selfish interests.

But they have left the rest of the nation behind…

“they” are all of the elite, all of the oligarchy — pro- and anti-duterte, pro- and anti-marcos, pro-and anti-aquino, pro- and anti-america, pro- and anti-china — and their media arms and other enablers.  they are all complicit in the sad and worsening state of nation.

this was driven home hard by the kris aquino episode vs. mocha uson who dared liken duterte’s pucker-up kiss-muna moment in south korea to ninoy aquino being kissed by lady admirers moments before he deplaned and was assassinated in august 1983.  read rosario a. garcellano’s Kissing pictures:

But can parallel behavior be actually observed in the pictures of the President kissing a member of his audience and of Ninoy Aquino being kissed by admirers? I think not, if only in the fundamental terms of one being the kisser and the other the kissee. One solicited the occasion for the contact (to entertain and amuse, and also as part of “the culture of Filipinos,” according to his explainers); the other submitted to the act, with an awkward grin.

Kris Aquino was well within her rights to take loud umbrage, even if, as Uson claimed, “this is not about you.”

indeed.  that was uson at her most malicious and unthinking worst yet.  i was immensely pleased for ninoy when kris rose to the occasion, challenging uson to a debate, or sampalan and sabunutan, one-on-one, what fun!  alas, uson copped out, LOL, what a loser.

and then there’s kris, who pala, while making hamon uson to a real catfight, reached out to bong go, no less, na kaibigan pala niya.

krisaquino I took the courage to reach out to PRRD’s SA Bong Go (sorry sa initial post, nag auto correct to Gong-although cute yung Bong Gong)… thank you commissioner Aimee Neri for helping me reach him via text. I have known & liked him for 8 years. In this instance I am Ninoy’s daughter- he believed in the power of true & honest communication… SA Bong, thank you for your reply. Thank you for taking my feelings as a daughter into consideration & showing me EMPATHY. I am most grateful for a man as powerful as you are now for texting & vibering me the words “we are sorry for the incident.” You have my sincere gratitude.  We all have 1 goal, a nation we can be proud of, and the best possible prosperous lives for all Filipinos. I love our country as much as our president does. I pray for #PEACE & mutual respect for all of us. God bless you.

ito naman ang pinost ni bong go na pinost ni kris sa kanyang instagram.

Christopher Bong Go  Kanina po, dahil ipinag-utos ni Presidente Duterte sa akin, I relayed a sincere apology to Kris.  We apologized because nasaktan siya and we wish to reiterate that sincere apology once again.  Sabi nga ng pangulo, “respetuhin dapat natin ang patay.” Iyong po ang pinanggagalingan ng apology namin.

Nirerespeto din namin ang opinyon ng mga supporters ng pangulo na nasasaktan din sa patuloy na pagbatikos sa kanya sa kabila ng lahat ng nagawa niya para sa ating bayan.”

(huh? so kung buhay si ninoy, okay lang?)  at kinausap din daw ni bong go si uson.

Christopher Bong Go Nag-usap kami ni Mocha at nagkasundo na tapusin na ang isyung ito. We all agreed to put this issue to rest out of respect to all our fellow Filipinos. I believe that politics should not divide us. Magtulungan na lang tayo kaysa mag-away away, para sa ikabubuti ng bayan.

at heto uli si kris, grateful for the “olive branch” from the powerful bong go upon the orders of the most powerful man…

krisaquino  Alam kong damned if you, damned if you don’t ako… but i was brought up to recognize an “olive branch” when it is being offered. Alam ko yung mga natitirang LP will bash me & the DDS will never like me. Alam ko rin na sasabihan akong bakit ako nagpapauto. Pero ito ang pananaw ko- the most powerful man, President Duterte affirmed my pain. When all his supporters have called me the most hateful names- th man who doesn’t say SORRY- inutusan ang kanyang pinaka pinagkakatiwalaan na mag relay ng SINCERE apology sa kin. Anak akong nakipaglaban na bigyan ng respeto ang magulang kong patay na. Sa puso ko, naramdaman ko na yun. So #carebears na po sa lahat ng babatikusin alo. In my critics words- this “media whore” “bitch” and “kulang sa pansin” BINIGYAN ng panahon at importansya ng pangulo ng ating bansa. Pasensya na kung #BRAT ang tingin ninyo pero this was a #WIN for the memory of the 2 people i love-unfortunately for the HATERS i am here to stay.

needless to say, what a waste.  kris was in a position to demand, at the very least, that uson be fired and replaced with someone bright, smart, and competent.  then we could stop wasting time arguing over the false comparisons and flippantly facetious questions that uson specializes in to distract from her daddy digong’s every perversion.

but the real question is: why did kris fold so quickly?  basta na lang tumiklop, invoking nation yet, as does bong gong.  i was still wondering about that when i saw this on facebook.

Angelo Suarez

Pantabla kay Kris Aquino, ang alas ng mga maka-Duterte ay Hacienda Luisita.

Ang Central Azucarera de Tarlac sa loob ng Hacienda Luisita ay pag-aari ng mga Lorenzo, pamilya ng mga landlord na kakutsaba ng mga Cojuangco-Aquino sa panglalandgrab.

Sino ang abogado ng mga Lorenzo sa pangangamkam nito ng lupa sa pamamagitan ng Lapanday Foods Corporation sa Tagum?

Sino ang abogado ng mga Lorenzong nagbantang babarilin ang mga magsasakang papasok sa lupang dapat naman ay sa kanila?

Si Manases Carpio, asawa ni Sara Duterte.

connect the dots.  they who have left the nation behind, they are all in this together.  let us keep that in mind as we navigate the muddy waters of our national life and pursue our struggle for independence.

*

independence day blues (in the time of gloria)
the real rigodon 
june 12, what’s to celebrate (in the time of pNoy)
Is the Philippines a lost cause? by john nery
Nothing to celebrate? by rina jimenez-david
Independence Day? End of the Republic by jarius bondoc

noise barrage 1978, first People Power show

The people first made their presence known, loud and clear, five years into martial rule, on the 6th of April 1978. It was the eve of elections for Members of Parliament who would sit in the Interim Batasang Pambansa or National Assembly. Under pressure from the U.S. government, Marcos had allowed Ninoy to head a new party, Lakas ng Bayan (LABAN) and from his prison cell to run for a seat in opposition to KBL’s frontrunner Imelda. A month before elections, Defense Minister Enrile went on TV and charged Ninoy of being both a communist and a CIA agent.

Ninoy demanded equal TV time and got it. It was his first ever appearance on public television in almost six years and the nation was enthralled (the streets were empty, everyone was indoors watching TV) and shocked at how much weight the once chubby senator had lost. For people who voted him into the Senate in ’71 there was a poignant sense, long overdue, of how terribly he must have suffered, and continued to suffer, under Marcos rule. And yet the man had lost neither his ardor nor his bite and the people took little convincing that Enrile lied, Ninoy was neither a communist nor a CIA agent.

Except for that one TV appearance, Ninoy’s campaign was left to his wife Cory and seven-year old Kris, whose rallying cry was, “Help my Daddy come home!”  On April 6, the eve of elections, Ninoy’s secret admirers from left, right, and center responded under cover of darkness with the historic noise barrage. At 7:00 P.M. on the dot, we took to Manila’s streets yelling, “Laban!” and making the L sign with thumb and index finger, accompanied by car horns shrieking, pots and pans banging, whistles blowing, sirens wailing, church bells pealing, alarm bells ringing, never mind if the dreaded military picked us all up. We had no idea then that it was organized by Communist Party leader Filemon Lagman a.k.a. Popoy,  and if we had known, we would have joined anyway just to spite the dictator.

The noise barrage did not win Ninoy the election that was marked by massive cheating, but it told him in no uncertain terms that there were Filipinos out there like him, anonymous but increasing in numbers, who were yearning for freedom.  These people were not to surface for another five years. [EDSA UNO (2013) “Marcos Times” pp 24-25]

March for Our Lives, ‘78 Laban Noise Barrage, and the fight vs. Duterte

pNoy, erwin erfe, ninoy’s killers

i thought it was just another house of reps dengvaxia hearing, even if rather star-studded with pNoy himself and butch abad sitting next to da janet garin, and across them the kontrabidas (or is it the other way around) PAO’s persida acosta and erwin erfe and tony leachon.  but i was only half-listening, parang i had heard it all before.

i didn’t realize until after, from news reports, that things had heated up pala.  nagkainitan, with dr. erwin erfe’s forensic expertise questioned again and again.  erfe’s response after was to publicly remind aquino: “I reviewed your dad’s murder.”

Defending his credentials, Erfe noted that he was tapped in 2004 to review the forensic evidence in the assassination of Aquino’s father, slain senator Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino, Jr. when his convicted killers sought a re-opening of his murder case before the Supreme Court.

“Noong 2004 po, kinuha po kami ng Public Attorney’s Office para pag-aralan ang assassination ni Senator Ninoy Aquino… Alam po iyun ng dating Presidente,” Erfe told DZMM.

The Aquino camp’s lawyer, former senator Rene Saguisag, had coordinated with PAO experts and presented their findings to the high court, he added.

that night erfe posted on his fb wall:

they humiliated me several times today — Pres Aquino and Cong Lagman. For a moment i thought I was the one under investigation

cryptic, at malaman, ang dating sa akin ng paalala ni erfe kay pNoy that he was part of the 2004 re-investigation of ninoy’s death…  the unsaid being:  meron akong alam…?  it could be just my fertile imagination, but why else would erfe bring up ninoy’s assassination out of the blue, e dengvaxia ang pinag-uusapan.  pNoy as common denominator?

my seniorcit memory bank drew a blank on PAO’s case in behalf of the convicted soldiers in 2004, but in 2009  i blogged on ninoy’s killers.  this was sometime after the release of the jailed soldiers, thanks to president gma’s grant of clemency.  the aquinos were upset because the ex-convicts continued to declare their innocence, point to galman as the culprit, and to danding as the mastermind.

at the time it seemed clear that ninoy was shot sa hagdan pa lang, and given the bullet’s downward trajectory, that the gunman was the soldier behind ninoy.  but now i’m not sure, not after watching this 2003 Saksi segment  NINOY AQUINO Assassination Theories: Did Rolando Galman do it?!  with UP prof jerome bailen who led the PAO team.  the audio is terrible so i transcribed it here.

V.O.  Ayon sa Sandiganbayan… si Constable 1st Class Rogelio Moreno ang napatunayang pumatay kay Ninoy.

Nasa likod ni Ninoy si Moreno nang mabaril ito.  Pero sa pagsisiyasat ni Professor Jerome Bailen, isang forensic expert, mali raw ang interpretasyon ng Agrava Commission na ginamit ng Sandiganbayan para desiyunan ang kaso ng mga sundalo.

Imposible raw na sa kaliwang bahagi ng ulo tatama ang bala kung ang bumaril ay right-handed, tulad ni Moreno.

Ang nakita ni Bailen na posibleng bumaril kay Ninoy ay si Rolando Galman dahil siya ang nasa kaliwa ni Ninoy.

BAILEN:  “Hindi puwedeng si Moreno ang bumaril niyan … it should be from the left.”

VO Imposible rin daw na sa hagdan binaril si Ninoy gaya ng paniniwala ng Agrava Commission dahil kung totoo ito, dapat ay sa harap ng hagdan mismo bumagsak ang katawan ng dating senador.

Natagpuan ang katawan ni Ninoy sa kaliwa ng hagdan, ilang metro ang layo sa hagdanan, na tugma sa sinasabi ng mga sundalo na binaril siya sa tarmac.

Isa pang punto, sa impact daw ng pagsabog ng bala sa ulo ni ninoy, malamang daw na magnum .357 revolver ang ginamit na armas, taliwas sa tingin ng Agrava Board na .38 o .45 caliber pistol ang ginamit.

the davide court, however, refused to re-open the case in 2005, saying that no new evidence was presented by the PAO team.

… we are not moved by petitioners assertion that the forensic evidence may have been manipulated and misinterpreted during the trial of the case. Again, petitioners did not allege concrete facts to support their crass claim. Hence, we find the same to be unfounded and purely speculative.

but check out these videos that raise the galman angle, see / sense why the galman-killed-ninoy school of thought refuses to die.

HISTORY™ (4 of 5) The Assassination of Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino, Jr. 
Who killed Ninoy
Ninoy Aquino Assassination: The Mystery Behind Rolando Galman’s .357 Magnum! 

it would be great to hear it from dr. erfe: why was the PAO team so sure it was rolando galman who shot ninoy?  puwede nga na hindi sa hagdan binaril si ninoy, it just means they went down those stairs pretty fast, or just faster than the prosecution would have us believe.  and the magnum .357 story is so mixed up it makes sense, if you’re trying to hide something.

but but but how does one explain what the crying lady, rebecca quijano, says she saw:  that ninoy was shot on the stairs, by the soldier behind him, which testimony was confirmed by other eyewitnesses and believed by the court.

one theory is, galman was brought in by one faction of the military to kill ninoy sa tarmac, but the soldiers escorting ninoy, from another faction, were given instructions to kill him on the stairs.

posible ba na kinaladkad na lang si ninoy down the rest of the stairs and then some of the way toward the van? habang pinapatay si galman ng iba pang faction?  but then there would be signs of the kaladkaran.  and why ba didn’t they make ninoy sakay in the van right away?  photo-op muna, to show ninoy and his alleged killer galman, and galman’s magnum .357?

the real question is, why is it so unbelievable that galman killed ninoy?  why did the supreme court consider it a “crass claim,” not to be entertained?

actually it’s not galman killing ninoy that’s unbelievable, rather it’s who allegedly set up galman, who allegedly ordered / paid for the assassination.  sabi ng ilang sundalong nakulong, ang salarin daw ay si danding cojuangco, pinsang buo ni cory na number one business crony ni marcos.  ang problema, walang proof against danding.  he has never even had to deny it.  and the courts refuse to hear it.  out of respect ba for cory who refused to believe it?

the aquino children, too, do not believe that danding could have done such a thing, family and all that.  yeah, right.  so defensive for the uncle who allied with the dictator who jailed ninoy for 7 yrs 7 mos.  too bad “family” got in the way of the aquinos, but not in the way of danding?

which brings me back to dr. erfe.  pogi points for him and dr. leachon for being on the PAO side that’s calling out the DOH on conflict of interest; it tells me they’re clean, uninvested in big pharma, or they wouldn’t dare speak out?  i’d like to hear their official report on the alleged dengvaxia-related deaths, undiluted, unedited, uncensored by the PGH and DOH or any of their agencies.

after that, let’s hear from dr. erfe on the ninoy assassination.