mai, oh, mai, ricky carandang!

i have a good friend who used to be in mainstream media who is now with the malacanang news desk, coloma bloc, and the day he texted me the good news of his appointment was the last time we had a text exchange initiated by him.

a day or so after the august 23 bloodbath i texted him, fishing for info as to what else the president was up to that long afternoon and evening, just between him and me, just for my info, promise promise promise, and all i got was the official line, nothing more, nothing less.

needless to say, my respect for him has levelled up many notches, especially in the wake of the stupidly insolent irresponsible impertinent tweets of presidential speechwriter mai mislang, carandang bloc, while in vietnam with the president.

it bears pointing out that mislang was also in new york with the president last september and that we didn’t hearof any offensive tweets.   bakit kaya?   because the wine was great?   the traffic was painless?   the guys were guwapo?   tweetless as in speechless lang siya in america the beautiful?

or was it because she was the only one of the carandang group in new york, it was so soon after boss ricky’s major major aug23 booboos, so she was on her best behavior?   but what does this say about her bastos behavior in vietnam?   she was a different person because vietnam is third world, and maybe because boss ricky came too, hindi siya nag-iisa, and they were having a blast and maybe just maybe they brought out the bastos instead of the best in each other?

because, really, i’m amazed that carandang didnt have the sense to shut her up at “sucks”.   instead nakipagsagutan pa siya.   the same with ces drilon, who i’m surprised didn’t have the sense to shut them both up.   to top it all, carandang says he still has to figure out what to do about his tweeting darling, i mean, underlings, ano ba yan!   so he stops everyone from tweeting and/or blogging kahit wala namang nagkakalat kundi si mislang.

carandang must have loved john nery’s piece on the Unfortunate Case of the Wine that Sucked:

One journalist whose work I admire said Mislang should have resigned—as though the offense had led to a major diplomatic crisis. I don’t think I am being inaccurate when I say this journalist’s opinion was widely shared. Mislang has since apologized, and apparently the offending tweets have been removed. But I still see the occasional comment, tsk-tsking the blunder and asking for blunderer’s head.

When, I would like to know, did my profession adopt the one-strike policy? There is no question that Mislang’s tweets were bad diplomacy, but when did it reach the level of official policy, serious enough to merit expulsion from government? Mislang, whom I do not know from Eve, is not in the foreign service, where her kind of jejune comment would have had severe implications for her career; granted, she works for President Aquino’s communications group, where the cardinal rule ought to be not to become news. Perhaps the appropriate sanction would have been a reprimand, and a decision to leave her out of official delegations in the future. Butresignation? For expressing an opinion that the host government did not consider offensive?

tsk tsk, john nery, what makes you think that the host government did not find any of it offensive?   yes, we haven’t heard any reactions from the vietnamese but that doesn’t tell me they weren’t offended; more likely they’re just more civilized and sophisticated than we are — the french influence, no doubt — why stoop to our level?   big mistake to think that it hasn’t affected / deepened / sharpened, and negatively, their opinion of us as a people.   big mistake to think they don’t care if mislang is fired, or resigns, or not.   i bet they do care, and they’re watching, and waiting.   what goes around will come around.   one day, one way or another (as with hong kong / china) there will be repercussions, that could go from bad to worse, depending on whether or not they see a head or two rolling.

dapat lang, one mistake and you’re out.   no second chances.   the hell with learning curves for anyone who wasn’t elected.   learn the ropes elsewhere.   the presidency is the highest and most important office in the land.   the president needs, should have, professionals around him, not bumbling amateurs and overrated kids who have no sense of delicadeza and who are so full of themselves, they’ve become national embarrassments.

***

read too:

Propriety means never having to say you’re sorry / The internet is forever / The wine will always suck by karen cardenas.

The Mai Mislang Whinery by boo chanco.

Tweet made Carandang look like a twit by ilda.

from fritz webb

please understand that we have given everything required to prove that hubert was in the U.S. when the crime occurred.You name it, we gave it.

1. record of departure including ticket, ticket receipt,(with accompanying testimony from raja tours owner Bibay Nolasco), airline manifest (with accompanying testimony from a northwest airline official), passport with departure stamp from the Bureau of Immigration

2. record of entry which includes an F.B.I. report, a note verbale issued by the U.S. government signed by Secretary of State Madeline Albright stating that Hubert Webb was in the U.S. testified to by no less than both foreign secretary Domingo Siazon and Consul General Leo Herrera Lim

3. records of his stay which includes: Videos – one in Disneyland (testified to by a complete stranger who saw Freddie Webb and decided to video him), one at Lake Tahoe and another at a cousins wedding ceremony. Records of employment in the form of several encashed checks in his name Hubert Jeffrrey Webb before and after the crime California Drivers License aquired during his stay, certified by the Department of Motor Vehicles California. Dozens of eyewitness accounts all of which were excecuted by upstanding members of society all of whom have much to lose had they perjured themselves in court, the most prominent of all being Entertainer Gary Valenciano. Supreme court justice Antonio Carpio also testified that he knew that Hubert was in the U.S, based on his conversations with my father who was in the U.S. right before the time of the incident.

4. records of his departure which includes again the certification from the U.S. stating his date of departure, airline manifest testified to by an authority from the Philippine Airlines, Passport showing entry into the Philippines.  We have given everything humanly possible to prove he was in the United States four months before and fifteen months after the massacre occured. He only has one record of ever going to the U.S.A and it was only during the period we claim he was there.

Pease take note that: NOT A SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE WE PRESENTED WAS EVER REFUTED OR PROVEN TO BE FALSE BY THE PROSECUTION.  THEY COULD HAVE VERY EASILY ASKED THE UNITED STATES IF THE DOCUMENTS WE PRESENTED WERE FAKE BUT THEY DIDN’T.  WHY?  BECAUSE THEY KNEW OUR DOCUMENTS WERE REAL.  THEY COULD HAVE EASILY (ABSOLVED) HUBERT IF THEY ALLOWED DNA TESTING FROM THE BEGINNING BUT THEY OBJECTED TO IT.  WHY?  BECAUSE THEY KNEW THAT IT WASN’T HUBERT’S SPERM BECAUSE THEY KNEW THAT HE WAS IN THE UNITED STATES.

We have waited fifteen long years for some people to start believing. Due to a judge and prosecution without any conscience, my brother has suffered much for a crime he very clearly did not do. All we pray is that he be set free so that he can pick up the pieces and start to live what he has left of his life. Let truth prevail.

no proof beyond the reasonably doubtful testimony and affidavits of a self-confessed nbi-asset-former?-drug-user.  ACQUIT HUBERT WEBB!

media, priests & abortion

media is plural for mediocre, rene saguisag says in his manila times column on the same day that mark robert b. baldo in a letter to the inquirer editor decries the failure of media to level-up the public debate on the RH bill.

A cursory look on the articles printed in this broadsheet shows this to be a recurring theme: luminaries using the infidelities of some Catholic priests in Europe to discredit the Church; some citing the political affiliations of some bishops; and others, presenting flawed accounts of Church history. This is a mistake because no longer do we hear mention of arguments by both parties.

… Media inevitably shape the public debate. I am not talking here about whether the bill should be passed or not, or whether the media should frame it in such a way that it would be passed or not. I am simply talking about how to frame the debate in such a way that it would stimulate productive discussion rather than a stirring drama about a declining institution in Philippine society.

indeed, na-sidetrack, nagpa-sidetrack, na lang ang media sa rizal vs. damaso drama ni carlos celdran.   easier naman talaga to go with the flow, kahit paatras, than to move on, against the tide, to the more difficult formidable challenging task of helping along the RH discourse toward a clear resolution.

in Some issues about the RH bills fr. joaquin bernas writes:

When does human life begin? We probably are all agreed that man must not destroy human life. Our Constitution protects life “from conception.” There is some indication in the deliberations of the 1987 Constitution Commission that this means “from fertilization.” But there are contrary views. Who will decide which view is correct?

granted, for the sake of no-argument, that the philippine constitution means “from fertilization” and that congress will so concur, what then?   logically, it should mean the end of all debate because as with the natural family planning method (no sex during ovulation), with artificial contraceptives no fertilization happens, which means no life is destroyed, so condoms, pills, and IUDs should be okay-all-right.

and yet and yet and yet, priests and other rabid pro-lifers continue to insist that birth control pills (that prevent ovulation so no egg is produced for sperm to fertilize) are abortifacients.   nakakaloka.   how canyou even begin an intelligent discussion???   for the longest time i couldn’t figure it out.   why the lying.   why the dishonesty.   why the misinformation.   until suddenly it dawned on me, after reading this, still from fr. bernas:

The determination about the beginning of human life will also be relevant to the debate on abortion. Clearly abortion is prohibited and penalized by law. But when does abortion take place? At what stage of the reproductive process will interruption be considered an offense against life? At fertilization or only after implantation? Are there birth control devices or pills which are abortifacient? If so, in what way? There is debate about the abortifacient effect of some birth control means. Who is to settle this debate—Congress? The Courts? Science? the Church? The ralliers? I understand that the various pharmaceutical and medical literature on this are conflictive.

the questions tell me that fr. bernas knows more than he’s telling, much like a parent who has a hard time talking to a teen child about sex because the openness and the info could be misconstrued as license to have sex.   in this case the information, which is most likely new to many many filipino women, rich and poor, young and old, could be misconstrued as license to interrupt the reproductive process by preventing the implantation of a fertilized egg, which apparently he equates with abortion.   i totally disagree.

just to make sure i have it right, i emailed my balikbayan brother dr. godofredo “butch” stuart, now based in tiaong, quezon, who is my first resource on contraception.   his response:

REPRO 101

Fertilization occurs when sperm-meets-ovum, 200 to 500 million sperms in the ejaculate, discharged into the vaginal vault, embarking on journey up the vagina, up the cervix. Only less than a thousand survive the swim and make it to the fallopian tube, into the “last lap” of their swim. These sperms have fertilizing capabilities that last only for 72 hours, sometimes 96 hours.

And once a month, normally, one mature egg is released from the ovary, fertilizable only for 24 hours. Into the fallopian tube it begins the journey, where it is met by one of the surviving sperma. So fertilization occurs, resulting in a zygote.

The germinal stage (0 to 2 weeks) begins when the zygote journeys down the fallopian tube to the uterus, reaching the uterus in 4 to 5 days, floating freely in the uterine cavity for several more days, finally adhering to the uterine wall about the 8th day after fertilization. By the 12th the egg is firmly implanted. And by the end of the second week the uterine wall has completely surrounded the newly developing organism.

This is the basic arithmetic on sperm and ovum life spans, and how the implantation happens many days later after fertilization. And how morning-after contraception works in the schemata of the germinal stage and implantation.

check out his website stuartxchange.com where he has a page on emergency post-coital contraception.   between fertilization of the egg and its implantation in the uterus, there’s a 7-day window during which contraceptive pills taken in certain doses effectively prevents implantation, which is how the morning-after pill (banned here) works.

the question is, when a woman resorts to emergency contraception, is that abortion?   i don’t think so.   while it is true that a fertilized egg has life, still it’s NOT A VIABLE LIFE, not until implantation.

DOC BUTCH :  Yes, non-viable until implantation.  Alive, yes, as in in-vitro fertilization, alive in the laboratory milieu, but still needing the uterine implantation to enter a sustaining nutritional environment.

which brings me back to fr. bernas’s questions: when does abortion take place?   answer: certainly not when a woman resorts to emergency contraception “the morning after” sex, because a fertilized egg (if at all there is one) is not yet a viable life-form.   and no, BIRTH CONTROL PILLS ARE NOT ABORTIFACIENTS:  once a fertilized egg has implanted onto the uterine wall, no amount of these pills can dislodge or remove it from the uterine wall.   (only real abortifacients can dislodge, abort, a zygote, but that’s for another blog.)

of course pro-lifers would disagree with me till kingdom come.   but try googling it and you will find that there are as many arguments for fertilization, as there are for implantation, as the beginning of human life.   so fr. bernas asks: who is to settle the debate re the alleged “abortifacient effect of some birth control means” — congress? the courts? science? the church? the ralliers?   answer: NONE OF THE ABOVE.   i say THE WOMAN DECIDES, not the priests or the opus deists.

DOC BUTCH : From opposing ends, it will never be answered or agreed upon. Yes, in the end, it should be the woman’s right, sole and inalienable, unburdened by archaic church edicts and impotent male political will. Too, a daunting responsibility for “educators” with the burdensome task of educating the womenfolk. And how to make the information available and comprehensible to the masa, who still resort to coat-hangers, grapevine pharmaceuticals, and dangerous herbal concoctions.

indeed.   widespread underground procedures kill about 1,000 women each year in this predominantly roman catholic country.

An estimated 560,000 women in the Philippines in 2008 sought abortion involving crude and painful methods such as intense abdominal massages by traditional midwives or inserting catheters into the uterus, said a report by the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights.

which brings me back to the media, which have the power and the means not only to shape the debate but to make available the information and educate the womenfolk, thereby “to change the status quo of high rates of infant mortality, maternal deaths, and abortions. It is a moral imperative that such dehumanizing conditions should not be allowed to continue.”

DOC BUTCH :    Media seems to kowtow to the powers that be.  It seems like institutional fear.  No cojones to challenge the church on such matters.  Or perhaps everyone of note in media went to the same church-sponsored Sex Education 101.  Masyadong malakas ang simbahan.

but is it just fear of excommunication and hellfire,  or is it also a lack of critical thinking,  and not caring enough about the issues that matter?   media is plural for mediocre?   yes, all of the above.

revisiting hubert webb

after catching most of cheche lazaro’s Dalawang Mukha ng Hustisya the other night, napaisip naman ako.   impossible not to be touched by the webb family’s stories and how they’ve never let up on loving, caring for, and visiting hubert in jail and believing in, swearing to, his innocence.   what if he IS innocent?

of course nakakadurog din naman ng puso ang nangyari sa vizconde mother and daughters.   impossible not to sympathize with the aggrieved husband and father and to understand why he agonizes over the webbs’ continuing appeal for reconsideration — if hubert et al are innocent, then who violated and massacred his loved ones, and why are they walking free?

so i was googling the case all day yesterday to refresh my memory and here are some worthy links:

pinoyexchange.com  forum december 30 1999 to january 8, 2000 :
The Vizconde Verdict

The Manila Times’ 2005 Special Report :
Questions linger in Vizconde case, Part I
Huberts main defense: ‘I was in California’ Part II

solita “winnie” monsod’s 2007 Inquirer column :
Hope for Hubert Webb

Sunday Inquirer Magazine’s 2008 feature :
The Vizconde Case

The Manila Times april 2010 report :
High Court reopens Vizconde massacre case

ramon tulfo’s april 2010 Inquirer column:
I Swear on Hubert Webb’s innocence

ramon tulfo’s may 2010 Bandera column :
Bakit ako atat na atat sa Vizconde Massacre?

winnie monsod’s june 2010 Inquirer column :
The case of the missing semen sample

cesar m. de los reyes’s letter to the editor, response to winnie :
Deprived of chance to prove innocence

alex magno’s july 2010 philippine star column :
DNA

pinoyexchange.com forum in reaction to cheche’s docu : The Vizconde Massacre: Do you believe that Hubert Webb is guilty?

also i found two links with information new to me.   the first from a pdf doc. “A Son, a Father and a Terrible Night” by Tamara de Guzman (google “When I first followed this crime, I believed Hubert Webb was guilty…”) where Freddie Webb is quoted as saying:

Partly because of my being in politics, my son got caught in the middle,” he finally said. “There were Indian nationals who were developing drugs in Las Piñas City, They were caught by the NBI (National Bureau of Investigation) and were locked up. I accidentally discovered a plan to free them and I exposed it. The investigation led back to their financier who has connections high up in the government. They got back at me through Hubert.

which was never reported by mainstream media (if memory serves), but was confirmed seconded by a commenter on ellen tordesilla’s blog:

Mike – February 12, 2010 1:27 am

With regards to Hubert Webb, I don’t think he is guilty of the crime (Vizconde massacre). Napaginitan si Senator Webb ng NBI coz pinakialaman niya yung kaso ng mga Indian drug traders who were in the custody of the NBI then and pinatakas. I think there were 12 of them Indian nationals. It was then Rep. Webb who asked for the investigation of the incident.

the second link is more recent.   a feb 2010 gmanews.tv report of senators probed for unethical/questionable conduct has this interesting detail:

In 1996, during the 10th Congress, Senator Freddie Webb was investigated for alleged abuse of authority and probable violation of laws in the employment of his son Hubert Webb in the Senate Electoral Tribunal.

This was after Webb claimed that his son, a suspect in the celebrated Vizconde massacre, was in the United States from March 9, 1991 to October 28, 1992 when his daily time record showed that he went to work, from 9 am to 6 pm.

The younger Webb was found guilty of the murder.

so.   senator webb was not found guilty.  i suppose it was punishment enough that his son was found guilty in the vizconde case?   the  senator must have soooo regretted falsifying time records (okay, if in fact he did), lalo na if these time records were known to the prosecution and the judge who rejected all evidence that hubert was out of the country.

just the same.   i find it strange that the court found alfaro, biong, his mistress, and the two webb housemaids more credible than the u.s. state department, immigration, the fbi, etc.   kasi daw the latter’s documents could have easily been faked.   really?   all of them?  wasn’t it much much easier to bribe the so-called witnesses into concocting that wild story of drugs, sex, and crime?

what i remember most about the 2000 verdict was that it was more sensational than surprising.   thanks to two carlos caparas films — The Vizconde Massacre: God Help Us! in 1993 starring kris aquino as carmela, and The Untold Story: Vizconde Massacre Two – May The Lord Be With Us in 1994 starring vina morales — the public was just oh-so-primed to see hubert hang.