China has asked all Philippine vessels to leave immediately Scarborough Shoal and sent a second aircraft buzzing over the area to scare away Filipino fishermen, officials said yesterday.Full Story
#9244 Aug 5, 2012
INTERNATIONAL LAW and CHINA'S Historical Claim
Chinese assertion based on historical claims must be substantiated by a clear historic title. It should be noted that under public international law, historical claims are not historical titles. A claim by itself, including historical claim, could not be a basis for acquiring a territory.
Under international law, the modes of acquiring a territory are: discovery, effective occupation, prescription, cession, and accretion. Also, under public international law, for a historical claim to mature into a historical title, a mere showing of long usage is not enough.
Other criteria have to be satisfied such as that the usage must be open, continuous, adverse or in the concept of an owner, peaceful and acquiesced by other states. Mere silence by other states to one's claim is not acquiescence under international law. Acquiescence must be affirmative such that other states recognize such claim as a right on the part of the claimant that other states ought to respect as a matter of duty. There is no indication that the International community have acquiesced to China's so-called historical claim.
In relation to name giving and maps, name-giving (or names in general) and placing of land features on maps, these are also not bases in determining sovereignty. In International case law relating to questions of sovereignty and ownership of land features, names and maps are not significant factors in the determination of international tribunals' determination of sovereignty.
Under international law, fishing rights is not a mode of acquiring sovereignty (or even sovereign rights) over an area. Neither could it be construed that the act of fishing by Chinese fishermen is a sovereign act of a State nor can be considered as a display of State authority. Fishing is an economic activity done by private Individuals. For occupation to be effective there has to be clear demonstration of the intention and will of a state to act as sovereign and there has to be peaceful and continuous display of state authority, which the Philippines has consistently demonstrated.
Besides when UNCLOS took effect, it has precisely appropriated various maritime zones to coastal states, thus eliminating so called historical waters and justly appropriating the resources of the seas to Coastal States to which said seas are appurtenant.'Traditional fishing rights" is in fact mentioned only in Article 51 of UNCLOS, which calls for archipelagic states to respect such rights, if such exist, in its archipelagic waters.
It should also be noted, that in this particular case, the activities of these so-called fishermen can be hardly described as fishing. The evidence culled by the Philippine Navy showed clearly that these are poaching activities involving the harvesting of endangered marine species which is illegal in the Philippines and illegal under international law, specifically the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).
#9245 Aug 5, 2012
Philippines' Claim and the International Law
1. UNCLOS - CHINA AGREED WITH IT. A SLAP TO CHINA'S FACE. China signed and ratified UNCLOS IN 1982.
The Convention concluded in 1982. To date, 162 countries INCLUDING CHINA have joined in the Convention.
1982 IS PRETTY RECENT. By law, NEWER treaties INVALIDATES "OLDER" TREATIES.
When China ratified UNCLOS in 1996, it gave up whatever historic rights it had to the natural resources in areas that are now the EEZ or continental shelf of other States. China's legal relations with other Parties to UNCLOS are now governed by UNCLOS, and China cannot use its domestic law as an excuse not to fulfill its international obligations under UNCLOS.
First, Article 10 (Part II, Article 10,#6) on bays provides that States may draw closing lines across the mouths of bays if such lines do not exceed 24 nm. Article 10 also states that the provision on bays does not apply to UNCLOS and contains only two provisions which are possibly relevant to so-called “historic bays”. Second, Article 15 (Part II, Article 15) on the delimitation of territorial sea boundaries provides that as a general rule, the median line should be applied in determining the territorial sea boundary, unless it is necessary by reason of historic title or other special circumstances to delimit the boundary in another matter. Third, Article 298 gives States Parties the right to opt out of the compulsory binding dispute settlement system in section 2 of Part XV for disputes involving “historic bays or titles”. Given these provisions, it can be argued that UNCLOS does not recognize any “historic waters” or “historic rights” in areas outside of the territorial sea.
Exclusive economic zones (EEZs)
These extend from the edge of the territorial sea out to 200 nautical miles (370 kilometres; 230 miles) from the baseline. Within this area, the coastal nation has sole exploitation rights over all natural resources. In casual use, the term may include the territorial sea and even the continental shelf. The EEZs were introduced to halt the increasingly heated clashes over fishing rights.
The continental shelf is defined as the natural prolongation of the land territory to the continental margin’s outer edge, or 200 nautical miles from the coastal state’s baseline, whichever is greater. A state’s continental shelf may exceed 200 nautical miles until the natural prolongation ends. However, it may never exceed 350 nautical miles (650 kilometres; 400 miles) from the baseline; or it may never exceed 100 nautical miles (190 kilometres; 120 miles) beyond the 2,500 meter isobath (the line connecting the depth of 2,500 meters). Coastal states have the right to harvest mineral and non-living material in the subsoil of its continental shelf, to the exclusion of others. Coastal states also have exclusive control over living resources "attached" to the continental shelf, but not to creatures living in the water column beyond the exclusive economic zone.
Philippines' 200 Mile EEZ
PART VIII of UNCLOS
Official UNCLOS SITE: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreem...
REGIME OF ISLANDS
1. An island is a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at high tide.
2. Except as provided for in paragraph 3, the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf of an island are determined in accordance with the provisions of this Convention applicable to other land territory.
3. Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.
Picture of Scarborough Shoal
Scarborough Shoal is not an island and it cannot support human habitation therefore it cannot have 200 EEZ
Scarborough Shoal is submerged at high tide. It is unimaginable how the ancient Chinese could have inhabited it.
#9246 Aug 5, 2012
International Law and the Philippines Claim
2. Effective Jurisdiction
Palmas Island (now part of Indonesia) was included in the TREATY OF PARIS, BUT THE INTERNATIONAL COURT FAVORED THE NETHERLANDS because it demonstrated EFFECTIVE EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION. Indeed, in that particular case, sovereignty over the Palmas Island was adjudged in favor of the Netherlands on the basis of "effective exercise of jurisdiction'' although the said island may have been historically discovered by Spain and historically ceded to the US in the Treaty of Paris.
Official UN REPORT of the US vs the Netherlands Island of Palmas Case: http://untreaty.un.org/cod/riaa/cases/vol_II/...
In the case of Scarborough shoal and the Spraltys, the Philippines has exercised both effective occupation and effective jurisdiction.
1. The Philippines currently controls 7 Spratly Islands, China has ZERO. China only controls reefs which are under water. Per UNCLOS, the waters above those reefs are part of the Philippines' EEZ. So China' is occupying the reefs illegally!
Scarborough Shoal - Chinese ships just recently started staying there, to be exact just since April 2012, which is more like a form of HARASSMENT rather than effective jurisdiction. The Judge will base it on the time frame of effective jurisdiction. The Philippines is documenting everything they do. Though the Philippines hasn't sent their ships back, Philippine Aircrafts continue to fly around the area from time to time to exert sovereignty.
2. THE PHILIPPINES has ARRESTED A LOT OF ILLEGAL CHINESE, VIETNAMESE, AND TAIWANESE FISHERMEN IN SCARBOROUGH SHOAL WITHOUT ANY PROTEST FROM CHINA, VIETNAM OR TAIWAN. CHINA PROTESTED JUST RECENTLY.
SAME WITH THE SPRATLYS, THE PHILIPPINES HAS ARRESTED ILLEGAL CHINESE, VIETNAMESE, AND MALAYSIANS WITHOUT ANY PROTEST FROM THEIR RESPECTED COUNTIRES.
FACT: CHINA NEVER ARRESTED FILIPINO FISHERMEN IN THE DISPUTED ISLANDS.
THE PHILIPPINES HAS ALSO CAPTURED ILLEGAL CHINESE FISHING BOATS
3. THE PHILIPPINE NAVY AND COASTGUARD HAVE ALWAYS BEEN PATROLLING THE ISLANDS.
4. Scarborough Shoal was also used as an impact range by Philippine and U.S. Naval Forces stationed in Subic Bay in Zambales for defense purposes.
FACT: CHINA NEVER PROTESTED.
5. The Phil. has also been conducting scientific, topographic, and marine studies in the disputed islands
6. Filipino fishermen have been fishing in the disputed areas since prehistory
7. The Philippines has a municipality in the disputed islands called Pag-Asa. You can find houses, a school, military posts, and other infrastructures.
See pictures below
http://i48.tinypic.com/34ffhpt.jpg - Elementary School
http://i45.tinypic.com/6zq0pi.jpg - Government Building
http://i50.tinypic.com/jif51l.jpg - Naval Station
7. Philippine Flag on Scarborough Shoal
Reef - is not an Island, a reef is a submerged ridge of rock or coral near the surface of the water.
Per UNLCOS, they don't qualify for 200 mile EEZ
An example of an illegally occupied Chinese reef
http://i46.tinypic.com/208z7mp.jpg - Mischef Reef
see its not an island! It is not above the water!
And per UNLCOS the water above the reefs are part of the Philippines EEZ!
Philippine Occupied Spratly Islands AGAIN ISLANDS (not reefs)
3. West York
6. Lankiam - the smallest Spratly Island
7. Flat Island
How bout the PRC?
Taiwan is not a country, under International law, only recognize countries can claim territories.
No International Law supports its 9 dash line claim!
#9247 Aug 5, 2012
International Law and the Philippines' Claim
3. ARCHIPELAGIC DOCTRINE (UNCLOS Chapter IV)
Archipelago is defined as a sea or part of a sea studded with islands, often synonymous with island groups, or as a large group of islands in an extensive body of water, such as sea.
In various conferences of the United Nations on the Law of the Sea, the Philippines and other archipelago states proposed that an archipelagic state composed of groups of islands forming a state is a single unit, with the islands and the waters within the baselines as internal waters. By this concept (archipelagic doctrine), an archipelago shall be regarded as a single unit, so that the waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago, irrespective of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the state, subject to its exclusive sovereignty.
Despite the opposition of maritime powers, the Philippines and four other states (Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Bahamas) got the approval in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea held in Jamaica last December 10, 1982. They were qualified as archipelagic states. The archipelagic doctrine is now incorporated in Chapter IV of the said convention. It legalizes the unity of land, water and people into a single entity
The Philippines bolstered the archipelagic principle in defining its territory when it included in Article 1 of the 1987 Constitution the following:
"The national territory comprises the Philippine Archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein xxx"; and
"The waters around, between and connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines."
On the strength of these assertions, the Philippines Archipelago is considered as one integrated unit instead of being divided into more than seven thousand islands. The outermost of our archipelago are connected with straight baselines and all waters inside the baselines are considered as internal waters. This makes the large bodies of waters connecting the islands of the archipelago like Mindanao Sea, Sulu Sea and the Sibuyan Sea part of the Philippines as its internal waters, similar to the rivers and lakes found within the islands themselves.
The archipelagic principle however is subject to the following limitations:
a) respect for the right of the ship and other states to pass through the territorial as well as archipelagic waters
b) respect to right of innocent passage
c) respect for passage through archipelagic sea lanes subject to the promulgation by local authorities of pertinent rules and regulation
The Philippine Archipelago
In other words, the Spratly Islands and Scarborough Shoal are part of the PHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGO.
CHINA is not an archipelago.
The Spratly Islands are very close to the Island of PALAWAN, therefore, the Philippines, the Spratly Islands, and the Island of Palawan together with Scarborough Shoal per UN Convention Chapter IV is a single unit.
There is no doubt that the Spratly Islands and Scarborough Shoal are part of the PHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGO.
YOU DO NOT HAVE TO DO AN EXTENSIVE RESEARCH, JUST LOOK AT THE MAP AND USE YOUR COMMON SENSE.
AGAIN, THE SPRATLY ISLANDS AND SCARBOROUGH SHOAL ARE PART OF THE PHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGO
UNCLOS CHAPTER IV.
#9248 Aug 5, 2012
The Chinese think the older the map, the stronger it is as evidence.
Assuming that the Chinese really have the 1270's map in their possession and presents it as evidence, the document proves the Chinese MAY have discovered the shoal back then and documented it.
But the Philippines is using the 1600's map not for determining who mapped the area first, but to prove that they exercised effective jurisdiction of the area since the1600's.
Some European Maps
1. http://i46.tinypic.com/4kbp1y.jpg - Spain (Treaty of Paris Party)
2. http://i45.tinypic.com/33feyvl.jpg - Spain
3. http://i45.tinypic.com/oqjb6u.jpg - Italy
Who wins the legal battle then when these two evidences are presented? Obviously, the Philippines!
Effective jurisdiction supersedes discovery in any territorial claim.
Chinese historical claims are not recognized under international law.
The 1279 surveying point mentioned in Guo Shoujing's (chinese astronomer) work was actually a place along the coast of central Vietnam NOT the Scarborough shoal.(p.202 of Guo Shoujing pingzhuan, Nanjing University Press, 2003).
How can a 1279 Yuan dynasty map be a basis of today’s claim of territorial ownership? Like what I have pointed out, Italy cannot claim most of Europe today based on Alexander the Great's Roman Empire hundreds of years ago. That is also true with what Gheng His Khan and Napoleon Bonaparte conquered territories in Asia and Europe also hundreds or thousands of years ago.
Again, historical claims are not recognized in international law.
It doesn't matter who can produce the oldest map because old maps do not determine today's boundaries! What's important is that international law (based on international customs and treaties such as UNCLOS) sides with the Philippines. China cannot claim Scarborough as an integral part of its territory or its baseline because Scarborough is a shoal that is INCAPABLE OF SUPPORTING PERMANENT HUMAN SETTLEMENT.
Fact: Chinese historical claim is based on a HOAX. NO Chinese official or scholar have ever identified the specific historical document supporting Beijing's claim. The rest of the world relies on EVIDENCE. All the official Chinese Imperial Maps that I've seen show that the southernmost extent of China ends at Hainan islands.
The Chinese claims they have been fishing there since ancient times. Let me ask you these questions:
Again we are talking about Ancient Times
1. How many weeks or months does it take for a small Chinese fishing vessel without motor and relying on the wind alone to reach Scarborough Shoal or Spratlys and back?
2. What do they fish there and what do they bring back to China after months WITHOUT REFRIGERATION?
3. You don't have enough fish near China that you have to go alllllllllllllllllllll the way to the Philippines to fish huh? Since ancient times???
So funny. Common sense please.
Under international law, fishing rights is not a mode of acquiring sovereignty (or even sovereign rights) over an area. Neither could it be construed that the act of fishing by Chinese fishermen is a sovereign act of a state nor can be considered as a display of state authority. Fishing is an economic activity done by private individuals. For occupation to be effective, there has to be clear demonstration of the intention and will of a state to act as sovereign, and there has to be a peaceful and continuous display of state authority, which the Philippines has consistently demonstrated.
#9249 Aug 5, 2012
China claims that they first EXERCISED Jurisdiction over the Islands
1. How could the Chinese possibly control those islands when they are too far from them?
*Again we are talking about ANCIENT TIMES- consider sailing and navigational hardness worsened by typhoons and bad weather (let's just say).
Let’s face the reality, during ancient times, how could Chinese fishermen have inhabited those Islands without water, food, and proper shelter? Common sense, even today, people there need to be supplied with foods, supplies, electricity etc.
2. Are the Chinese not familiar with Kingdoms with very EFFICIENT navigational skills that leave very very close to the disputed islands during that time? Vietnam was even trading with the Philippines (you will see below).
The Austronesians were able to discover the Pacific Islands and Madagascar which is in Afica from South East Asia. Though they did not invent writing to record their discovery, it would be ludicrous to deny their discovery of the islands so close to the Philippines, Vietnam, and Borneo in light of the fact that they were able to discover the various islands in the vast Pacific and Indian Ocean.
The Austronesians, specifically the Malayo-Polynesian speakers controlled the TRADE traffic between India and China.
Austronesian Kingdoms of South East Asia
Ausronesians Controlled the PACIFIC OCEAN including SOUTH CHINA SEA before the European Colonization.
1. Kingdom of CHAMPA (0192–1832)- Central and Southern Vietnam. The Malay-speaking, Hinduized Cham seagoing empire of central Vietnam dominated South China Sea trade until it was conquered by the Vietnamese about the time the European traders began to arrive in Asia, while trade between Champa (present-day central and southern Vietnam) and Luzon (Philippines) was well established long before the Chinese drew their 13th century map.
Indeed, long before Chinese ships began to regularly sail it, the sea was known to the 10th-century Arab traveler and geographer al-Masudi as the Cham Sea. This was in recognition of the fact that at the time, and for another 400 years, the principal seafarers and merchants in the region were from Champa, the Malay (in its broadest sense)-speaking, Hindu-worshipping nation based on the central Vietnam coast.
It was probably from Champa that the Philippines acquired the Indian-type scripts used on the islands prior to the arrival of the Spanish.
2. Majapahit Empire (1293 -1500)- According to the Nagarakretagama (Desawarñana) written in 1365, Majapahit was an empire of 98 tributaries, stretching from Sumatra to New Guinea; consisting of present day Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, southern Thailand, the Philippines, and East Timor (The Spratlys are within these boundaries)
3. Srivijaya 7th century–13th century - The empire thus grew to control the trade on the Strait of Malacca, Sunda Strait, the SOUTH CHINA SEA, the Java Sea, and Karimata Strait.
By the twelfth century, the kingdom included parts of Sumatra, the Malay Peninsula, Western Java, Sulawesi, the Moluccas, BORNEO and the PHILIPPINES.
4. Kingdom of Brunei - Northern Borneo, some parts of southern Philippines and MANILA
5. Sultanate of Sulu (1457–1917)- Dates back from the Mahjapahit and Shrivijaya empires, which extended from Sabah, the Sulu archipelago, Palawan, parts of Mindanao, the islands now known as the Spratlys, Palawan, and up to the Visayas and Manila.
#9250 Aug 5, 2012
The historical facts are that the Chinese were latecomers to navigation in the South China Sea and beyond. They were invisible before the Tang Dynasty, and although vast amounts have been written about Chinese expeditions under Admiral Zheng around Asia and across the Indian Ocean to Africa in the early 15th century, these occurred more than a thousand years after Malay seafarers began to cross the Indian Ocean.
When Chinese Buddhist pilgrims like Faxian went to Sri Lanka in the 5th century, they went in ships owned and operated by Malay peoples. Ships from what is now the Philippines traded with Funan, a state in what is now southern Vietnam, 1,000 years before the Yuan dynasty. China makes much of the early 15th century expeditions of Zheng He to the Indian Ocean and Africa. But Indonesians had been crossing that ocean at least 1,000 years earlier, settling in Madagascar, the fourth-largest island in the world. Their twin-outrigger ships enabled quite swift passage across the ocean, and the Indonesians also left their mark on the coast of Africa before being supplanted by Indian and then Arab traders.
“The seafaring history of the region at least for the first millennium of the current era was dominated by the ancestors of today's Indonesians, Malaysians, Filipinos and (less directly) Vietnamese (Austronesian Chams).” This statement at least is supported by current historical and anthropological knowledge.(Victor T. King,“Ethnolinguistic Groups of Southeast Asia,” inSoutheast Asia: A Historical Encyclopedia, from Angkor Wat to East Timor, ed. Ooi Keat Gin, pp. 492-498, Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, Inc., 2004). known as the Spratlys, Palawan, and up to the Visayas and Manila.
VARIOUS EUROPEAN COUNTIES HAVE ALSO DOMINATED THE AREA LIKE FRANCE, BRITAIN, AND SPAIN. HOW COULD HAVE THE CHINESE MAINTAINED EFFECTIVE CONTIUNOUS JURISDICTION SINCE 1270’s?
Just because China have old maps showing islands and shoals on their ancient maps doesn't mean it is theirs. They identified these shoals and islands as navigational tools. They went through these waters to trade or on their way to trade, not to claim these places as theirs. They needed to identify the shoals and other shallow waters as a warning so that their ships will not go aground.
The tendency of the Communist Party government in China, as elsewhere, to rewrite history to reflect changes in personnel or ideology is well known. Less noticed, however, is the tendency to rewrite national history to justify expansionist foreign policies. The recent stand-off between Chinese and Philippine ships is a case in point.
China’s case as expounded by the Foreign Ministry is one where the only history that matters is Han Chinese. Its claim reads:“It is China who first discovered Huangyan Island” and “drew into China’s map in China’s Yuan dynasty (1271-1368AD)”. This is like Europeans claiming that they got to Australia before the Aboriginals or the Americas before Native Americans.
The weakness of China’s case explains why it is not prepared to discuss overlapping claims with its regional neighbors as a group, and why it will not submit South China Sea issues to international arbitration under the terms of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. In the case of the (never inhabited) Scarborough Shoal, its claims would almost certainly be rejected.
#9251 Aug 5, 2012
No LEGITIMATE Country Supports Chinese 9 Dash Claim
They want International Law to be used SPECIFICALLY UNCLOS which CHINA SIGNED!
ASEAN (CAMBODIA, MYANMAR, BURMA, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Singapore, Brunei, Philippines)
ASEAN countries have agreed on the bloc’s six-point principles which include: Full implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the East Sea (2002) and using International Law to settle dispute, including the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)
Russia Pronounce its support to the Philippines over Spratly disputes with china and other claimants. Russia is supporting the Philippines' stand that RULES based on transparency and diplomacy should be used to resolve maritime issues.
International Law must be used to resolve dispute
EU-Asia Center director Fraser Cameron said during a forum in Manila that the EU supports a rules-based international system and liberty of navigation. The EU believes that territorial disputes should be resolved “in accordance with international law"
New Zealand backs Philippine position on Spratlys
New Zealand supports the position of the Philippines and other allies that claimants to the Spratly chain of islands must heed the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)
Malaysia is supporting the Philippines' stand that Manila's dispute with China over ownership of Scarborough shoal should be resolved based on the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)
1) Support for the “sovereign rights” of the Philippines in the Scarborough Shoal.
2) Opposition to China’s use of the “nine-dashed line” to make overlapping claims with the Exclusive Economic Zones and continental shelves of the Philippines, Vietnam and other ASEAN countries, as well as opposition to “China’s actions and threats of force,”
3) Support for the Philippines’ proposal to submit the dispute at Scarborough Shoal to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS).
President Aquino and Noda “confirmed that freedom of navigation, unimpeded commerce, and compliance with established international law including the UNCLOS and the peaceful settlement of disputes serve the interests of the two countries and the whole region.”
Australia said those involved in the territorial dispute — Brunei, China, Malaysia, Philippines, and Taiwan — should adhere to UNCLOS, which codifies the international law of the sea.
They should be following international law, the rule of law, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos),
Indonesia supports PHL stand on Spratlys
China’s consistent refusal to bring its claim to the United Nations International Court of Justice (ICJ) or to the United Nation’s International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) by itself is a tacit admission that it cannot prove its so called historical claim before a proper neutral court
Saint Paul, MN
#9253 Aug 5, 2012
We know that it's been repeated many times. The problem is how to stop the xhinese military adventurism and who is going to stop them and what is going to stop them. God maybe? Send in the bishops to stop them with religious power.
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
#9254 Aug 5, 2012
The mission here for these DISHONEST PINYOY here is to hide the TRUTH and so they continue to post the irrelevant articles which they have posting 100X. to hide comments and articles or those which makes them look like a FOOLS!
Starts reading from #9230 onward to discover what these detractors are trying to conceal.
This is the FALLACY of DEMOCRACY and that is why I do not believe in it!
And for it to succeed, the ruling class needs a DEPENDANT CLASS - the poor in order to bribe them to VOTE for them!!!!
Benigno Aquino III hated this man who exposed him.
As I’ve said so many times before, all elections are local. People in the provinces, and even in many areas of the National Capital region, don’t really care who will make it as president, vice president and even senators.
This is why national candidates rely on local politicians to carry them.
I have to say it, but the Philippines is still very much a FEUDALISTIC state. People in the provinces RELY much on local leaders to provide food on the table, livelihood, education and health care.
That’s why the campaign line of local candidates is:“If you are in trouble and you go to me for help, I also WANT YOUR help to vote for somebody I am endorsing.”
And that means money for local politicians. In fact, the rivalry is so heated in some areas that there is bloodshed. To local politicians, funding is survival —it spells the difference between victory and defeat.
My gulay, why do you think movie icon Fernando Poe Jr. lost? The usual talk is that he was cheated but in reality, his funding dried up!
Commission on Elections Chairman Jose Melo should not be pressured by business sectors identified with the Yellow Brigade of Noynoy and other segments of society to have a manual count of the May 10 polls.
If Melo and his fellow commissioners relent and submit to this pressure, they in effect would be admitting that automation will not work, and that would be a reflection on the credibility and integrity of the Comelec after it paid P7.1 billion to Smartmatic to give us an automated election.
The only reason I see why Noynoy’s fanatics are insisting on manual count and audit is that they don’t trust Comelec to give us a credible election.
They are also trying to make a connection between the possible results of the automated count and what happened in the 1986 snap elections. This was one of the triggers of the Edsa Revolution.
Saint Paul, MN
#9255 Aug 5, 2012
So how much per hpur do you charde cvcp for you dumb effortsw?
#9256 Aug 5, 2012
Heyhey. Don't push your bullshet to the Filipinos.
You're the one trying to change the topic here by posting irrelevant articles.
Austronesian Guy have posted very valid articles and arguments that you chinamen have repeatedly neglected due to the fact that you know you lose the case.
Everything here is common sense chinaman. Obviously, the Philippines is on the right side of the law and is the rightful owner of Scarborough.
If you're being paid to defend china, at least do it properly and do it with intelligence. Stop posting nonsense and arguing like a whimpering coward.
#9258 Aug 5, 2012
I'm still waiting for China to fire at any Philippine Vessels.
So far they haven't done anything.
You know whats gon happen to them if they do that.
It will be COMMUNIST China VS the WORLD.
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
#9260 Aug 6, 2012
SHAMELESS low IQ chinaman CEV or Donkey Kong!
This article is not mean your caste of low IQ apes as someone so aptly put it!
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
#9261 Aug 6, 2012
That will probably NOT COME because low IQ astro-apes like you did not realize the BALL is in your own court!
China has already started fire the first shot by FORTIFYING these shoals.
Now confront her!!!! Hahahahahah
And I see PINYOY's occupation of these islands of Kalayan, Panatag island become history.
Look at the Olympics, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, etc all have a medal except PHILIPPINES!!!! Hahahahaha
The SUPERPOWERS are all at the TOP!!!!
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
#9262 Aug 6, 2012
One of his articles he wrote and he is RIGHT about many thing?
Why I won’t vote for Noynoy?
If we were watching a basketball game, we would now be in the last two minutes. The May 10 elections is only less than two weeks away, and anything can still happen.
Despite what the poll surveys say, I still believe that it is a four-cornered fight among Liberal Party standard bearer Senator Benigno Aquino III, Nacionalista Party standard bearer Senator Manuel Villar, former President Joseph Estrada of the Pwersa ng Masang Pilipino and even administration candidate former Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro.
I have been a journalist for over half a century and I have covered elections since as early as the Laurel-Quirino fight. I know for a fact that there are so many imponderable factors in Philippine elections.
These imponderable factors are vote buying (especially in the provinces), cheating in spite of an automated election, command votes, violence, failure of the Precinct Count Optical Scan machines, disenfranchisement of voters, power outages and even the weather. Hence, I would prefer not to predict a winner at this point.
Santa Banana, despite avowals by the Commission on Elections and sectors guarding our ballots, and while I’m hoping for the best, I also know for a fact that old habits die hard. We should also not forget the Golden Rule in Philippine elections—he who has the gold rules!
The only thing I’m sure of is that I will not vote for Aquino. I’ve cited my reasons so many times before. I will say them again.
First and foremost are perceptions (or rumors) that Noynoy is mentally unstable, having been autistic at an earlier age. He has repeatedly refused to undergo a psychiatric exam if only to prove his critics wrong.
And then, at the age of 26, he reportedly violated the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act by putting up a security agency (bearing his initials, BSA) with his uncle-in-law Len Oreta. The company cornered contracts with sequestered companies during the incumbency of his late mother President Cory Aquino. If this is not conflict of interest, I don’t know what is.
My gulay, Noynoy even had the gall to list the presidential residence on Arlegui Street as the company’s official address!
And then there are the Hacienca Luisita massacres and the Kamaganak Inc. I was among the latter’s victims. I was co-founder of Erectors Inc.(with the late Transportation Minister Totoy Dans). My investment of P200,000 disappeared into thin air.
The same group which comprised Noynoy’s security agency reportedly grabbed an insurance company owned by a Chinese-Filipino who was accused by the Marcos dictators of something. The group then went on to corner, together with the Government Service Insurance System, all insurance contracts of government firms.
Santa Banana, some people really laughed all the way to the bank. The big scam at the time was the GSIS’ striking an insurance deal with Lloyds of London. Can you imagine the kickbacks that some people must have had?
This is why I can’t stomach voting for the son of Ninoy and Cory.
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
#9263 Aug 6, 2012
This returnee arrived from USA and immediately set the region into tensions with her neighbors?
One must be low IQ, not to see the connection??? hahahaha
In order to understand the overall picture of SCS, one must understand a little bit about DIRTY PINYOY politics!
Meet our newest superhero: NEUTRALNOY!
Manila Standard Today columnist Emil Jurado got it spot on when he tried to explain the erosion of support for Noynoy “Son of Ninoy and Cory” Aquino.
“… the dimming of Aquino’s star may be attributed to his being a candidate “against” something, not “for” something. More people are also becoming aware of his lack of track record and competence.”
When you go on national television to say nothing aside from running after crooks and vowing not to steal, then you’re standing on pretty shaky ground.
Jurado continues:“And when Noynoy says in his informercial,‘hindi ako magnanakaw (I will not steal),’ we just have to see the faces around him salivating for a return to power. And then we remember the many anomalies perpetrated by Kamag-anak Inc. during his mother’s time.
Yes, Aquino says he is running AGAINST graft and corruption, injustice, poverty (as if that can be solved in our lifetime), and insurgency. All these are motherhood statements. Come to think of it, what’s Noynoy running FOR?
He has nothing to show us, really. His stint as a legislator has been untainted all right, untainted with accomplishments. He relies solely on the alleged legacy of his famous parents.
The problem with the Noynoy campaign is that it’s anchored on hate and vindictiveness.”
Ironically, the Yellow Army fancies itself as standing for good against evil. Noynoy’s more rabid supporters delude themselves into thinking they are the messiahs of the Philippines — it is only them who are thinking for the good of the country.
Mired in this hopeless, deluded mindset, Noynoy supporters mistakenly assume we are in the same situation as we were in 1986.
No, there is no dictator to topple. Though we hate GMA and her cronies with a passion, we are not in the chokehold of dictatorship or even martial law.
But that’s how the LP Mafia want to spin it. They want to create an impression of chaos and present themselves as the only option to get us out of it.
If Noynoy was so ardent about doing good and standing up against evil, what explains a non-existent record in the Senate and House?
I mean, he was just going with the flow the whole time. Walang bahid ng abilidad. Walang pinakitang kakayahan.
Now, all of a sudden, he is the man who can do no wrong (or good)?
He is our newest superhero –NEUTRALNOY! Neither here nor there… neither good nor bad. He’s just, well, IS.
God help us all.
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
#9264 Aug 6, 2012
When President or the legislators consisting of mainly all the President's men, started screwing around with the Judiciary, isn't that the beginning of the end of real DEMOCRACY and the beginning of another DICTATORSHIP!
Now all you needed is an old trick in the book: An external bogeyman to distract the internal politic?
Prosecution’s blunders blamed on PNoy
March 02, 2012
Lee Ann P. Ducusin
MILITANT Kilusang Mayo Uno yesterday heaped the blame for the impeachment prosecution’s blunders on President Benigno Aquino III.
KMU Chairperson Elmer Labog said Aquino is to be blamed for the sudden announcement of the prosecution panel in the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona that it is resting its case amidst perception that it messed up in the task of laying the basis for Corona’s conviction by the court.
“We blame no other than the President,” he said.
The prosecution panel scrapped five out of the eight articles of impeachment which it had initially submitted to the impeachment trial, preempting the possible testimony of a key witness, Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno, before the court.
“It is now clear that the prosecution panel, under the direction of President Aquino, has failed miserably to do its homework. It is also now clear that the President opted to wage a propaganda campaign against Corona in the hope that he would be forced to resign, instead of ensuring that he would be impeached,” Labog said.
“The original sin is the blitzkrieg fashion in which the impeachment complaint was crafted and passed under the President’s orders. The result was a poorly-prepared complaint the weakness of which the Aquino government tried to hide with propaganda hype,” he added.
The KMU said Aquino’s haste to remove Corona and control the Supreme Court stems from his desire to get back at Corona for the SC’s decision on the Hacienda Luisita case, which ordered that the hacienda’s lands be distributed to farmers.
“The impeachment complaint clearly suffered because of the President’s haste to remove Corona in order to reverse the SC’s decision on Hacienda Luisita. A more noble motive, such as going after Arroyo, would have meant creating a solid complaint even if it would take more time,” he said.
“President Aquino’s motive of overturning the Supreme Court decision on Hacienda Luisita was exposed by the special treatment which his government gave to Arroyo in prison, and his Ombudsman’s decision to downgrade the plunder cases against Arroyo to mere graft cases,” he added.
Labog stressed that the people’s desire for the impeachment of Corona so the government can go after Arroyo has been undermined by the President’s selfish motives.
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
#9265 Aug 6, 2012
1. So is Philippines playing into the hand of the US hawks?
2. Whose interest is Benigno Aquino III looking after - those of Philippines or others? I will explain later on this.
3. Who are in fact funds Benigno Aquino III Political campaign and agenda past and present?
4. Freedom in navigation in the SCS which have been quoted by USA has been pledged by China before? So what are they talking about?
5. Is this all about the covert undersea navigation that went unnoticed by all ASEAN and the rest of the world by the SUPERPOWERS?
#9266 Aug 6, 2012
We will take a few Pinays as wives. This should improve their lot in life.
Add your comments below
|Islam Will Conquer Italy and the Entire West (Sep '10)||4 min||Nina de fuego||386,418|
|Video of Greek army creates controversy in region||6 min||Kuvayi Milliye||476|
|United Front Against Turkey?: Top Cypriot Legis...||8 min||greek||204|
|UPDATE 2-China ramps up crude buying, reserves ...||10 min||RESISTANCE IS FUTILE||4|
|LDS Apostle visited Tonga (Feb '14)||11 min||tongangodz||23,346|
|Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06)||11 min||Grau||119,279|
|UK party leaders promise Scotland new powers||16 min||Swedenforeve||35|
Find what you want!
Search World News Forum Now
Copyright © 2014 Topix LLC