«

»

Dec 28

Impunity

liberty, equality, fraternity

(Free Press editorial cartoon from the 1920s.)

Gentility is supposed to permeate places like country clubs and golf courses. They are the places where the hoi polloi are kept out and where everyone else can see and be seen. When someone like Bambee dela Paz and her family collide with official thugs, the collision isn’t just physical, it’s cultural. The set of rules that keeps the plebs in their place is never supposed to intrude into places where gentility matters.

But power, which relies on armed might to enforce obedience and simulate public respect, by it’s very nature isn’t genteel, can never be civil, will always ride roughshod over others.

I fully sympathize with dela Paz, her father, and her brother: bravo to her for raising hell and bravo to all those who’ve taken up her call for there to be consequences for what happened to them.

There is an irony here, of course: several, actually.

230307_01fg_ad_640

One irony is that gentility is the last thing that really matters in the supposed enclaves of the middle and upper classes, where the old days of black balling potential members because they were scandalous or generally socially unsavory individuals has long disappeared and been replaced by the sort of entitlement culture where mere possession of wealth or influence (the two are joined at the hip like Siamese twins) trumps all other considerations (how obtained and how used?) is what matters.

Another irony is that this incident could only have happened in the national capital, where an altercation in one place can safely be reported by someone when they get home: the metropolis is vast enough for you to be able to get away with blowing the whistle, everyone has kinship ties extended enough, at least among the middle and upper classes, to neutralize those belonging to those with whom you’ve collided.

There is a reason rallies tend to take place in national capitals; there is a reason a young lady can go and blog and have people rally to her cause in sympathy, both expecting something to be done and not having to think through whether the call and rallying to that call will have fatal consequences. It is the existence of a civic culture which is still powerful enough to compel limits on official impunity.

So we have here a clear clash of civilizations: between the entitlement and warlord culture of the provinces, which compels obedience by force, and which doesn’t hesitate to use that force to compel submission by anyone who isn’t part of the ruling clan’s pecking order of enforcers; and the national capital culture which expects self-control of officialdom, which doesn’t think twice about standing up to official bullying; which, even if beaten to a pulp thinks it’s possible to rally support from like-minded people who actually believe in justice and notions of equality -because there are more decent people than the bad.

Still another irony is that People Power is now being mobilized -its first stirrings being the sharing of officially embarrassing news, the stoking of popular outrage, the expression of public opinion, the coming together of a constituency mobilized by shared values- among the sort of people who’d shrugged off so many other acts of official impunity. There is a lesson here somewhere: and it’s a simple one. Impunity eventually sows the seeds of its own destruction. There will always come a time when a line will be crossed, and it’s a line too far.

Which is not to say that this incident will cause a revolution; but it is proof of how reality will always intrude into even the politest of conversations.

The coming year is going to be a showdown, of sorts, between the exponents of the culture of impunity, from the President to her allies on the official and local level. It is a showdown between those who furiously resent a political culture where public opinion matters, where impunity is challenged, and where privilege is supposed to be something subjected to questioning.

In Resistance isn’t futile, I mentioned just one way I oppose impunity: by blowing my horn at official convoys. This holiday season, I had the satisfaction of doing so, to the president’s convoy itself, twice. The second time around, the President passed within spitting distance and the PSG actually craned their necks to get a view at whoever was committing this act of lese majeste. They genuinely seemed startled. I myself was startled to see that the President no longer uses license plate No. 1 on her car. Her limousine has no license plate, at all.

My point is we see this impunity all the time, in small ways, and shrug it off -oddly enough, in the same manner we shrug off the big, spectacular, cases of impunity, too- when we ought to start tying it all together.

And their project next year is to basically abolish public opinion; to reduce it to its component local parts, where public opinion has been muted, and where it can be treated in such a way and such a manner as to be beyond questioning, court cases, heckling, letters to the editor or blog entries demanding resignations: because the trump card of an official when it comes to the provinces is the message every bodyguard represents: you can run, but you can’t hide.

Wait till the Nasser Pangandamans of this country are both members of parliament and ministers of state, ruling over Federal states where their writ is literally and not just figuratively, the law.

You’ve seen what has been unfolding over the past few years and what is out to entrench itself over the first quarter of this year.

The danger is to confuse the forest for the trees. We are susceptible to doing this: shrieking over Estrada’s threatening to run for office, while overlooking the President who cynically released him with a pardon; twisting Cory Aquino’s comments out of all recognition while overlooking how truly mistaken everyone was, to think the President would be a stateswoman and not a thug in skirts; wringing our hands over Mar Roxas’s cussing when no government since martial law has so thoroughly justified cussing because of it’s crossing every line, written or not, expected of officialdom; placing traffic and corporate premiums over public demonstrations of outrage; venomously scorning Jun Lozada while overlooking the officials who wanted him rubbed out and who very nearly managed to do it.

The Japanese had a chance to be welcomed to the Philippines, as they were in many other parts of Asia, as liberating heroes, except they proceeded to slap Filipinos who refused to bow to them; and so, resistance was immediately sparked, even among those disillusioned with the Allied cause. Again, I’m not saying this appalling incident will accomplish anything more than inspire horrified tut-tutting over how tasteless, and ungentlemanly, the President’s official family is. But you never know.

Postscript:

The incident seems destined to get bogged down in Court. Court is appropriate for determining the monentary compensation due the ones beaten up. The Court of Public Opinion is where this ought to be settled politically, and the political solution is twofold: the resignation of the Secretary of Agrarian Reform or his being fired if he refuses to quit; and the suspension of the Secretary’s son, the mayor, immediately. And if those currently angry really want to do something, then they belong to the circles of our society that can effectively embark on a campaign of social ostracism against not just Secretary-father and mayor-son, but, so long as no Executive action is taken, then against the entire official family of the President. This includes the children of officials who drive No. 8 cars to school, at any official beyond the handful mandated by Executive Order as entitled to official escorts, to officials who have more than one bodyguard, and so on.

Officials have quit or been made to resign elsewhere for much less.

Good reads: see Of Golf, the Internet and Elites, and We haven’t really gone anywhere and Piyudal

227 comments

15 pings

Skip to comment form

  1. Lurker_Lang

    mindanaoan,

    the word came from the eyewitnesses of valley golf as narrated by a club member.

    its not about demonizing the kid, i just wanted to convey an unbias version of the story. and that the kid was not as defenseless as some people would like to portray.

    they got smack because of the stupidity of the father. i wonder what would you say if the pangandaman was on the recieving end.

    kape tayo sa starbucks? :)

  2. pulis na pogi

    facts, whatever that you are smoking right now, throw it away! call the (+632) 531-9001 immediately! hahaha

  3. cvj

    As i mentioned above (at December 30th, 2008 at 12:07 am), the Middle Class does not like their heroes to be damaged goods. Since the de la Paz family no longer comes in a neat package, then the equivocation has started. (This is parallel to Miriam’s eliciting an admission from Jun Lozada during the Senate hearing that the latter was not exactly clean.) IMHO, that the elder de la Paz wielded his umbrella first and that the 14-year old is a brat should not change the picture but that’s just me. The Middle Cass follows its own logic.

  4. BrianB

    “Since the de la Paz family no longer comes in a neat package… ”

    I quoted Kundera on momblogger’s on kitsch.

  5. mindanaoan

    conyo, the story is not a factual narration. it’s from the pangadaman side. notice that it includes thoughts of one side (did not want to disturb) but ignorant of the other side (No one knew who delapaz was speaking to).

    it doesn’t matter if they were provoked, or if it’s all the dela pazas fault. what should be explained is why the kid was beaten up.

  6. justice league

    Lurker Lang,

    Wow..justice league..nitpicking again. hahahaha.

    Hmmmm…. I checked if you already answered in the FV “Scandalizing the Suffering” thread.

    It appears you addressed a post to Pulis na Pogi but you haven’t addressed one to me yet.

    Are you having difficulty defending your ideas?

    “its so good of you to scrutinize the report about the 4 or 5 registrants on the pangandamans team when all the while you missed the whole picture. the blogosphere have painted wholesale the pangandaman’s as an evil, inhuman person and portrayed the dela pazs as meek and docile victims of injustice, based on what? of bambees emotionally charged and bias blog.

    you have shown your ability to treat an unbias report about the incident with a grain of salt, but very quick to jump into conclusion upon reading bambees one sided account. “- Lurker Lang

    Oh, MORE allegations from you.

    My first post here at Dec. 30 11:22 AM on this thread dealt with someone’s personal story.

    Discounting a clarification; my next post addressed to someone else on Dec 30 12:19PM contained the statements “And though it wouldn’t exculpate the Pangandamans for what they “supposedly” did, ………”

    That should tell everyone what conclusion I had or even if I had one already.

    On my post on Jan 2 2:38 PM, I stated:

    “One thing interesting about this though is that both sides are rather detailed on what the other side did but rather hedged on what their own side did.

    When both versions are eventually reconciled, I think it would be a very interesting story.”

    In the FV thread “The Pangandaman-De la Paz Family feud”; someone asked me if

    “Have you already made up your mind? Is the case beyond a reasonable doubt? Or are you willing to at least let the courts decide the matter?”

    And my reply was “I am willing to look at the results of the investigation.”

    So what is this so called “conclusion” that I was supposed to have been quick to jump into?

    or are you just too proud to accept that the bloghosphere made a big blunder and too pompous to retract their preconcieved notion of fairness.

    If indeed the bloghosphere made a big blunder and too pompous to retract their preconcieved notion of fairness; what has that got to do with me?

  7. Leytenian

    The people have been voiceless for so long. Now the blogosphere is a medium to express. It’s still young and it needs to grow more . There’s nothing wrong with the debate. The on-going publicity may correct the wrongs of others and may open our country to real democracy. Let the politicians be bothered by it. Let them deal with it and experience it.
    Let them explain and rebuild their credibility, character and conduct of public service.

    Express yourself, everyone .. Let it out even more. This case is a perfect Bang for the new Year.

  8. justice league

    BrianB,

    I was so interested in the case, hoping it will highlight the greater issue of very dangerous politician bodyguards. (Who wants a gun pointed at his face, huh? Over nothing?) It’s become an issue for nitpickers.

    Hello Brian.

    Given that there is someone who loves to ascribe nitpicking to me and somehow you are portraying nitpickers in a negative context; I’m wondering if you are actually referring this to me.

    Are you asribing the negative context of this “nitpicking” to what I did regarding your personal story?

  9. Bert

    My take on this:

    Let the justice system works on this pangandaman/delapaz case.

    I agree with mindanaoan. The adult may slug it out anytime they want to vent out their pent-up rage.

    But they should keep their hands off the kids.

  10. justice league

    Pulis na pogi,

    justice league, well, its up to you. believe what you want. but in my simplistic police world, if just moments ago we had already settled an issue as minor as overtaking (with the help an authority at that), surely, i will let pass your other infraction moments later which is playing in a group of 5 instead of 4! i will just tell you, ok, go on sex orgy of 5 right there if you want! happy new year na lang!

    Well I’m not about to admit having any experience with sex orgies so I’ll take your word for that.

    But this is golf.

    Simple question- Did you consider how long a group of 5 will play golf as against how long a group of 4 will play?

    but by the way, even that point of 5some or 4some was clarified and sorted out before the tee off in hole nr 5! here is the explanation of rge (Ray) a pioneer of pinoy golfer.com and personally know to the site admin. he is a member of valley golf:

    “I also have a speculation …………………. I do believe this was corrected before starting the 5th hole……”

    The source you are referring to is kind enough to admit that he is only speculating on the matter but you are already treating his comment as categorical proof.

    In the end, your source might be right but for you to ascribe a quality to his statement that even he doesn’t yet commit to (as categorical proof) just means that whatever you learned in your simplistic police world is not enough.

    You need to develop more skills!

    Happy New Year too!

  11. justice league

    Ooooopssss.

    Wrong block quoting but I know you know enough to figure it out.

  12. pulis na pogi

    justice,

    goodness, have you been in the fairway yet?

    stupid question.

  13. BrianB

    justice league, nitpicking when details are hazy and much of it unknown. Nitpicking on actual details.

  14. Lurker_Lang

    justice league,

    “It appears you addressed a post to Pulis na Pogi but you haven’t addressed one to me yet.

    Are you having difficulty defending your ideas?”

    I did not answer it so you can gloat about winning the argument..isn’t that what you really want ? having the last say? :)

    but since you insist then i might as well answer you..

    you ask me to reconcile my advocacy about the one which is inside the legal system while the other is out. This is non-sequitor; the issue is not about me, its about the dela paz and pangandaman and I say again there is nothing in my POSTs where I advocated “oakwood” while discussing the issue. You ask a question and I answer. It is what it is..But here you are, conveniently twisting the discussion and spin it where you ascribed that I am advocating it. Now who is the spinner here…

    It is not an allegation. It is a conclusion your honor. When someone (that means you) tries very hard to scrutinize any report whether from a third party or eyewitnesses and DO NOT subject the other sides story the same scrutiny; it doesn’t take a Sherlock Holmes to deduct which side he believes…

    kape tayo sa starbucks? :)

  15. Lurker_Lang

    just so we are clear here..the 5th person was an 8 yo boy who is probably an inch taller than a golf driver.

    kape tayo sa starbucks :)

  16. DarkAngel

    crystal clear LL…your friends are trying to drag the case towards that 8 yo old boy.

    ni hindi nga nadapatan ng lamok yang bambino nila eh yung bino sa kabila, dugoan.

    hihintayin kita sa starbucks ha!

    tayo tayo lang naman dito eh just like kapatid na pulis. tatahimik na ito pagwala ang mga tulad nyo at tulad ko at tulad nila.

    lets see what will happen to their complains filed earlier. sana duguan din si mayor pagkatapos. sabi ni atty fortun 9 to 12 yrs daw pag public official sa kasong child abuse. kakayani kaya yun ni mayor.

    hmmmmmmm see yah……..starbucks huh=?

  17. justice league

    Pulis na pogi,

    goodness, have you been in the fairway yet?

    stupid question.

    Since you already admit that the quality of your question is stupid; why do you have to ask it?

    BrianB,

    nitpicking when details are hazy and much of it unknown. Nitpicking on actual details.

    I have to admit that I don’t know what you want to convey with that.

    Lurker Lang,

    You ask a question and I answer. It is what it is..But here you are, conveniently twisting the discussion and spin it where you ascribed that I am advocating it. Now who is the spinner here…

    You!

    If you want to spin; at least be good at it.

    you ask me to reconcile my advocacy about the one which is inside the legal system while the other is out. This is non-sequitor; the issue is not about me, its about the dela paz and pangandaman and I say again there is nothing in my POSTs where I advocated “oakwood” while discussing the issue.

    Yes, you are not advocating “Oakwood” in your POSTS!

    When I asked you where did you take “Oakwood”; I was asking what court of law did you take Oakwood.

    Maybe it would have been better if you did advocate something like an “Oakwood” for the De la pazs. At least there will be consistency in your ideas.

    Because the issue is Practice and Preach!

    “Oakwood” is what you Practice!

    Taking the case before the court of law is what you Preach!

    So again, how are those 2 ideas in consonance with each other?

    It is not an allegation. It is a conclusion your honor. When someone (that means you) tries very hard to scrutinize any report whether from a third party or eyewitnesses and DO NOT subject the other sides story the same scrutiny; it doesn’t take a Sherlock Holmes to deduct which side he believes…

    So this conclusion of yours is based on your own deduction. Maybe you should have left it to Sherlock Holmes.

    If you look at the post that Pulis na Pogi copy pasted from the post of RGE; RGE is just outlining what was outlined to him/her by the head of the fact finding committee. Its practically hearsay but I read it anyway.
    Bambee de la Paz’s or the one from Briana Asal (though I don’t know who the writer really is) come in as first person accounts.

    Briana Asal’s post never mentioned the Pangandaman bodyguards. RGE and Bambee’s post mentions them.

    A lot of people made comments on the Pangandaman bodyguards.

    But this is what I said about them:

    2) As I read Bambee’s blog, the bodyguards did draw their guns. But she didn’t intimate (at least not in that story) that they pointed those guns at them. There doesn’t seem to be much story on the bodyguards anywhere. Much of what she says is that flightmates of Pangandaman and friends did the beating.
    …………………..

    The older Pangandaman is a cabinet official. Likely those guards came from the PNP or the AFP.

    I guess we’ll have to wait for the investigation to find out what the bodyguards did.

    It is a given that the Pangandaman and De la Paz accounts will have a lot of issues contradicting each other.

    I don’t think the De la Pazs would know about Hussein’s son being registered (if that should be the case) but I expected RGE’s account to contain that since it is in the Pangandaman’s account.

    I haven’t seen any medical certificate detailing the wounds of either party. But I have seen a video of Bino’s wound. I have not seen any of the wounds of the Pangandaman side.

    But as far as I recall, I haven’t contradicted any of the 3 accounts.

    What kind of scrutiny would you have exercised?

    I did not answer it so you can gloat about winning the argument..isn’t that what you really want ? having the last say?

    You did allege that I love arguing for the sake of argument.

    If you look at the latter part of “The right fight at the wrong time” thread, I knew that the idea of another blogger was wrong.

    But I was prepared to let it go.

    kape tayo sa starbucks?

    Not even if you’re buying!

  18. justice league

    Lurker Lang,

    You ask a question and I answer. It is what it is..But here you are, conveniently twisting the discussion and spin it where you ascribed that I am advocating it. Now who is the spinner here…

    You!

    If you want to spin; at least be good at it.

    you ask me to reconcile my advocacy about the one which is inside the legal system while the other is out. This is non-sequitor; the issue is not about me, its about the dela paz and pangandaman and I say again there is nothing in my POSTs where I advocated “oakwood” while discussing the issue.

    Yes, you are not advocating “Oakwood” in your POSTS!

    When I asked you where did you take “Oakwood”; I was asking what court of law did you take Oakwood.

    Maybe it would have been better if you did advocate something like an “Oakwood” for the De la pazs. At least there will be consistency in your ideas.

    Because the issue is Practice and Preach!

    “Oakwood” is what you Practice!

    Taking the case before the court of law is what you Preach!

    So again, how are those 2 ideas in consonance with each other?

    It is not an allegation. It is a conclusion your honor. When someone (that means you) tries very hard to scrutinize any report whether from a third party or eyewitnesses and DO NOT subject the other sides story the same scrutiny; it doesn’t take a Sherlock Holmes to deduct which side he believes…

    So this conclusion of yours is based on your own deduction. Maybe you should have left it to Sherlock Holmes.

    If you look at the post that Pulis na Pogi copy pasted from the post of RGE; RGE is just outlining what was outlined to him/her by the head of the fact finding committee. Its practically hearsay but I read it anyway.
    Bambee de la Paz’s or the one from Briana Asal (though I don’t know who the writer really is) come in as first person accounts.

    Briana Asal’s post never mentioned the Pangandaman bodyguards. RGE and Bambee’s post mentions them.

    A lot of people made comments on the Pangandaman bodyguards.

    But this is what I said about them:

    2) As I read Bambee’s blog, the bodyguards did draw their guns. But she didn’t intimate (at least not in that story) that they pointed those guns at them. There doesn’t seem to be much story on the bodyguards anywhere. Much of what she says is that flightmates of Pangandaman and friends did the beating.
    …………………..

    The older Pangandaman is a cabinet official. Likely those guards came from the PNP or the AFP.

    I guess we’ll have to wait for the investigation to find out what the bodyguards did.

    It is a given that the Pangandaman and De la Paz accounts will have a lot of issues contradicting each other.

    I don’t think the De la Pazs would know about Hussein’s son being registered (if that should be the case) but I expected RGE’s account to contain that since it is in the Pangandaman’s account.

    I haven’t seen any medical certificate detailing the wounds of either party. But I have seen a video of Bino’s wound. I have not seen any of the wounds of the Pangandaman side.

    But as far as I recall, I haven’t contradicted any of the 3 accounts.

    What kind of scrutiny would you have exercised?

    I did not answer it so you can gloat about winning the argument..isn’t that what you really want ? having the last say?

    You did allege that I love arguing for the sake of argument.

    If you look at the latter part of “The right fight at the wrong time” thread, I knew that the idea of another blogger was wrong.

    But I was prepared to let it go.

    kape tayo sa starbucks?

    Not even if you’re buying!

  19. Bert

    “just so we are clear here..the 5th person was an 8 yo boy who is probably an inch taller than a golf driver.”

    mabuti hindi ito ginantihan at binugbog ng mga delapaz. baka mas civilize sila, heheh.

  20. sleek

    bullshit all of you people !

    hindi niyo ba ako kilala?

    I gave Gloria millions of votes. She owed me her seat.

    I will not resign over this brawl.

    Oh ano, kilala niyo na ako?

    I will counter sue for bullshitting me… tandaan niyo yan!!!!!

    :)

  21. Lurker_Lang

    [quote] “If you want to spin; at least be good at it. – justice league”
    [/quote]

    Then we are in agreement that you are a good spinner.

    [quote]Yes, you are not advocating “Oakwood” in your POSTS! – justice league [/quote]

    Thank you for acknowledging it.

    [quote]I haven’t seen any medical certificate detailing the wounds of either party. But I have seen a video of Bino’s wound. I have not seen any of the wounds of the Pangandaman side. – justice league[/quote]

    Then isn’t waiting for both accounts to be narrated before taking sides the right thing to do? Yes?

    [quote]Because the issue is Practice and Preach!
    “Oakwood” is what you Practice!
    Taking the case before the court of law is what you preach!

    So again, how are those 2 ideas in consonance with each other? – justice league[/quote]

    No need to bang your head or split your hair justice league. You are entitled to your own interpretation but just to make things clear, do not drag me into your own delusion.

    If you really understand my POSTs in which all of this insinuation about preach and practice (dati advocating now preach and practice naman) you are so insistent to prove is;

    1) I am speaking on the premise of people are so quick to make judgments based on a one sided and bias account.

    2) That I made an example that a lot of Filipinos including me who have suffered maybe worst than what dela paz has but are quite man enough face it. Whether it’s their fault or not is irrelevant in the issue.

    You ask what is this action. I answered “oakwood”. You spin the issue and construe that I am advocating both when I was only making an example where the Law should be the final arbiter on any offense.

    When I mentioned “oakwood” it is in the principle of (I am speaking only for myself); that I dealt it squarely without these paawa effect of the dela paz who I believed is in a better position to fight the pangandaman in a court of law.

    If you can not get that into your crackhead, then I might as well tag you as the most brilliant nitpicker in MLQ3s blog.

    If you change your mind, kape tayo sa starbucks. :)

  22. Lurker_Lang

    bert,

    “mabuti hindi ito ginantihan at binugbog ng mga delapaz. baka mas civilize sila, heheh.”

    I mentioned about the 5th person because someone is making an assumption that the flight of the pangandaman was delayed because of registering 5 in the flight when it was already asserted that only 4 are playing. unless the 5th person was also playing golf. whatyathink?

    kape tayo sa starbucks :)

  23. Lurker_Lang

    darkangel,

    “tayo tayo lang naman dito eh just like kapatid na pulis. tatahimik na ito pagwala ang mga tulad nyo at tulad ko at tulad nila.”

    why don’t you speak only for yourself.

  24. Bert

    “unless the 5th person was also playing golf. whatyathink?”-lurker

    last time I heard the 5th person was holding on to a golf driver, I think either the person was playing golf or trying to whack the opponent, heheh.

    “kape tayo sa starbucks”

    ayoko, mahal doon, sayang pera.

  25. Bert

    Just some thoughts about this matter:

    In golf practice, is an eight year old cannot be allowed to play?

    The Pangandaman’s reason for registering the 8 yo boy was that there was nobody to take care of him.

    Why nobody? The bodyguards were there, no?

  26. justice league

    Lurker Lang,

    Then we are in agreement that you are a good spinner.

    Please give me 3 good reasons why I should agree.

    Thank you for acknowledging it.

    You are welcome.

    Then isn’t waiting for both accounts to be narrated before taking sides the right thing to do? Yes?

    That would be ideal. And your point is?

    2) That I made an example that a lot of Filipinos including me who have suffered maybe worst than what dela paz has but are quite man enough face it. Whether it’s their fault or not is irrelevant in the issue.

    You ask what is this action. I answered “oakwood”. You spin the issue and construe that I am advocating both when I was only making an example where the Law should be the final arbiter on any offense.

    When I mentioned “oakwood” it is in the principle of (I am speaking only for myself); that I dealt it squarely without these paawa effect of the dela paz who I believed is in a better position to fight the pangandaman in a court of law.

    I asked you how you conduct this “lumaban in our own way”.

    And your actual response in Scandalizing the Suffering on Jan 2 7:31 PM was:

    i’ll give you a hint… ”oakwood”. although i do not belong to the high profile personalities involved there.

    You are referring to the “Oakwood mutiny/incident” And you were involved but just wasn’t one of the high profiled personalities.

    You may have likened it to dealing without the paawa effects but you were involved in something considered to be outside the legal system. That is how you conduct your ‘lumaban in your own way’. That is your practice.

    Yet you preach something else.

    You spin the issue and construe that I am advocating both when I was only making an example where the Law should be the final arbiter on any offense.

    Oh, more spin from you.

    I never said that you were advocating an “Oakwood”.

    Go ahead. Show everyone where I supposedly said that you were advocating “Oakwood”. Copy paste the discussion from FV if you want.

    And I don’t even have to say that you do “Oakwood”, because you yourself admit it.

    I mentioned about the 5th person because someone is making an assumption that the flight of the pangandaman was delayed because of registering 5 in the flight when it was already asserted that only 4 are playing. unless the 5th person was also playing golf. whatyathink?

    And still spinning!

    I never said that the flight of the Pangandamans was delayed because of registering 5.

    If indeed Hussein’s 8 year son was registered; there would 9 registrants for the 2 flights.

    One flight would then be considered as foursome, the other as fivesome.

    I know the 8 year old kid will not play but on paper there will be 9 registrants. (if the kid was indeed registered)

    If the De la Pazs were told that there were 9 registrants for the 2 Pangandaman flights without being told that 1 was just a kid who won’t be playing; it would be hard for the De la Pazs to accept that the Pangandamans were playing as 2 Foursomes.

    If you change your mind, kape tayo sa starbucks.

    Thanks for the offer but still no .

    Btw, why were you involved in “Oakwood” anyway?

  27. DarkAngel

    L_L,

    Sorry i thought tao ka, di pala.Ok it’s all your fafa.

    Dami mong pa spinning sa kwento. I like your style.
    One of a kind. Pakawala ka rin ba? Eh di dami nyo na.

    hehehehehe

  28. babyblues

    lurker lang is the worst commenter at mlq and at FV. he has lost his senses and values. his mentality is very typical of a corrupt personality. he/she will devalue our community.

    an ignorant and cruel to the well being of this country. let him embarrass himself further just like the pangandamans. One day, lurker lang will find no peace for himself.

  29. pulis na pogi

    hahaha, i just cannot fathom that until today, there are still fans of the baseball bat-wielding de la pazes insiting the impossible for their idols.

    very FORTUN-ate de la pazes.

  30. DarkAngel

    babyblues,
    tumpak!!!as in 101% balls-eye. if he(L_L), puro balls lang.if she (L_L)naman i dont know, she needs balls maybe.

  31. Lurker_Lang

    justice league,

    “Btw, why were you involved in “Oakwood” anyway? ”

    I would very much like to answer you, but giving the way this discussion had turned out to… i am a little bit suspicious that this may be another leading question.

    Maybe some another time..

  32. Lurker_Lang

    babyblues,

    “lurker lang is the worst commenter at mlq and at FV. he has lost his senses and values. his mentality is very typical of a corrupt personality. he/she will devalue our community.

    an ignorant and cruel to the well being of this country. let him embarrass himself further just like the pangandamans. One day, lurker lang will find no peace for himself.”

    Do you have any basis for your accusations?

    will you be citing an example of your moral ascendancy to support your assertion that I am corrupt?

    you don’t even know if I am a he or a she.. hahahahaha

    kape tayo sa starbucks :)

  33. Lurker_Lang

    DarkAngel,

    you’re just a keyboard warrior…and that’s all you gonna be..hahahahahaha

    kape tayo sa starbucks :)

  34. justice league

    Lurker Lang,

    I would very much like to answer you, but giving the way this discussion had turned out to… i am a little bit suspicious that this may be another leading question.

    Well I really couldn’t make any promises that it wouldn’t be. Might have depended on your answer.

    You did admit that you have been reading my posts here in Manolo’s blog for more than 2 years.

    But I don’t know if you came across a post I once wrote regarding the military here in this blog. (It doesn’t appear on “search” so I’m basing this on memory)

    I remember I said that there appears to be a big difference between the military under ex-Pres. Estrada and the one under PGMA (in dealing with the secessionist threat I believe)

    I think I intimated that “Oakwood” probably had a lot to do with that. ( The loss of veteran officers who are willing to fight )

    If ever I do get to finish that UNCLOS story (actual phrase being “I do get to start”), I think Sen. Trillanes will play a substantial part in that article.

    Maybe some another time..

    But I respect your decision and till that some another time or something else comes, I bid you goodbye.

  35. Lurker_Lang

    justice league,

    I do read your post including all other commens from the regulars of mlq blog. But I would admit that I may not remember specific posts that I came across with.

    There really is a big difference during ex-pres Estradas time. Even with all his shortcomings I can say that troops morale are higher in Junior Officers and NCO ranks.

    Maybe you noticed that most of the disgruntled military who participated in “oakwood” came from the elite units of the AFP. Noticed also that the PMA class 94 though as idealistic as the 95’s they inhibited themselves. These has more to do with upperclass/lowerclass or seniority upbringing deeply engrained in the academy. Tactical command was in the hands of the 95’s. No self respecting upperclassmen will be willing to take orders from an underclass. But this is another story..

    I would very much like to read about your UNCLOS story when you do finish it.

    And goodbye to you..for now

  36. Lurker_Lang

    “comments”

  37. glentomacruz

    Clash of ego ang nangyari.. isang mayaman at isang politico…. pang maykaya lang ang golf e… status symbol…. pati anak ni dela paz e naglalaro… gentleman’s game daw ang golf…PWE! ang asal ng mga yan e hoodlum…

    yang mga pulitikong mga yan, ang yayabang pati mga bodyguards… e sineswelduhan lang naman ng taumbayan…akala mo na kung sino.. idamay niyo pa yang mga pulis, militar, konsehal at pati hamak na barangay tanod…
    Kaya lang kung iisipin, yang mga dela Paz e mayaman din kasi(kaya afford maggolf)…tinamaan ang mga ego sa paglalaro ng golf…away ng mga mayayabang…nagpa-awa effect din na kesyo matanda na yung tatay… tapos yung anak e may hangin din sa ulo..

    gaya sa badminton sa corporate, daming mayabang(gaya ng duktor na ulol na naglalaro sa centro-inihian ko sasakyan mo gago!) at ngayon lang yata nakapaglaro ng competitive game… hindi nakakaintindi ng pagkatalo or sportsmanship…mga PWE!!!

  38. leytenian

    the mayor pangandaman has no right to claim advantage on PACE of PLAY nor have the rights to insist to ” Play through” . If de la paz decline and said NO, the mayor should have accepted it.

    Our representative in this country are losing values, ethics and moral conduct . baliktad daw sabi ni tongue twisted and I agree:

    Gloria – imbes paunlarin ang bansa, ninanakawan pa; sumumpa pa sa bibliya, sinungaling naman; ina raw siya ng bansa, pero ipinapaalipin yung mga anak niya sa dayuhan
    Kongreso – imbes gumawa ng batas ayon sa konstitusyon, pilit gumagawa ng konstitusyon para sila mapaboran ng batas
    PNP – imbes na manghuli ng kriminal, sila ang gumagawa ng krimen
    AFP – imbes na dinidisarmahan ang mga rebelde, binebentahan pa ng armas
    DA – imbes tulungan ang magsasaka, pinopondohan ang mga umaangkat ng bigas
    DAR – imbes na palawigin ang mga lupang sakahan, ayun nambubugbog sa golf course na dapat sana’y taniman ng gulay
    DOE – imbes imbestigahan yung dambuhalang oil companies, yung dealers ang binubusisi, doon lang naman bumibili sa tatlo yung mga dealers
    DENR – imbes patigilin ang pagkakalbo ng gubat, pinaputol lahat ng puno sa parke sa tabi ng dating Jai-Alai
    GSIS – imbes na paunlarin yung pera nila sa Meralco, pilit nilulugi ang halaga ng stocks nito
    SSS – imbes na maging transparent sa mga investment nito, kumuha ng sekretaryong mahilig magtago sa executive privelege
    POC – imbes sanayin ang mga atleta sa laban, sila-sila ang naglalaban – sa pondo
    DILG – imbes bantayan ang pinag-gagawa ng mga pulis, kinukuha nilang bantay (bodyguard) yung mga pulis
    OWWA – imbes bigyan ng tulong ang mga OFW na kumita, kinokotongan pa di pa man nakakaalis
    NAPOCOR – imbes na kuryente ang ibinebenta, yung power plant ang sinusubasta
    PAG-IBIG – imbes magpabahay sa mahihirap, bumili ng bahay sa Dasma
    (dagdagan ninyo)

  39. pulis na pogi

    i wonder what is the next thing that the de la paz apologists will say, now that valley golf expells Dela Paz and only suspends for two years the dar chief.

    valley golf concluded that de la paz instigated the fight!

  40. Jason B

    just whack the pangandamans already;
    more people will rejoice than mourn;
    our justice system sucks; it only works for the
    rich / in this case, the richer;
    the worst feeling is seeing the end of a barrel
    of a gun pointing directly at you; whether he will pull the trigger or not; we all talk/write/blog; but it is
    our actions/reactions that define us as men, not animals.

  41. diego

    mayor told his bodyguards “maul them or i’ll fire you!”

1 3 4 5

Fetch more comments

  1. The Valley Golf incident and the power of the Internet « Hits and Mrs.

    […] spree Pedestrian Observer GB: Mayor Nasser Pangandaman, Jr. GOOFBall Bully of Philippine Golf Manuel L. Quezon III: Impunity Musings of Don Kishote: Comment: Nasser Pangandaman Jr.: The warlord of Misiu Journaling on the […]

Leave a Reply