Vice Mayor Rodrigo Duterte flashes dirty finger at media critics

[W.Axl Rose]

---

mao nay sakto nga leader. i dont care about your moral self righteous bullshit.

How about the Ampatuan? I wonder.............. How about one of your family or relatives nagpabadlong pid-okon without due process can you do that duterte?

[Baeybe_Bryce]

that's the problem.
people now a days can't think of another way to solve the problems but just as what a news reporter have said "Ginagawa nilang tama ang mali eh"

Even if the reality is crooked and twisted, it does not mean our "joining in" is well justified. Kung unsa ang uso mau pud ang ato?

That's true. Sadly, the law created for everyone doesn't really apply to everyone. That's why we merely base it on moral judgment. What's good in our place might/might not be good for others.

It's not about what's "uso" but it's about results. If the said law has been implemented and recalled we should have not ended up discussing what's right and wrong now. I know, it's pathetic, really but reality bites. We're just lucky that geographically we are not located in Mindanao.

we go back to the topic hap? It's about flashing a dirty finger!
How can something this wrong be right? just because we have not been there does not mean he can be right. Morality and ethics does not exempt a person nor anybody. Every citizen is obliged to follow an act of decency especially if you are someone to be respected.

This is like settling for mediocrity. Just because he has done a great job does not mean he can lay a dirty finger on tv.


Now the problem is how do we solve this? The action lies in us and not in anybody else. We should start in ourselves. We should not just depend on the government.

I never said this is justified. I can say it's wrong. But questioning how he run his city is a different story.

Am i too idealistic? Aren't we supposed to be? How can we change a nation when we just blend in to old habit?

Idealism is never wrong but should be used whenever necessary. Idealism talks about ideas not actions. We are supposed to be good individuals, we should mind ourselves first before we complain how others run their life.

You know, we can never change the world but we can change ourselves. We can change how we speak, how we act and what kind of living we have. Too bad that we are just too busy talking about others life that we, at times, are not cleaning our own closets.

If only Davao has a choice it would not end up this way. Anyone who thinks he can be that "change" in Davao, be that choice.

[hulagway]

dri na thread ibase bro:

https://www.istorya.net/forums/destin...-or-davao.html

kita ka sa katag sa duha ka syudad.

ok njoy..........

[lady_c]

your a mayor

[monroy]

Reading this posts makes me think this idea ....

It's implementation of law - Filipinos will abide by the law if they know it will be implemented. Implemented to all.

Case in point - Filipinos living abroad

Hence , if we can't understand, skirt around or are spoiled by democracy , we might as well live in a dictatorship.

But who would want to live in a society were you are told what to do without taking into consideration its people's understanding of it and will to follow its Laws, more so where do we find another Lee Kwan Yu - Honestly Vice Mayor reminds me of him minus the fingers but its always results.

Results for a city to prosper with peace and order.

A leader is chosen by his people , I understand the debate between Law and Judgement... but we can't debate between how region 7 maybe better than region XI as these are both very different.

The Philippines is a very challenging country with different cultures, language, people so on , let's pause and really think about things as there are no easy way out of our very deep hole.

But in the end do we debate Law or the means to achieve Peace and Prosperity.

This is an either/or fallacy. Law IS the means to achieving peace and prosperity. Vigilante killings is beyond the law, and what you get is not peace and prosperity but a wild west anything goes environment where personalities, rather than institutions, are feared. So what happens when the Dutertes are gone? Then violence will come back, because the institutions are broken and police have forgotten how to investigate and solve crimes properly. So then the pro-Dutertes will come back and say the Dutertes should stay in power forever. Then we have a mini-dictatorship where leaders are indispensable and can't be removed from office because you rely on them rather than institutions to protect you

Comparing Sarah to LKY would probably cause LKY to feel insulted. LKY never went beyond the law, he always acted within the law. Arbitrary arrest of persons who threaten security are allowed under the old British law under which Singapore operated (and continues to operate through the Internal Security Act). That is why it can never be said that Sarah is like LKY. In what sense? Strictness? Ok, but strictness while violating the law is not the same as strictness following the law.

At first LKY wanted to stay in power forever. But in the end, he created a country with very strong institutions, where the police are among the best in the world and crimes are solved at nearly 100% success rate. That requires real leadership. Despite all the power given to him, he never resorted to extrajudicial killings to solve a crime problem. He stopped the problem by building schools, eradicating corruption and creating efficient institutions. Why can't we do the same thing here? Why must we compare the Dutertes with LKY when they are nothing like him?

If the Dutertes want to continue the vigilante killings in Davao then they should try and make it the law of the land. If they fail to do so it is because the vast majority of people are against these killings.

[monroy]

The law that convicts the guilty.
The law of land that protects the rights of the victims and the suspects.

The law of land that judged Erap (your example). But where is he now? He ran for presidency last election right? See what I am saying?

The law of land that gave/gives nth chances to robbers, killers, rapists and criminals. Bail? Presidential Pardon? Anyone?

The law of land that gives amnesty to militants and their kinds. (after several deaths on our military)

Whatever you say the law is still the law and it is still our best means to achieving a reasonable result in this country. You may not like it, you may even hate it but you are still subject to it and so are the Dutertes. So no amount of posturing or grandstanding on this issue will make your points correct, because if it is against the law, it is against the law period.

If people are dissatisfied with the law, then the best way is to work towards changing it. The solution is not to go beyond it. As individual citizens, even mayors must abide by the law even if they don't think it brings them results. That is why we have institutions, because institutions despite being imperfect are always better than personalities. Work within the system, not beyond it.

I'm no saying he's innocent, I can't say he's guilty either. I don't personally know the guy. I'm no witness.

The man is innocent until proven guilty. The court should decide but when its just pure hearsay and accusations he will never be convicted.

Lol and who is saying they are guilty? They should be the subject of an investigation, nobody is saying they are guilty. What I said is if they are guilty as most people suspect, then the argument that getting voted into office forgives their crimes is retarded

Before Dutertes how many so-called law abiding Mayors served Davao? How was Davao before compare to now? Since law and democracy was written and implemented why do you think did it end this way?

The means don't justify the ends so this is a meaningless question.

No intentions will justify killing, morally. Period. So let's say if ever the man will be proven guilty, just in any case, tell me what's next?

Will the fight with vigilantes stop after the capture of the so-called "leader"? Will they? We can't even hunt down NPAs how much more those unknown, no-faced vigilantes roaming around us?

They seek for justice that the law that you know deprived them. Is it wrong? Yes. Is it fair? yes/no, yes for the victims and no for the moralists.

It is wrong and unfair for everyone, including the victims. When the victims become party to perpetuation of a crime, then they have become criminals as well. That should not be the objective of a civilized society. Vigilante goes beyond self-defense, it is already based purely on vengeance and our law doesn't allow that. We aren't a primitive, tribal society, or am I wrong in thinking that with people who think like you do?

This is much too idealistic. Ideal and the right thing to do, I will give you credit for that. Now, how many do you think practices this? For long decades the law of land serves us all, where are we now?

And do you ever wonder why the Philippines is the way it is? It is because we like short-cuts and we hate following the rule of law. We always come up with excuses why we should violate laws. Just as an example, and minor OT, people cross the road anywhere they like even if it's against the law and the excuse is always that its too inconvenient to use the proper crossings. The result is traffic and congestion. See what I mean?

Violating the law in this way isn't just about being idealistic but flaunting the law that way serves as a bad example to the citizens. If elected officials thumb their nose at the law why should citizens follow it? People follow their leaders examples. If the mayor, on the other hand, reduces crime by following the law, then people will be encouraged to respect our law and the result will be a more peaceful, LAW-ABIDING society.

Game over? That's funny, people easily forgive and forget. Hello Erap? Hello Jinggoy Estrada?

Hahaha, what makes you think I've forgotten. What about Erap? What about Jinggoy? As I said, if you have a problem with the law, lobby your Congressman to change it. Everyone knows our laws need to be improved, but that is not an excuse to break them

The law will stay and every unexpected decade we will be discussing such issues like these. Different people, different status but similar cases. I just hope our laws here are as effective as you think.

Lack of respect for the law will ensure that our country continues to be backward, poor and in chaos. People who don't respect the law will never succeed.

That's the irony of the written law that we have on this land.

And your alternative is the law of vigilantes and roving bands of death squad? Ad2 nalang sa Afghanistan/Iraq puyo. Then you'll see the ultimate end result of that way of thinking =P

[yiennahs]

That's true. Sadly, the law created for everyone doesn't really apply to everyone. That's why we merely base it on moral judgment. What's good in our place might/might not be good for others.

It's not about what's "uso" but it's about results. If the said law has been implemented and recalled we should have not ended up discussing what's right and wrong now. I know, it's pathetic, really but reality bites. We're just lucky that geographically we are not located in Mindanao.





I never said this is justified. I can say it's wrong. But questioning how he run his city is a different story.





Idealism is never wrong but should be used whenever necessary. Idealism talks about ideas not actions. We are supposed to be good individuals, we should mind ourselves first before we complain how others run their life.

You know, we can never change the world but we can change ourselves. We can change how we speak, how we act and what kind of living we have. Too bad that we are just too busy talking about others life that we, at times, are not cleaning our own closets.

If only Davao has a choice it would not end up this way. Anyone who thinks he can be that "change" in Davao, be that choice.

Reality bites but it does not have to keep us from doing what is moral. Reality will not make you a disabled person unless you are blinded by it.

[KE-25]

This is an either/or fallacy. Law IS the means to achieving peace and prosperity. Vigilante killings is beyond the law, and what you get is not peace and prosperity but a wild west anything goes environment where personalities, rather than institutions, are feared. So what happens when the Dutertes are gone? Then violence will come back, because the institutions are broken and police have forgotten how to investigate and solve crimes properly. So then the pro-Dutertes will come back and say the Dutertes should stay in power forever. Then we have a mini-dictatorship where leaders are indispensable and can't be removed from office because you rely on them rather than institutions to protect you

Comparing Sarah to LKY would probably cause LKY to feel insulted. LKY never went beyond the law, he always acted within the law. Arbitrary arrest of persons who threaten security are allowed under the old British law under which Singapore operated (and continues to operate through the Internal Security Act). That is why it can never be said that Sarah is like LKY. In what sense? Strictness? Ok, but strictness while violating the law is not the same as strictness in adherence to the law.

If the Dutertes want to continue the vigilante killings in Davao then they should try and make it the law of the land. If they fail to do so it is because the vast majority of people are against these killings.

"Red Herring" I haven't heard that term in a long time, it's making me think u being a Law Student or someone that reads .... although I see you rephrased at exactly 10:46am , appreciate the rephrase as the latter term was not my intent on diverting the significance of this post.

I enjoy a good conversation so i'm keeping this at that , and btw I wasn't talking about Sarah to LKW but Rody. Nevertheless I understand where you are headed and I do agree why laws are created and what it is supposed to do. Plus we wouldn't want to get into Corporal punishment and why it doesn't apply to everyone but Singapore...

I started my previous post as an Idea , it wasn't structured well but I didn't expect anyone to react the way you did. When someone uses the word "Red Herring" it could refer to " Wait a minute your wrong " , whatever the case ... here is an extension to my thoughts yesterday.

Here is a question . Would it be safe to say our Laws apply to everyone? That it is implemented to everyone? Are our institutions making this country better for everyone. Realistically .... Now our thoughts and beliefs say it does or we would want it that way ... but the current state our country is in may be different ... heck its been happening for many generations na. I invited a colleague from the states a few years back , we were driving and this car made a left turn on a NO left turn sign, he then asked me if our Traffic rules were mere "Suggestions" , I told him ..... um now that u brought it up it could be... Seriously though we would want to think Law should be implemented but is it ? Lets start with good wages for Police maybe that may help but thats for another topic.

While I too may not agree with killing someone before due process, but do we really have proof other than words. I have not lived in davao to know the real State it is in , all I know after visiting the region I have never seen any other region similar to what is in place there for the better.

Hence it makes me wonder Law and true results of the state a region is in.

Again this is my opinion and like I said I admire the state their region is in minus the finger ....

[Butchokoy]

the finger is cool! most of the time, media is annoying anyway..

[Baeybe_Bryce]

Whatever you say the law is still the law and it is still our best means to achieving a reasonable result in this country. You may not like it, you may even hate it but you are still subject to it and so are the Dutertes. So no amount of posturing or grandstanding on this issue will make your points correct, because if it is against the law, it is against the law period.

If people are dissatisfied with the law, then the best way is to work towards changing it. The solution is not to go beyond it. As individual citizens, even mayors must abide by the law even if they don't think it brings them results. That is why we have institutions, because institutions despite being imperfect are always better than personalities. Work within the system, not beyond it.



Lol and who is saying they are guilty? They should be the subject of an investigation, nobody is saying they are guilty. What I said is if they are guilty as most people suspect, then the argument that getting voted into office forgives their crimes is retarded



The means don't justify the ends so this is a meaningless question.



It is wrong and unfair for everyone, including the victims. When the victims become party to perpetuation of a crime, then they have become criminals as well. That should not be the objective of a civilized society. Vigilante goes beyond self-defense, it is already based purely on vengeance and our law doesn't allow that. We aren't a primitive, tribal society, or am I wrong in thinking that with people who think like you do?



And do you ever wonder why the Philippines is the way it is? It is because we like short-cuts and we hate following the rule of law. We always come up with excuses why we should violate laws. Just as an example, and minor OT, people cross the road anywhere they like even if it's against the law and the excuse is always that its too inconvenient to use the proper crossings. The result is traffic and congestion. See what I mean?

Violating the law in this way isn't just about being idealistic but flaunting the law that way serves as a bad example to the citizens. If elected officials thumb their nose at the law why should citizens follow it? People follow their leaders examples. If the mayor, on the other hand, reduces crime by following the law, then people will be encouraged to respect our law and the result will be a more peaceful, LAW-ABIDING society.



Hahaha, what makes you think I've forgotten. What about Erap? What about Jinggoy? As I said, if you have a problem with the law, lobby your Congressman to change it. Everyone knows our laws need to be improved, but that is not an excuse to break them



Lack of respect for the law will ensure that our country continues to be backward, poor and in chaos. People who don't respect the law will never succeed.



And your alternative is the law of vigilantes and roving bands of death squad? Why not live in Afghanistan?

You think perfect of the law that we have in this country. That it is as solid as a rock. So ideal. You failed to see the other side of reality because you stick to your law. The law that tells you what is right or wrong. By the book.

Might as well prepare yourself, that if ever this man will be found guilty, give it few year and you will see his face up wandering around like a free. That's what law we're talking about. You tell me what law will convict him and years from now another law will set him free. Ironic isn't it?

You see the power of law? Estrada and Jinggoy, such perfect examples. Condemned but free.

Am no telling that he is right, that he is not the person you think he is. What I've been trying to tell you is not to dwell much on the that law. You talk about the law that protects us but also the same law that releases our abusers. Perfections at it's finest.


You telling me what law is, but I just told you what reality is. You talk about the institutional law but that's what I don't see around. Try reality check?


You think that law can save Davao from it's abusers? Well, maybe, but it could have been implemented by the time that book of law was written so it wouldn't have ended like this. What happened to a lot of decades lost? Now where' the law?

If only Davao has a choice it would not end up this way. Anyone who thinks he can be that "change" in Davao, be that choice.

You don't want vigilantes protecting Davao? Now give them a choice. A lawful choice.