Cebu Velez College student killed in clash between Army and rebels

[cottonmouth]

---

CHR-7 invites Palang's family, activists - INQUIRER.net, Philippine News for Filipinos

Quote:

Alonso said that even before the New People's Army (NPA) released a statement confirming Rachelle's membership in the rebel group, CHR was already aware of her association with the NPA.

He said that before the September 18 encounter, CHR investigators had learned that Bishop Antonio Palang, Rachelle's uncle, had sent word to Dumaguete City Bishop John Du to look for Rachelle and convince her to return to Cebu.

Alonso said that according to Du, Palang's parents knew beforehand that she had joined the NPA.

“Rachelle Mae told her parents that she will be going to the mountains to join the group against the government,” Alonso said.

Palang's father earlier denied that his daughter was a member of the NPA.

Unquote:


Na sige deny pa gyud...bad baya ang mamakak, masuko si Lord ana. What do you think are the ideals of groups who live on lies? Is it noble? Nahhhh...

[godwhacker]

^^^ Sige diay ang pamakak sa mga familyang Palang ug ang ilang mga supporters. Nabuking man gud ang ilang anak kay napatay man sa mga military ug sa mga pagduda nga ang dinali-an nga pag cremate ni Mae usa ka pagtagu sa kamatu-oran aron maguba ang ebidensya.
Tan-awon nato kung unsay mogula ining meeting sa CHR ug sa KURAP_PATAN? Morag si Abarrientos ra man siguro ang mo attend sa meeting kay di man pabor nila ang resulta sa imbestigasyon. Pero ug nahitabo nga pabor nila ang outcome, sus marya e hosep, way hunong na ilang mga rally, rally diha.

[giddyboy]

The very reason why armed struggle is armed struggle is because people have given up talking about things because of extremes in points of view and philosophy about how to conduct life, because the talking will lead nowhere and they deem that only the bullet will decide who's idea is superior. Basically what I'm saying is this thread is pretty much a never ending debate--sige lang mo'g lalis without any true meat and substance, because one side will ALWAYS stand for what he/she believes in, and the other side with ALWAYS stand for what he/she believes in. And no one will come up a winner unless, a) a mod closes the thread (and the last poster "feels" as if he "won" the thread by posting the last idea that supports his/her ideology), or b) the iStoryan members who posted this thread who are adamant about their POV's will find each other in real life and shoot and kill each other.

If men can truly live in peace with one another, and truly understand one another, then guns should have been abandoned a long time ago. But the sad truth is, they are still here, and they can still be used.

-RODION

i understand what u mean in all this but this is not only all about winning a debate here. it is sharing opinions and learning from them. it would also mean clashing of opinions. that's reality coz every person has his/her own mind.

i know ang left ug ang right dili gyud mag abot. labi na kad2ng tua na layo na sa tumoy. some would try to be at the center.

mind u, arguments between posters do have meat and substance. coz their stands don't only come from their own mind but also based on facts.

before, the arguments were based on whether Rachelle Mae is an NPA or not and whether she was really into a medical mission or a NPA mission.

and now coz it was already proven a fact that she indeed was an NPA and using the medical mission as alibi that led to her death, some questioned her moves, while some praised it. Questions also arise about the honesty of some leftist personalities who declared before that she isn't an NPA.

------------------------------------

ASSUMING WE PUT POLITICAL COLOR ASIDE, what shall we call a person who hides his/her true intentions and therefore using a medical mission as an alibi? di ba bakakon? unsa may tawag anang tawo nga moingon dili lage na cya member pero in the end confirmed diay nga member? di ba bakakon gihapon? how do u call a person who uses other people's money & resources to fight against the very people who spent those? di ba backstabber? unsa may tawag anang tawo nga mo go against sa mando sa iyang ginikanan?

simple ra kau nang mga pangutanaha...i'm asking these questions as real as possible, as practical as possible, as neutral as possible, and as frank as possible. no metaphors here. much more with monologues.

[The_Child]

The very reason why armed struggle is armed struggle is because people have given up talking about things because of extremes in points of view and philosophy about how to conduct life, because the talking will lead nowhere and they deem that only the bullet will decide who's idea is superior. Basically what I'm saying is this thread is pretty much a never ending debate--sige lang mo'g lalis without any true meat and substance, because one side will ALWAYS stand for what he/she believes in, and the other side with ALWAYS stand for what he/she believes in. And no one will come up a winner unless, a) a mod closes the thread (and the last poster "feels" as if he "won" the thread by posting the last idea that supports his/her ideology), or b) the iStoryan members who posted this thread who are adamant about their POV's will find each other in real life and shoot and kill each other.

If men can truly live in peace with one another, and truly understand one another, then guns should have been abandoned a long time ago. But the sad truth is, they are still here, and they can still be used.

-RODION

yes indeed it is a waste of time. because we have already answered your questions, now why do we have to answer back again your gibberish questions wherein the answers are on the previous pages, are you lazy enough to read our posts? or do you just blab your way to a nonsense thought?



now you're wrong about that one, how many studens did not finish college due to procrastination? from mypoint of view mas daghan paman cguro lfs na naka graduate with honors kaysa sa uban... think about that one,what selfish cause?



asa man sir?

i understand what u mean in all this but this is not only all about winning a debate here. it is sharing opinions and learning from them. it would also mean clashing of opinions. that's reality coz every person has his/her own mind.

i know ang left ug ang right dili gyud mag abot. labi na kad2ng tua na layo na sa tumoy. some would try to be at the center.

mind u, arguments between posters do have meat and substance. coz their stands don't only come from their own mind but also based on facts.

before, the arguments were based on whether Rachelle Mae is an NPA or not and whether she was really into a medical mission or a NPA mission.

and now coz it was already proven a fact that she indeed was an NPA and using the medical mission as alibi, some questioned her moves, while some praised it. Questions also arise about the honesty of some leftist personalities who declared before that she is a friend and isn't an NPA.

------------------------------------

ASSUMING WE PUT POLITICAL COLOR ASIDE, what shall we call a person who hides his/her true intentions and therefore using a medical mission as an alibi? di ba bakakon? unsa may tawag anang tawo nga moingon dili lage na cya member pero in the end confirmed diay nga member? di ba bakakon gihapon? how do u call a person who uses other people's money & resources to fight against the very people who spent those? di ba backstabber? unsa may tawag anang tawo nga mo go against sa mando sa iyang ginikanan?

simple ra kau nang mga pangutanaha...i'm asking these questions as real as possible, as practical as possible, as neutral as possible, and as frank as possible. no metaphors here. much more with monologues.

Indeed, indeed!

But this is reality. there is no reality outside this. the very notion of armed rebellion, death, human rights, all that we are talking about in this thread is reality itself, once we separate ourselves from this, there is nothing, pure void. Armed rebellion, casualties of war, we allow to continue this 'violence' through our talking about it. We are participants to this violence. And the only way to stop this violence is for us to be apathetic. That we have to renounce whatever is said, that we do not care. There is no violence outside, the violence is springs here, this is the framework of reality. Palang's death has always been will always be - virtual.

cheers~

[bazarov]

i take offense. I have leftist ideals and yet the very notion of the Left here is being equated to necrophiiliac [sic] groups such as those being mentioned, LFS, NPA, etc...

nec·ro·phil·i·a [ nèkrə fíllee ə ] n. Sexual desire for dead bodies; sexual feelings for or sexual acts with dead bodies.

Throughout history, the creation of martyrs and heroes is the standard response of groups of people that are suppressed in a given milieu (or are in conditions of constant conflict). The oral traditions of Homer reminiscing the heroism of Achilles in Troy, the incessant recantation of the sacrifices of the Christian religion's martyrs, the YouTube videos celebrating the Islamic fundamentalist mujaheddins' suicide attacks, the World War II stories of our great grandfather's guerrilla exploits against the Japanese occupiers, etc. These are but a few examples of how the preservation of the memory of the dead and its perpetuation serves the purpose of the threatened group.

History has many examples of how dead people came to symbolize a struggle against a particular order. The status quo fears this most, thus the unremitting efforts to demonize dead subversives. In the words of the Czech writer Milan Kundera: "The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting." The memory of the dead can galvanize change.

But here, by the incongruous use of the term "necrophilliac" [sic], we are given a new twist on the oft-repeated theme of the Left's being left behind by the times. The Left does not glorify the dead. By means of the inappropriate use of terminology, we come to an altogether different meaning. The bestowal of "martyrdom" to the Left's fallen comrades is not anymore veneration. By the wily misuse of words, we are left only with a bestial instinct :o, plain and simple: a sexual desire for the bodies of the dead. A feral passion to impregnate the decaying crevices of a corpse.

It's amazing how accusations of sexual deviancy, no matter how :o out of place, almost always crop up in crude political intramurals.

CONTRIBUTING AT LEAST SOMETHING IS NOT ENOUGH, we have to raise our standards naman, if we are to contribute something we have to contribute in a sensible manner.

--

P.S. Mao Tse Tung is lopsidedly pictured here as a "Great Leap backward." Lest we forget, Deng Xiaoping's policies in the 80s that led to China's rise as a Capitalist power today wouldn't have been possible if not for Mao's programs of radical agrarian reform and national industrialization (and ridding China of its neocolonializers and their local lackeys).

Let us also give to Mao the credit for having uttered the following words. These quotes should be good advise for the "heroic" comrades who are still out there in the mountains (and also to those who are inclined to join them in their "great" "patriotic" one-thousand years war):

Wherever there is struggle there is sacrifice, and death is a common occurrence. But we have the interests of the people and the sufferings of the great majority at heart, and when we die for the people it is a worthy death. Nevertheless, we should do our best to avoid unnecessary sacrifices.

-- "Serve the People" (September 8, 1944), Selected Works, Vol. III, p. 228.

The world is yours, as well as ours, but in the last analysis, it is yours. You young people, full of vigor and vitality, are in the bloom of life, like the sun at eight or nine in the morning. Our hope is placed on you. The world belongs to you. [But not if you're dead.]

-- Talk at a meeting with Chinese students and trainees in Moscow (November 17, 1957).

[worldwide]

sa akong tan-aw mas kuyaw man ang gobyerno karon kaysa komunista. harap-harapan na gud ang pangawat

[giddyboy]

@bazarov: good opinion u got there!!! and good find too!

[GemWArrioR]

what cause?

nga mamatay sa way tumong? way hinungdan? mao na ang cause nga gustong ipaabot sa NPA sa mga tawo? yeah, applause to thos who died for no cause at all kay nailad sila sa mga NPA... congrats...

sakto jud ka junmar. what cause are they fighting when their suppose to be leaders are sitting pretty up high in Netherlands.

[The_Child]

nec·ro·phil·i·a [ nèkrə fíllee ə ] n. Sexual desire for dead bodies; sexual feelings for or sexual acts with dead bodies.

Throughout history, the creation of martyrs and heroes is the standard response of groups of people that are suppressed in a given milieu (or are in conditions of constant conflict). The oral traditions of Homer reminiscing the heroism of Achilles in Troy, the incessant recantation of the sacrifices of the Christian religion's martyrs, the YouTube videos celebrating the Islamic fundamentalist mujaheddins' suicide attacks, the World War II stories of our great grandfather's guerrilla exploits against the Japanese occupiers, etc. These are but a few examples of how the preservation of the memory of the dead and its perpetuation serves the purpose of the threatened group.

History has many examples of how dead people came to symbolize a struggle against a particular order. The status quo fears this most, thus the unremitting efforts to demonize dead subversives. In the words of the Czech writer Milan Kundera: "The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting." The memory of the dead can galvanize change.

But here, by the incongruous use of the term "necrophilliac" [sic], we are given a new twist on the oft-repeated theme of the Left's being left behind by the times. The Left does not glorify the dead. By means of the inappropriate use of terminology, we come to an altogether different meaning. The bestowal of "martyrdom" to the Left's fallen comrades is not anymore veneration. By the wily misuse of words, we are left only with a bestial instinct :o, plain and simple: a sexual desire for the bodies of the dead. A feral passion to impregnate the decaying crevices of a corpse.

It's amazing how accusations of sexual deviancy, no matter how :o out of place, almost always crop up in crude political intramurals.

CONTRIBUTING AT LEAST SOMETHING IS NOT ENOUGH, we have to raise our standards naman, if we are to contribute something we have to contribute in a sensible manner.

--

P.S. Mao Tse Tung is lopsidedly pictured here as a "Great Leap backward." Lest we forget, Deng Xiaoping's policies in the 80s that led to China's rise as a Capitalist power today wouldn't have been possible if not for Mao's programs of radical agrarian reform and national industrialization (and ridding China of its neocolonializers and their local lackeys).

Let us also give to Mao the credit for having uttered the following words. These quotes should be good advise for the "heroic" comrades who are still out there in the mountains (and also to those who are inclined to join them in their "great" "patriotic" one-thousand years war):

Wherever there is struggle there is sacrifice, and death is a common occurrence. But we have the interests of the people and the sufferings of the great majority at heart, and when we die for the people it is a worthy death. Nevertheless, we should do our best to avoid unnecessary sacrifices.

-- "Serve the People" (September 8, 1944), Selected Works, Vol. III, p. 228.

The world is yours, as well as ours, but in the last analysis, it is yours. You young people, full of vigor and vitality, are in the bloom of life, like the sun at eight or nine in the morning. Our hope is placed on you. The world belongs to you. [But not if you're dead. ]

-- Talk at a meeting with Chinese students and trainees in Moscow (November 17, 1957).

OT: do i know you? Your manner and style of writing is very familiar, your taste for Mao more than Deng is also familiar, and your affinity for Russian literature is making me think that i know you. But then again i could be mistaken.

The spectacle of Martyrdom is a part of a psychological conditioning throughout history. In our times, historians are no longer the star-makers, it is the media, and if you are who i think you are, you'd know how Media effaces the real and how everything is subsumed to mere archives- social memory is not differentiated from a historical phenomenon, i.e, no longer could we differentiate from things really happening from the things that are made to happen during this ascendancy of Media Hyperrealism.

The dead people are not just symbols, but they are also Sign referring to objects that could no longer trace is objective roots. Any object that becomes a sign presents an assumption that it has already been absorbed to a semiotic community, what we ask what does it refer to? and then, interpretations go wild, who dominates? the larger voice, who gets the larger voice? that is the question. And then there is that art of interpretation when it comes to history. Historical phenomenon are always dependent upon historical events and historical events are always dependent upon Spectacle. who makes the spectacle ergo makes historical events which proceeds to the knowing of historical phenomenon. if Palang was killed, without media coverage, killed without any spectacle, do you think she would even pass as a variable within our social sphere? Would a tree falling down a forest with no one to hear it produce a sound? a contemporary twist to classical epistemology.

in regards to sexual deviancy, although freud maybe obsolete, he still possesss with him important considerations in psychology such as the notion of *** *** and more ***. Neofreudians tend to label everything within this perspective (almost everything) that human issues are rooted upon sexual ones. So here's the thing, political discourse is a human endeavor, ergo, it is psychological and if we follow freudians, or neofreudians, we continue to go back to the roots of the issue of the subjectivity - *** *** and more ***. So how does necrophilia translates to the obsolete backward Left( in the philippines, this paradoxical term for the left actually exists) they praise dead things, even make love to them, and it would totally devastate their world if separation happens. Think of the Left here, separating itself from Mao, or Marx, what then? It'll be a terrible breakup, Who do you think would appear as the rebounder?

Also, social memory is programmatic. It has nothing to do about its own self, it is always for an end, but the question is, who shapes this end? again, those who could think are those who do the job.


Mao Mao Mao. I leave you to your Mao for now. i dont want to be in between the two of you.

Have you finally read Georges Bataille the story of the eye?

[Reason2believe]

OT: Is there such a thing as intellectual intercourse? cos i sense somethig of that kind IN here.