Bishops want the truth? (They can't handle the truth!)

[randy111979]

---

Truth is not relative. Its absolute. Truth is truth as black is black or white is white. There are no gray areas only balack and white. If both insists that that theirs is truth then one of them is definitely telling a lie.

Then there is only one way to find out. To prove or to disprove right?

[mosimos]

Thats what the CBCP is asking. Yet the government is not interested in finding it. We have to have a genuine investigation not Congressional set ups like the one Congress is handling which was just railroaded anyway to exonerate Garci.

Can GMA handle the truth?

[randy111979]

Thats what the CBCP is asking. Yet the government is not interested in finding it. We have to have a genuine investigation not Congressional set ups like the one Congress is handling which was just railroaded anyway to exonerate Garci.

Can GMA handle the truth?

Congress is moving within the law. So what they did is valid. Who selected the members of congress? You did. I did. Those same people who we entrusted as lawmakers are the ones who decided.

Unfortunately for you guys, you have a perceived truth. And it was not met. Your perceived truth is that congress prosecutes PGMA right away. Then let her prove or disprove the allegations.

The problem is the truth that came out is different. Now, how are you handling that? You want more.

Purely my opinion.

[FK]

Congress is moving within the law. So what they did is valid. Who selected the members of congress? You did. I did. Those same people who we entrusted as lawmakers are the ones who decided

Unfortunately for you guys, you have a perceived truth. And it was not met. Your perceived truth is that congress prosecutes PGMA right away. Then let her prove or disprove the allegations.

Because a congressman from our district thinks that GMA should not be tried... then we should just accept it? HUH?

Forwarding the impeachment complaint to the senate is not judging GMA... it is one way of knowing what did really happen. Now because congress trash the impeachment complaint because of just a mere ruling (which they can revise anytime)... they in effect trash the best way of knowing the truth.

O.T.

It really amazes me that some people here invoke the rule of law, when most of them approve how the vigilantes kill those suspected snatchers, drug pushers... ironic isn't it. Or shall we call it double standard?

[randy111979]

O.T.

It really amazes me that some people here invoke the rule of law, when most of them approve how the vigilantes kill those suspected snatchers, drug pushers... ironic isn't it. Or shall we call it double standard?

Hahahahaha. You got me there man. Hahahaha. Am being circumstancial? When in Rome?
That's my own version of being adaptive. hahahaha.

FK: Are you against pollution? from cars? factories?

[randy111979]

Because a congressman from our district thinks that GMA should not be tried... then we should just accept it? HUH?

Forwarding the impeachment complaint to the senate is not judging GMA... it is one way of knowing what did really happen. Now because congress trash the impeachment complaint because of just a mere ruling (which they can revise anytime)... they in effect trash the best way of knowing the truth.

Revise anytime or not. Unfortunately, majority favors not.
It's difficult to imagine a law that can be tailored fit to any situation at anytime.

A mere ruling?

Unfortunately, your being represented by your congressman.

best way of knowing the truth? sure? with all the allies of PGMA their? hahahaha.

[FK]

Revise anytime or not. Unfortunately, majority favors not.
It's difficult to imagine a law that can be tailored fit to any situation at anytime.

A mere ruling?

oh yes it is... they did not base there reason for junking an impeachment base on a Philippine law... it was just base on rules on impeachment... which by the way was not followed entirely during the impeachment of ERAP.

Unfortunately, your being represented by your congressman.

unfortunately jud... but I would just accept it because they SUPPOSEDLY represent us?

best way of knowing the truth? sure? with all the allies of PGMA their? hahahaha.

Oh yes it is still is... with direct line of questioning on both witnesses and cross-examination. it still is the best way.

[randy111979]

Revise anytime or not. Unfortunately, majority favors not.
It's difficult to imagine a law that can be tailored fit to any situation at anytime.

A mere ruling?
oh yes it is... they did not base there reason for junking an impeachment base on a Philippine law... it was just base on rules on impeachment... which by the way was not followed entirely during the impeachment of ERAP.

Coz nobody tried to question it? Or the one questioning it was weak? Different people?

Unfortunately, your being represented by your congressman.
unfortunately jud... but I would just accept it because they SUPPOSEDLY represent us?

I can't force you to accept it. You can complain to the ombudsman? if you want supreme court?

That's what a righteous and consistent man should be doing.

best way of knowing the truth? sure? with all the allies of PGMA their? hahahaha.
Oh yes it is still is... with direct line of questioning on both witnesses and cross-examination. it still is the best way.

The problem is, they have a different line of thinking compared to you. I don't think you will be contented by the way they investigate if it favors PGMA.

[FK]

Coz nobody tried to question it? Or the one questioning it was weak? Different people?

you have just said it before the reason why... majority decision, but for me a majority decision is not always right.

I can't force you to accept it. You can complain to the ombudsman? if you want supreme court?

when was it that you oppose to the idea of a person... you have to sue him in court?

That's what a righteous and consistent man should be doing.

huh? kanos-a man naabot ang istorya abot righteousness and being consistent kong dili ka mo uyon sa congressman?

The problem is, they have a different line of thinking compared to you. I don't think you will be contented by the way they investigate if it favors PGMA.

could be... all i want to see is a trial, though sa as of know i'm convince that GMA is guilty, but who knows some part of the trial they can present a strong evidence that would say that the tape was spliced. By the way... was there an investigation... an investigation that was finish and has a strong conclusion?
Before the re-opening of the congress investigation on Hello Garci... they said that there was a cover-up... so much for a government who wants to know the truth.

[gareb]

as long as vested interests can freely and rampantly subvert a supposedly fair due process, it is practically useless. there is simply no sense in resorting to it, except of course if you are in favor with what those with the upper hand will do.

you are right, LytSlpr. CBCP cannot handle the truth that we cannot remove the menace that is gloria by pleading, appealing to conscience, to 'pursue the truth'. they are asking the crocodile to disgorge the chicken. and knowing the crocodile's hide, the supposedly wise sages of religion failed to see that, or purposely failed to.

funny. pro-GMA once called for due process so that everything would go according to the law. even with the foresight that the whole system is rotten to the core. GMA even admitted that to herself. now that all heavy, sensationalistic legal measures have been done away with, subverted if you may, by the dominant TRAPO's at Congress... and it is as if she will allow a true-as-blue investigation. let us not kid ourselves please.

if the people who are supposedly leading the moral recovery of the country through religion cannot see this oh-so-simple fact, i do not know what can make them see it. or perhaps they are afraid to grasp the impetus of truth that calls for measures that they cannot hope to agree with...?

makes you think.

the legal process, or at least its completion only legitimized gloria's continued triumph. you are right again. it is no longer an issue of right and wrong, or true or false, in the legalistic context. we already know what happened, what the truth is, and what is the right thing that must be done. the CBCP knows that too. but as you say, they are in a bind. lash out at Madame and they might point the knife at their own throats. plead, plead and plead and they will only legitimize the claim of a few that the church has finally lost its grip on the people's opinions.

funny. again. how the church fail to see the parallelism of a failed legal measure (elections) to unseat the president @ 1985 and again a failed legal measure (impeachment) to unseat a president @ 2001, and again another botched attempt at present; the previous two had the church calling for an 'extra-judicial solution'. the present we see the church beating as round the bush.

what is missing? is it Cardinal Sin and his quasi-liberal bent on these issues?

makes you think how funny everything is, don't you?