Are you supporting federalism, what can you say about BBL?

[digitalsuperman]

---

Salamat sa comment, just testing his water there. See his reply?

Anyway dapig sa bbl o dili, dli nato neglect na ana jd ang first purpose sa milf. They settled for bbl coz its more feasible kaysa sa ilang damgo.

actually boss sa akong opinion ang BBL if ever ma approved na based sa draft nga 4994, hinuon wala paman ammendments murag napa man guro ni sa first reading, kay para nako mura nig double Edged sword.

if ang tao nasakop sa lugar nga nasakop sa bangsamoro state, maka ingon gyud sila nga pabor gyud to nila. kay naa man sila autonomy sa ilang state, maka implement silag taxes, fees ug levies then accrued na tanan padulong sa bangsamoro state. pun-an pa sa ilang additional budget gikan sa central government so mahulog ug makasuya kaayo kay daghan sila budget.hehe.

ang pinaka dakong alkanse gyud ani boss kay ang visayas. kay mahulog ug majority sa mindanao excempted na sa subsidies nga gikuha sa tax.sama anang MRT, LRT sa manila ug i think apil na ang mga airport sa manila.naa pud na subsidy.atay au.hehe.

[yhokz101]

actually boss sa akong opinion ang BBL if ever ma approved na based sa draft nga 4994, hinuon wala paman ammendments murag napa man guro ni sa first reading, kay para nako mura nig double Edged sword.

if ang tao nasakop sa lugar nga nasakop sa bangsamoro state, maka ingon gyud sila nga pabor gyud to nila. kay naa man sila autonomy sa ilang state, maka implement silag taxes, fees ug levies then accrued na tanan padulong sa bangsamoro state. pun-an pa sa ilang additional budget gikan sa central government so mahulog ug makasuya kaayo kay daghan sila budget.hehe.

ang pinaka dakong alkanse gyud ani boss kay ang visayas. kay mahulog ug majority sa mindanao excempted na sa subsidies nga gikuha sa tax.sama anang MRT, LRT sa manila ug i think apil na ang mga airport sa manila.naa pud na subsidy.atay au.hehe.

Mao lage boss in fairness sa ubang local units sa whole Philippines dili man pd makatarungan. Ambot nganu special treat man ni clang revolutionary group. Naa naman gd na so if gina introduce naman gani ang bbl na similar sa framework sa federalism.. Why not usbon nalang jd totally para impas. Naa man jd pd ni something fishy ni panot gipadali2x pa jd. Ang current draft sa bbl needed man jd pd e revise o klarohon.

Nganu magpa lahi man jd lage.. In time basin na blowback ra ni sa atong govt.

[digitalsuperman]

Mao lage boss in fairness sa ubang local units sa whole Philippines dili man pd makatarungan. Ambot nganu special treat man ni clang revolutionary group. Naa naman gd na so if gina introduce naman gani ang bbl na similar sa framework sa federalism.. Why not usbon nalang jd totally para impas. Naa man jd pd ni something fishy ni panot gipadali2x pa jd. Ang current draft sa bbl needed man jd pd e revise o klarohon.

Nganu magpa lahi man jd lage.. In time basin na blowback ra ni sa atong govt.

di na musugoT ang government boss. as long as tagalog ang molingkod diha sa gobyerno di gyud na ma usab. kay if ever ma federal system ta, mahulog nga ang manila na ang tigbayad sa ilang mga subsidies. mao nang pabor gyud ko taga visayas or mindanao ang mo lingkod sa pwesto. ok rapud nako if regionalized ang substate. like ang Region 7 usa ka state.ingon ana unta.

[Juan Martinez]

The first comment I posted here was in reaction to your about post about the opinion of Senator Santiago that the peace deal will create a substate which she is unconstitutional. I commented that accordingg to her she is a constitutional expert, but what she has shown was hubris and braggadocio. Then you replied to the effect that we cannot*dismiss the fact that the deal is creating a substate which is unconstitutional. In other words, you AGREE with Senator Santiago. Then I asked what particular provision*of the Constitution that is violated BY THE SUBSTATE SYSTEM. Instead of answering my question, you asked me if I know the difference between creating an autonomous region and a substate. Then you added by saying that they (you maybe referring*to Congress) are studying *the BBL if it is only creating an autonomous region and not a substate, *which you said will violate of the Constitution. Then I raised my question again, what particular provision of the Constitution that makes the substate system unconstitutional. You cannot give a direct answer but you cited again the position of Senator Santiago to the effect that BBL is unconstitutional because the enumeration of the reserved powers or retained of the central government under the BBL restricts Philippine sovereignty. I replied to you that I perfectly understand what Senator Santiago is saying. Then I insisted in asking you what do you know about our Constitution specifically is saying about the substate system being a transgression of our Constitution OTHER THAN BELIEVING what Senator Santiago is saying. You replied "you perfectly understand her yet you seek for more? By her statement alone it is understood asa stand ang BBL*with respect sa atong constitution. What do you want my own version of her statement? naa pa bay laing version?*Or gusto ka edited version *of her statement? na unsa na man pod ka.(then you laughed) You added that you’re not a lawyer and you're not expert of the Constitution. THEN YOU SAID YOU WERE JUST RELAYING THE STATEMENTS OF SENATOR SANTIAGO. Then you asked me*why a substate will not violate the Constitution. As a parting shot you asked why the MOKLO wanted to separate.

*

NOW, who will not think you are not STUPID. You just copied and pasted the position of Senator Santiago. I asked you what do you know about our Constitution is saying the substate system being unconstitutional and you copied and pasted the position of Senator Santiago. Why don’t you have a mind of your own? That is why I asked you to read. I told you Senator Santiago is NOT the Supreme Court. Under our Constitution, only the Supreme Court can declare a law unconstitutional. **** *

[Juan Martinez]

OT: daghana nang mga newbie dri ui.. lol

maghimo pod kaha ko ug laing account...

The first comment I posted here was in reaction to your about post about the opinion of Senator Santiago that the peace deal will create a substate which she is unconstitutional. I commented that accordingg to her she is a constitutional expert, but what she has shown was hubris and braggadocio. Then you replied to the effect that we cannot*dismiss the fact that the deal is creating a substate which is unconstitutional. In other words, you AGREE with Senator Santiago. Then I asked what particular provision*of the Constitution that is violated BY THE SUBSTATE SYSTEM. Instead of answering my question, you asked me if I know the difference between creating an autonomous region and a substate. Then you added by saying that they (you maybe referring*to Congress) are studying *the BBL if it is only creating an autonomous region and not a substate, *which you said will violate of the Constitution. Then I raised my question again, what particular provision of the Constitution that makes the substate system unconstitutional. You cannot give a direct answer but you cited again the position of Senator Santiago to the effect that BBL is unconstitutional because the enumeration of the reserved powers or retained of the central government under the BBL restricts Philippine sovereignty. I replied to you that I perfectly understand what Senator Santiago is saying. Then I insisted in asking you what do you know about our Constitution specifically is saying about the substate system being a transgression of our Constitution OTHER THAN BELIEVING what Senator Santiago is saying. You replied "you perfectly understand her yet you seek for more? By her statement alone it is understood asa stand ang BBL*with respect sa atong constitution. What do you want my own version of her statement? naa pa bay laing version?*Or gusto ka edited version *of her statement? na unsa na man pod ka.(then you laughed) You added that you’re not a lawyer and you're not expert of the Constitution. THEN YOU SAID YOU WERE JUST RELAYING THE STATEMENTS OF SENATOR SANTIAGO. Then you asked me*why a substate will not violate the Constitution. As a parting shot you asked why the MOKLO wanted to separate.

NOW, who will not think you are not STUPID. You just copied and pasted the position of Senator Santiago. I asked you what do you know about our Constitution is saying the substate system being unconstitutional and you copied and pasted the position of Senator Santiago. Why don’t you have a mind of your own? That is why I asked you to read. I told you Senator Santiago is NOT the Supreme Court. Under our Constitution, only the Supreme Court can declare a law or any act of congress unconstitutional. **** *

[yhokz101]

The first comment I posted here was in reaction to your about post about the opinion of Senator Santiago that the peace deal will create a substate which she is unconstitutional. I commented that

Hahah yeah ok.. Taasa sa reply ui. Nag tarung paka ug reply sa previous reply namo dli lang cge ka ingon stupid og ignorant. If you only share you thoughts after we shared ours, now that would be a constructive conversation isn't it? Instead you lambasted us with your witty-shining words.. Hahaha nya hambog pag dating, kinsa man ganahan ana?

Well again, nganu gusto man jd mag lahi ang mga moklo?

[Juan Martinez]

Hahah yeah ok.. Taasa sa reply ui. Nag tarung paka ug reply sa previous reply namo dli lang cge ka ingon stupid og ignorant. If you only share you thoughts after we shared ours, now that would be a constructive conversation isn't it? Instead you lambasted us with your witty-shining words.. Hahaha nya hambog pag dating, kinsa man ganahan ana?

Well again, nganu gusto man jd mag lahi ang mga moklo?

Then I told you that the Senator Santiago was only expressing her own opinion on BBL. Then I said that IF we follow Senator Santiago’s line of reasoning that it was the reserved or retained powers that make the BBL unconstitutional so, I said, it is not the substate system that is unconstitutional but the retention and reservation of those powers. Then I ASKED YOU AGAIN which provision of the Constitution that will be transgressed if and when congress will pass the BBL.

WHAT WAS YOUR STUPID REPLY? HEAR THIS AGAIN BECAUSE THIS IS FROM YOU:

“Did you catch what I said on “they are studying and reviewing if it is indeed will threatened the Philippine’s sovereignty, right? Did that even conclusive to you and if it is then you are assuming all what I mentioned conclusive to say BBL is indeed unconstitutional? Wla na lang unta na nila gi review o approve na unta na diretso if kanang mga congressman o sa senate wala naka sense og mga irregularities sa provision sa BBL in regard sa constitution?”

*

LOOK, HOW STUPID CAN YOU BE? IF YOU SAY BBL IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL YOU CITE HERE YOUR LEGAL ARGUMENTS WHY. *

[yhokz101]

Then I told you that the Senator Santiago was only expressing her own opinion on BBL.

I did mention this "retention and reservation of those powers.." and you asked me is there is any provision sa atong constitution, i said wala not directly. It was how those certain provisions sa bbl that are deemed to be reviewed and studied further kay pwd ma misinterpret. BBL provisions could be conflicting sa constitution with regards to this: "retention and reservation of those powers. " and many more like sa education part na akong na mention where wala nila na specify maau ang guidelines sa nationalism ngadto. Nabasa nimo to? Mao to ang sample why they cannot approved yet yhe draft bbl form..

Kung imo pasabot provision sa bbl directly conflicting sa constitution.. Na unsa murag sa first basa palang di kaha na makita sa nag review? Those vagueness sa certain provisions ang ako pasabot kay if ever dli ma specify pwd ma interpret ug malahi in the future mag kina unsa if ma implement na ang bbl.

Nganu mag lahi mag lage jud na sila bang mga moklo? Kung in the first place wa pa nag rebelde asenso na unsa nang mindanao.. Sila ray nagpa liso2x sa mindanao kung buot huna2x-on..

Legal arguments? Hahaha naa ta sa court session dri? What we have is opinion.. We can cite certain statements as we like as this is a forum fyi. You cant totally dismiss any idea maski copy paste pana in defense sa iyang express idea.. That does not even make less valid until you have proven otherwise.

[Juan Martinez]

I did mention this "retention and reservation of those powers.." and you asked me is there is any provision sa atong constitution, i said wala not directly. It was how those certain provisions sa bbl that are deemed to be reviewed and studied further kay pwd ma misinterpret. BBL provisions could be conflicting sa constitution with regards to this: "retention and reservation of those powers. " and many more like sa education part na akong na mention where wala nila na specify maau ang guidelines sa nationalism ngadto. Nabasa nimo to? Mao to ang sample why they cannot approved yet yhe draft bbl form..

Kung imo pasabot provision sa bbl directly conflicting sa constitution.. Na unsa murag sa first basa palang di kaha na makita sa nag review? Those vagueness sa certain provisions ang ako pasabot kay if ever dli ma specify pwd ma interpret ug malahi in the future mag kina unsa if ma implement na ang bbl.

Nganu mag lahi mag lage jud na sila bang mga moklo? Kung in the first place wa pa nag rebelde asenso na unsa nang mindanao.. Sila ray nagpa liso2x sa mindanao kung buot huna2x-on..

Legal arguments? Hahaha naa ta sa court session dri? What we have is opinion.. We can cite certain statements as we like as this is a forum fyi. You cant totally dismiss any idea maski copy paste pana in defense sa iyang express idea.. That does not even make less valid until you have proven otherwise.

NO, THAT “RETAINED OR RESERVED POWERS” ARGUMENT was the justification of Senator Santiago why she thinks BBL is unconstitutional,*NOT*yours. You just copied and pasted her argument. Make your stupid brain work so that that stupid brain of yours will not stupid forever. The only thing to do that is to read. why? do you need to be in court of law to back up your arguments with provisions of law. you are in the court of public opinion (so that you will know the phrase "court of public opinion" was coined by adlai Stevenson during the Cuban missile crisis). you are just plain stupid. ***

[Juan Martinez]

I did mention this "retention and reservation of those powers.." and you asked me is there is any provision sa atong constitution, i said wala not directly. It was how those certain provisions sa bbl that are deemed to be reviewed and studied further kay pwd ma misinterpret. BBL provisions could be conflicting sa constitution with regards to this: "retention and reservation of those powers. " and many more like sa education part na akong na mention where wala nila na specify maau ang guidelines sa nationalism ngadto. Nabasa nimo to? Mao to ang sample why they cannot approved yet yhe draft bbl form..

Kung imo pasabot provision sa bbl directly conflicting sa constitution.. Na unsa murag sa first basa palang di kaha na makita sa nag review? Those vagueness sa certain provisions ang ako pasabot kay if ever dli ma specify pwd ma interpret ug malahi in the future mag kina unsa if ma implement na ang bbl.

Nganu mag lahi mag lage jud na sila bang mga moklo? Kung in the first place wa pa nag rebelde asenso na unsa nang mindanao.. Sila ray nagpa liso2x sa mindanao kung buot huna2x-on..

Legal arguments? Hahaha naa ta sa court session dri? What we have is opinion.. We can cite certain statements as we like as this is a forum fyi. You cant totally dismiss any idea maski copy paste pana in defense sa iyang express idea.. That does not even make less valid until you have proven otherwise.

Mr. Nincompoop, you don't have the education, experience, vocabulary, and depth to talk about as serious a subject as BBL or the nuances in central mindanao or the peace process. you even called the OPAPP as peace process committee (you only knew that it's office of the Presidential Adviser on the peace process when you Google it). you can even hardly express yourself. you are just plain stupid.