Cebu Velez College student killed in clash between Army and rebels

[boylaang]

---

akoa lang ni ha pasayloa ko if out of topic na nani
resulta lang ni sa ako huna huna na walay mabuhat mag atubang sa computer


kinsa mn jud ang tinud anay na contra sa ato mga kaigsoonan na na nakigbisog alang sa kagawasan ug democracia?

mas mau tingale na mutabang ni cila ug liempio sa ato nasod karon.
pinaagi sa paghipos sa mga kurap na naa sa gobyerno.
sa mga mga tawo na ato gipili aron muluwas sa ato nasod pero mao ra d i nituok nato.
sa mga mga illegal na negosyante na maoy nakaguba sa maayong ugma sa ato mga kabataan karon
sa mga nanag iya ug mga negosyo na dili muhatag ug sakto na sweldo.
sa mga badlongon sa kadalangan na mamiktima sa mga inosente na sibilyan.
ug sa tanan na sagbot sa katilingban

mas mau tingale na mao kini inyo atimanon mga kaigsuonan dili ang pagsuroy suroy sa kabukiran na makalisang na hinoon sa ato mga kaigsuonan na nanimoyo didto ky ang number one na ma epiktohan niini kami intawon na mga mag uuma sa bukid mamakwit nalang ug puyo ky dilikado na ug masandwich

[ronaYo]

@boylaang
Bitaw bro noh? uyon sad ko anang imong suggestion
Why don't our bro & sis on the "Left" change strategy, from being political to some sort of "vigilantes"
Kay kana bitaw mga sundalo nga ilang kontra nangabuhi rman sad na sila, Kadagahanan ana nila nisulod raman sa pagka-sundalo kay tungod sad sa Kawad-on, Kapobrehon, ug kalisud sa kinabuhi... Looy sad intawn pamilya ana nilang mga namatyan ug mga na disable...

Why don't our bro & sis on the "Left" go after the source of the problem... mga Kurap sa Gobyerno...
Sus kadaghan jud raba ana nila oi! and they're very easy targets...
Ayaw nlng na targeta ang mga cellsites kay wa jud nay pulos...

[rob123]

@boylaang
Bitaw bro noh? uyon sad ko anang imong suggestion
Why don't our bro & sis on the "Left" change strategy, from being political to some sort of "vigilantes"
Kay kana bitaw mga sundalo nga ilang kontra nangabuhi rman sad na sila, Kadagahanan ana nila nisulod raman sa pagka-sundalo kay tungod sad sa Kawad-on, Kapobrehon, ug kalisud sa kinabuhi... Looy sad intawn pamilya ana nilang mga namatyan ug mga na disable...

Why don't our bro & sis on the "Left" go after the source of the problem... mga Kurap sa Gobyerno...
Sus kadaghan jud raba ana nila oi! and they're very easy targets...
Ayaw nlng na targeta ang mga cellsites kay wa jud nay pulos...

husto gyud na emo g suggest @ronaYo pra nako ha! nga ang ato mga bro ug sis sa left ug right ela sulbaron ug pangitaon ang ugat sa problema, kana gud karon ang pobreng masa man ang na apektohan ug maayo. kana gud adto na sila sa bukid mag away i mean ang Sundalo ug Npa ma ipit tawon ang mga mag uuma oi. Kon Sundalo mosaka moingon nga supporter ka ha! nya kon Npa sad mo ingon sad nga espiya ka ha! saon naman aning kinabuhia oi (hilak si juan ). . nya kon d mo hatag tax kuno ang tag eya cellsite bombahan dayon. Hilak na sad asawa ni juan kay d na daw siya ka text eya anak tua sa manila. .Storya lang ba, pa wa sa laay. Pero sa tinuod lang d ni dapat mahitabo kay d malalis kitang tanan mga Pilipino ra, dapat enay mag away magtinabangay unta pag sulbad sa problema sa ato nasud...PEACE!!!!!!

[giddyboy]

You're not stating any arguments in here... instead you are making YOUR OWN Judgement as to what kind of statements are these...
It should have been better if you argue his points... state facts to disprove his claim!

those are just the first part of my arguments. to continue:

(1) "first of all the AFP are paid to kill, hunt, taunt civilians." ---an appeal to fear, an appeal to prejudice, a glittering generality, demonizing.

this one doesn't even need disproving...coz by just following his logic, mosulod nlng diay ko ug AFP para to kill, hunt, and taunt civilians....that's bullsh*t.

the statement negates the purpose of joining the AFP which is to serve and protect, which in reality is what they are paid for.

coz the AFP are not paid mercenaries. they're duty-bound by the constitution.

in contrast, that statement is in fact more apt to describe the NPA. punan-an pa nako ug "terrorize", "extort", and "destroy infras i.e. cellphone towers, transmission lines", etc.

(2) "i know because of the human rights violations of Palparan has done in southern luzon, central luzon, eastern visayas and northern luzon" ---a red herring to statement #1

this statement wants to prove statement#1 via red herring technique. But disproving is very easy. Palparan is not the AFP. or the AFP is not Palparan.

One bad apple doesn't mean the whole basket of apples are all bad...but still, that is "assuming" one apple is bad.

it's just like saying a chapter AKHRO leader is bad. then if we follow the logic, the whole international fraternity itself is bad? that's non-sense. that's bullsh*t.

(3) "the AFP employs tactics way beyond your wildest imagination."---an oversimplification, intentional vagueness

to make it complete:

"siyempre there won't be evidences. if you were the head of the government would you like to have paper trails linking you to your dirty work? the AFP employs tactics way beyond your wildest imagination. but siyempre if you are a military man you would already know that. if not better look at the other side of the coin bet you would get what your looking...

again, those statements are equating the AFP in general to Palparan's case only. He wanted us to believe that because of Palparan, it is the same story to the whole AFP hierarchy. it is thus prejudicial. a big lie. a half truth. an oversimplification. an intentional vagueness.

"due respect to those uniformed men and women na nadadamay lang sa kabulukan ng mayorya ng mga opisyal sa kanilang pamunuan pero in general the system is sickening."

this statement is guilty of the same...in fact by stating that, it doesn't give any due respect to uniformed men and women at all. Disrespecting the AFP via "majority technique & nadadamay lng" is also tantamount to disrespecting the people in it...disrespecting them by making them look like subhuman.

(4) "high regards to those who take up arms. it is their right to seek the truth. it is their right to go against the flow of the stream. it is their right to express their rigths or to get back their rights by fighting back."--- flag-waving, using virtue words

This is the disproving point: our constitution doesn't give the right for a person to take up armed struggle in order to seek the truth, thus no legal basis in the first place. under the constitution, it is never the right of an individual or group, to fight back using armed struggle. it is tantamount to treason. that's why the NPA fronts has a denial policy of armed struggle coz it doesn't make it any legal.

using a false logic to appeal to emotion doesn't give any justice either to the statement. another bullsh*t.

(5) "ang CHR? its a gov't agency thats saying "hey! abuso na yan at mali na ang palakad." thats how simple it is."---another oversimplification

it is never that simple. no bullsh*t.

(6) "no army official would even dare to admit that they pulled the trigger on a farmers head."---an appeal to prejudice

it's just an assumption over another assumption. how can u even make a good counter argument against double assumptions? that doesn't even warrant an argument in the first place. that's the last bullsh*t for the day.

arguments that, while sometimes convincing, are not necessarily valid. they're appeals to emotion, contrasted to appeals to intellect...so why argue on those? i don't want my statements or arguments basing on emotion. im not an emotional guy...those are useless. an exercise in futility...and i don't intend to continue w/ these bullsh*t...

Happy Halloween everyone!!!

[ronaYo]

it's just an assumption over another assumption. how can u even make a good counter argument against double assumptions? that doesn't even warrant an argument in the first place. that's the last bullsh*t for the day.

Huh? Those are ACCUSATIONS! Not assumptions! Why are u making judgement on his (dimasaliw) statements when u don't want to argue with it?

arguments that, while sometimes convincing, are not necessarily valid. they're appeals to emotion, contrasted to appeals to intellect...so why argue on those? i don't want my statements or arguments basing on emotion. im not an emotional guy...those are useless. an exercise in futility...and i don't intend to continue w/ these bullsh*t...

hahaha! "sometimes convincing, are not necessarily valid" Unsa gud ni?
ahhh, Mutu-o na unta ka, pero Dili nalng kay emotional iyang statements and bcoz it's full of emotions DILI Valid? hehehe
Nitu-o man lagi ka sa "I am sorry" speech ni GMA? Full of FAKE emotions man tu ug she tried to Appeal for emotion and beside it's VOID of any appeals to intellect! Kataw-anan nimo oi!!!
YOU are CONTRASTING yourself here! bwahahahaha!!!
Kahilak man tag KATAWA aning imong quote oi! in bold letters pa jud!!! hahahahaha!
naa pjuy "bullsh*t" sa tumoy hik hik hik hik!

Anyway, FEAST on this: (an excerpt from a summary of the impeachment complaint of GMA)
link: tonyocruz.com Summary of the 2008 impeachment complaint against President Arroyo

HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS

Pres. Gloria Arroyo’s culpability and responsibility for the extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture and other human rights violations, through her state security forces including the AFP and the PNP are clearly established. It is well to stress that the political killings and disappearances are concentrated in Southern Tagalog, Central Luzon, Bicol, Eastern Visayas, Ilocos and the Cordillera – places that have been identified in Oplan Bantay Laya as “priority areas” and where “counter-insurgency” military operations are most intense and sustained. Several victims have survived their ordeal and lived to tell the horrors of state terrorism against its very own people.

The evidences in the disappearances of Jonas Burgos, Sherlyn Cadapan and Karen Empeño point to the AFP as responsible for the said disappearances. Even the Court of Appeals has DECLARED that the AFP took into custody Sherlyn and Karen and ordered the Philippine Army to surface both students. In the case of the abduction of the Manalo Brothers, the Supreme Court itself has affirmed the responsibility of the AFP in the abduction and torture of Reynaldo and Raymond Manalo.

That the killings and disappearances form part of a policy under Pres. Arroyo’’s counter insurgency program has been confirmed by UN Special Rapporteur Philip Alston who declared that “One response has been counter-insurgency operations that result in the extrajudicial execution of leftist activists. In some areas, the leaders of leftist organizations are systematically hunted down by interrogating and torturing those who may know their whereabouts, and they are often killed following a campaign of individual vilification designed to instill fear into the community”

In the case of Pastor Berlin Guerrero, the Court of Appeals quoted the Supreme Court which chastised the Department of Justice for prostituting the office of the prosecutor for the abuse of procedures to harass political opponents of the president. Prof. Alston on the other hand while dismayed at the enthusiasm of the executive in filing cases against dissenters, bewailed the lack of investigation and prosecution of the perpetrators of extra judicial killings and enforced disappearances.

[giddyboy]

Huh? Those are ACCUSATIONS! Not assumptions! Why are u making judgement on his (dimasaliw) statements when u don't want to argue with it?

assumption no. 1: army officials pulled the trigger on a farmers head. (it didn't specify which army official. it could only mean ALL army officials)
assumption no. 2: no army official would even dare to admit it. (an assumption to assumption no. 1)

mind u, i'm arguing w/ the nature of the statements and the content of the statements itself. that's my argument. ok, if u insist, my disproving it:

Not all army officials pulled the trigger on a farmers head. There is also no proof that all army officials pulled the trigger on a farmers head.

and if he goes further to cite Palparan's case, well, Palparan is not the AFP. but he already made the assumption that all army officials are like Palparan or somebody who pulls the trigger on a farmer's head.

and in so disproving his statement no. 1, is in fact disproving statement no. 2 also. im proving that his/her accusations are wrong...

but then again, as elementary as these arguments are, i don't need to disprove them at all. doesn't need an Einstein to figure it out...

hahaha! "sometimes convincing, are not necessarily valid" Unsa gud ni?
ahhh, Mutu-o na unta ka, pero Dili nalng kay emotional iyang statements and bcoz it's full of emotions DILI Valid? hehehe
Nitu-o man lagi ka sa "I am sorry" speech ni GMA? Full of FAKE emotions man tu ug she tried to Appeal for emotion and beside it's VOID of any appeals to intellect! Kataw-anan nimo oi!!!
YOU are CONTRASTING yourself here! bwahahahaha!!!
Kahilak man tag KATAWA aning imong quote oi! in bold letters pa jud!!! hahahahaha!
naa pjuy "bullsh*t" sa tumoy hik hik hik hik!

Propaganda - arguments that, while sometimes convincing, are not necessarily valid. they're appeals to emotion, contrasted to appeals to intellect.

and to think i just borrowed it from wiki...LOLs

"arguments that while sometimes convincing, are not necessarily valid"--- doesn't even need an Einstein to understand that...and there's nothing funny or hilarious about that description. well, to u only perhaps. i don't know why...

"sometimes" could go either convincing or not. and could also go 4 ways: convincing but not valid, convincing but also valid, not convincing and not valid, and, not convincing but valid.

and op kors, what Gloria did was also appeal to emotion. im not denying it. but comparing it to dimasaliw's is just like comparing an elephant to a rooster. if u said GMA's appeal is fake and void of any appeal to intellect, that's ur opinion. i don't want to argue on that coz we will be flying more off the topic, even w/ this one we just had.

The best propaganda is sometimes being truthful. IMHO, i consider PGMA's "im sorry" appeal as convincing and valid. But w/ dimasaliw's, not. but hey, im not saying that all people will find PGMA's appeal convincing, or dimasaliw's statements unconvincing.

depende ra na sa receiver how he/she wants to interpret propaganda. that's why i didn't fall prey to dimasaliw's appeals coz they are full of bullsh*t. that's why i countered his/her arguments in validity to disprove them...im not convinced (of dimasaliw's emotional appeal), that's why i was arguing on the validity part, the intellectual part, as per insisted.

and there is this thing about the source. yes, PGMA made propaganda, no doubt about that. but she is not a poster in our forum. dimasaliw is...get the drift?

and btw, im not falling for ur ad hominem trap either. gi warningan na rba ka ni mods. ayaw ko amonga intawn...LOLs

i already made my counter arguments against dimasaliw's statements. i already disproved his/her statements...and i don't intend to go on further even if u insist. besides, it's not u who made those statements in the first place...unless u want to be his/her alter ego. no offense...

Anyway, FEAST on this: (an excerpt from a summary of the impeachment complaint of GMA)
link: tonyocruz.com Summary of the 2008 impeachment complaint against President Arroyo

i don't need to...

and let's get back to the topic...ayaw ni himoa ug impeachment forum...

[ronaYo]

The best propaganda is sometimes being truthful. IMHO, i consider PGMA's "im sorry" appeal as convincing and valid.

This statement of yours, means alot! .... No need to elaborate...

[radiostar]

The best propaganda is sometimes being truthful. IMHO, i consider PGMA's "im sorry" appeal as convincing and valid.

you make me laugh giddyboy
nice one

[giddyboy]

This statement of yours, means alot! .... No need to elaborate...

OT:
well, i know that by saying that u already have assumptions on me. u myt say im a GMA fanatic. then i counter argue that im not. but that's already an ad hominem scenario.

u myt also say that statement is bullsh*t. well, me too, at first. but then by my logical and analytical thinking says it isn't. IMHO, the appeal is valid. now u can argue on that, instead of just making ad hominem tactics w/ the icon effect pa gyud...it doesn't solve anything.

i argued on dimasaliw's statements point by point, and what did u do? none, nada, zero, zilch, nothing.

and i am prepared to defend that statement "im sorry appeal as convincing and valid". im not looking at the person, but im looking at the appeal per se.

im not denying that some people disliked the "im sorry". but im not denying also that some are satisfied w/ it.

as i said earlier, depende ra gyud na sa tawo unsaon pag interpret sa propaganda.

but then again, this is going to be more out of topic na. the topic is supposed to be about Rachelle Mae. im ending it here...sorry modz for the OT.

you make me laugh giddyboy
nice one

hehe. i know what u r thinking...hehe

[radiostar]

hehe. i know what u r thinking...hehe

wow manghuhula... nice one again giddyboy