DIE HARD III
Herman Tiu Laurel
4/25/2011
The holidays allowed me a breathing spell from the daily information battles we are waging on several fronts. With the peace and tranquility of the last few days, I am able to see the dust and din from a distance more clearly again, helping me make this post-Lenten recap of these foremost issues:
The Economy. Aquino III is clueless about oil and energy and the elite globalists’ geo-political machinations on them. Veteran reporter Jim Tucker reported this month that “By the end of the year 2012 (the Bilderbergers and other elite) want us paying $7 a gallon for gasoline (that’s $4 today)…” and Western ground troops into Libya, as suggested by Kissinger, is the next step to ensure this.
The fuel subsidy of around P500 million taken from the Value Added Tax is really paid for by Filipino fuel consumers while oil companies are paid in full (without a dip in their sales volumes) for oil that’s overpriced by transfer pricing to their mother companies.
Aquino III’s importation of 50 million liters of diesel fuel is a farce, a claimed “strategic stock” that will last only a few hours for 3.3 million diesel vehicles plus countless sea-going vessels.
The only solutions are a re-regulation and re-nationalization of the fuel industry, along with a restoration of the Marcos-era energy development program.
The economy is now on its 26th year of counter-democratic re-structuring as it continues to see the privatization of the nation’s wealth and the socialization of the tax burden. The National Grid Corp. of the Philippines found approval with the Energy Regulatory Commission to pass on its 3 percent franchise tax to consumers. That will be on top of the franchise tax that’s being passed on to us by power distributors such as Meralco (Manila Electric Co.).
Marcos’ Presidential Decree 551 of Sept. 11, 1974 (which writer Rod Kapunan recently retrieved) was precisely issued to lower the cost of public utilities by assigning the payment of franchise taxes specifically to electric franchise holders enjoying the privilege granted.
It is immoral and patently illegal for those enjoying the privilege of a captive market to transfer their tax burden onto those who are entitled to these constitutionally-mandated basic services.
As the two passed-on franchise taxes will cost consumers 6 percent in additional burden, we ask: Is the fulfillment of one’s basic needs no longer a right but a privilege that people have to be heavily taxed for?
Then, there’s the issue of the minimum wage hike again, which will directly affect small-and-medium businesses and the lowest paid workers, many of whom will be retrenched, but spare transnational mega-corporations whose wage structures are already above minimum.
Former Sen. Ernesto Herrera, being the head of a US “labor” movement-sponsored unions’ federation that has always spoon fed his needed “capital,” has the temerity to write that “companies can afford the wage hike” even when he has never handled a private business that had to compete in the market.
On the other hand, Leftist labor movements that have nothing to show for still rely on the irrelevant minimum wage issue to maintain their illusion of relevance when the real issues are the exploitative, oligarchic government and the increasing “oligopolization” of the economy as small-and-medium enterprises are systematically being marginalized.
The Real Political Battles. Since both the Balay and Samar factions kowtow to the Yellow flag, as Aquino III and Marcos Jr. are united under the Marcos-Ochoa-Serapio-Tan law firm, and after Arroyo Comelec chairman Jose “Hocus PCOS” Melo was appointed by PeNoy to the multi-million Clark Development Corp., is there still any doubt about the Aquinorroyo zarzuela?
Such conflicts are par for the course in Philippine agnotology, i.e. the science of perpetrating ignorance, where anything and everything will be used to distract people’s minds from the real class exploitation happening on the real, live economic stage.
Another one is the reproductive health (RH) — now renamed RP for responsible parenthood (What the hell!). While it pits the triad of women, the Catholic hierarchy, and politicians against each other, there’s only one real loser — the people.
The bill, once enacted into law, makes the RH budget automatically appropriated in succeeding years. Politicians will get their RH medical buses with all the supplies and their large names plastered a la “Project of Congressman Piggy.” I knew there was a catch!
Meanwhile, as Kissinger’s National State Security Memorandum 200, entitled “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for US Security and Overseas Interests,” cited with alarm the burgeoning populations of “ India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines… since it would quickly increase their relative political, economic, and military strength,” more people must be made aware of this other reason for the vigorous push for the RH bill.
Still, aside from the US planning to eliminate these “threats” through its contraceptive devices, it will also enable its pharmaceuticals — one of two US business mainstays alongside the defense industries — to enjoy a continuing bonanza by supplying these RH supplies. In the end, ALL Filipinos (women included) lose economically.
Then, while the PeNoy government lumbers, within its bowels operates the future US virus — the Akyat-Bayan gang that’s beholden to the oligarchs and kowtows to US diktats in every way but hides in leftist gibberish. This Etta Rosales-Gloria Arroyo bunch of fresher clones with populist pretensions, supported by the likes of ABS-CBN, is reportedly “really powerful” these days, so much so that other leftists who may want positions now have to apply with them.
The real giveaway for this group, however, is its rabid support for the CCT (Conditional Cash Transfer) doleouts that only create a culture of mendicancy and dependency, even to the USAID and IMF-WB.
We’ll have more on cultural, global and other issues in our Friday column.
(Tune in to 1098AM, Monday to Friday, 5 to 6 p.m., and Sulo ng Pilipino, Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, 6 to 7 p.m.; TNT with HTL, Tuesday, 8 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11 p.m., on GNN, Destiny Cable Channel 8, on the “Philippine Labor Movement: Quo Vadis”; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com for our articles plus select radio and GNN shows)
Monday, April 25, 2011
Buzzwords
Sangandaan '93
Richard James Mendoza
4/25/2011
As I searched the Internet for something to read other than news articles about religion, somehow it came to my mind that I should find the definition of “buzzword.” Using a little-known Google command (by typing define:word on the search bar) I found an interesting definition from http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=buzzword. In the link, buzzword was defined as “stock phrases that have become nonsense through endless repetition.” Suddenly, I remembered some phrases that are continuously being repeated through the media; phrases such as democracy, human rights, corruption, saving the planet, ad nausea infinitum. And perhaps these phrases have truly embodied the “buzz” in buzzword, as in the buzzing of the bees, except that these phrases are more deafening than the buzzing itself.
Democracy. It’s something that I often hear from the US whenever they invade—I mean, take a “visit” on a country. For them, it’s a magic word like abracadabra that enchants many people and perhaps fool them in the process. They often proclaim that they‘re going to bring democracy and prosperity on a country that is being ruled by a despot or a dictator. But the saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions rings true in this situation. It’s what we’ve witnessed in Iraq in 2003 when the US did a military intervention in Iraq for the “search” of the so-called “Weapons of Mass Destruction,” which turned out to be nothing more than a shabby excuse to overthrow Saddam Hussein, steal its resources (in this case, oil) and ruin the country. Until now, Iraq is still reeling from the effects of the illegal invasion of the US military, with some areas still uninhabitable because of the radiation brought about by uranium bullets.
If you are looking for an example of “democracy” (or demo-crazy, for that matter) in our country, look no further. Twenty-five years ago, in what has been called “Edsa I,” the Yellows removed Ferdinand Marcos and installed their “Dear Leader” Corazon Aquino, thus “restored democracy” in our country. But what did their “democracy” really mean? Through the years, it only meant the return of the old ruling class and the worsening of living standards, all the while chanting “Demokrasya,” “Kalayaan” and other slogans which it had dulled the minds of many. It’s sickening to think that while the masses are toiling for their very survival, the oligarchy are enjoying the spoils through their legal extortionists such as privatized public utilities (how ironic) which are supposed to provide the basic needs for everyone and at the same time hypocritically mouthing on how life has “improved” after restoring democracy in this country. If democracy meant the rule of the minority and not of the majority, then I must be in a parallel universe but unfortunately, such is not the case.
These Yellows often claim to respect democracy and the rule of law but Edsa II proved otherwise. In broad daylight, they pulled off a coup d’état disguised as a “civilian uprising” on a democratically elected leader who brought hope to the masses. In the guise of removing a corrupt and immoral leader, they seized the opportunity and illegally sworn in GMA who never had the mandate of the people and thus strengthened the hold of the repressive ruling class in bleeding the country dry of its resources, all the while fooling the people that democracy lived once again and that justice had been served.
And then there was the real people’s uprising, Edsa III. This event was largely ignored by the media stations, with the exception of Net-25. The very same Yellows who claimed to love democracy suddenly became snobs as they berated the event and its participants, calling them “unwashed,” amongst other derogatory terms. The sinful cardinal bemoaned about the sacrilege of the sacred Edsa, hypocritically remarking Jesus’ first of the last seven words. A certain journalist even derided Edsa III, the title of the piece saying it all “Excuse me, please don’t call it People Power.” Twenty-five years after Edsa I, can it still be said that democracy rules the country? Well, I daresay that democracy died on February 25, 1986.
Saving the planet. If one thinks about it, there is really nothing wrong with saving the planet. After all, what could be wrong with planting trees and dreaming of a better world for the next generation? Nothing, except that hypocrites and knuckleheads are abound whenever the issue of “saving the planet” comes up, especially when it’s about global warming. Meet Al Gore, former Vice-President of the United States of America and the so-called inventor of the internet who is currently on a world tour preaching the gospel of global warming/climate change/global climate change/whatever name they’re using. Because of his continuous preaching, he has become an expert eschatologist regarding global warming and its purported doom, more so than the climatologists themselves.
According to the gospel of Gore, if we humans do not stop emitting carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere, the CO2 will worsen what is called the greenhouse effect. And he and his followers (read: alarmists) also preach about how the debate on climate change is “over” and anyone who presents a different point of view about global warming are compared to Holocaust deniers and should be sent to a “Nuremberg-like trial.” Regarding the so-called “greenhouse effect”, it turns out that the phrase itself is deceptive, according to W.R. Pratt in a booklet entitled “CO2: The Debate Is Not Over” which can be found in this link: http://www.spinonthat.com/CO2_files/CO2tdino.pdf (requires Adobe Reader to open).
According to Pratt, “The term was first coined in 1824 by Joseph Fourier to describe the way the atmosphere is warmed by the heat from the Sun. But it is John Tyndall, who according to some, it is claimed, is responsible for proving that the Earth has a greenhouse effect. It is strange then that in his book entitled Contributions to Molecular Physics in the domain of Radiant Heat written in the 1860s when he was professor of Natural Philosophy at the Royal Institution (previously known as the Hidden College) that the closest he comes to alluding to anything like a greenhouse effect is a reference on page 117 to the atmosphere behaving like a dam on heat energy from the sun.
However even this is an extremely inaccurate and unhelpful analogy because there are only two dynamics invoked in the example of a dam: The water flowing down hill and the wall of the dam across the path of the body of flowing water. However the dynamics involved in the heat energy from the Sun entering the Earth’s atmosphere are so numerous that they simply cannot be quantified” (emphasis added).
Added to the fact that greenhouse gases only compose less than one percent of the atmosphere, with CO2 being only less than a thousandth of a percent (a thousandth of a percent would look like this: 0.001). And most of the CO2 comes from the world’s vast oceans. These bodies of water store large amounts of CO2 and release it to the atmosphere very slowly. In fact, there are many graphs that show a different kind of correlation when it came to CO2 and the fluctuations in temperature. These graphs show that the rise of CO2 levels followed the rise in temperature, not the other way around.
Regarding the alarmists slogan of “The debate is over,” well I have bad news for them. The debate is NOT over yet and it will NEVER end. The scientific process is supposed to be about the discussion of different point of views; about debating and critical analysis. It’s certainly not about consensus. An example is the theory of Big Bang. Even though many believe that it was the Big Bang that started the universe, the theory is still being debated until the present day, even inventing the Large Hadron Collider to attempt to prove that the theory is correct. But such is not the case in global warming. Dissenting voices are silenced and are often accused of receiving money from Big Oil, which is uncalled for.
Truly, the spread of disinformation and agnotology continues to grow. The only antidote to such malaise is truth. Because the truth remains the same, while a lie does not. But what is the truth, anyway? That, my friend, is something that I’ll leave to the philosophers.
Richard James Mendoza
4/25/2011
As I searched the Internet for something to read other than news articles about religion, somehow it came to my mind that I should find the definition of “buzzword.” Using a little-known Google command (by typing define:word on the search bar) I found an interesting definition from http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=buzzword. In the link, buzzword was defined as “stock phrases that have become nonsense through endless repetition.” Suddenly, I remembered some phrases that are continuously being repeated through the media; phrases such as democracy, human rights, corruption, saving the planet, ad nausea infinitum. And perhaps these phrases have truly embodied the “buzz” in buzzword, as in the buzzing of the bees, except that these phrases are more deafening than the buzzing itself.
Democracy. It’s something that I often hear from the US whenever they invade—I mean, take a “visit” on a country. For them, it’s a magic word like abracadabra that enchants many people and perhaps fool them in the process. They often proclaim that they‘re going to bring democracy and prosperity on a country that is being ruled by a despot or a dictator. But the saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions rings true in this situation. It’s what we’ve witnessed in Iraq in 2003 when the US did a military intervention in Iraq for the “search” of the so-called “Weapons of Mass Destruction,” which turned out to be nothing more than a shabby excuse to overthrow Saddam Hussein, steal its resources (in this case, oil) and ruin the country. Until now, Iraq is still reeling from the effects of the illegal invasion of the US military, with some areas still uninhabitable because of the radiation brought about by uranium bullets.
If you are looking for an example of “democracy” (or demo-crazy, for that matter) in our country, look no further. Twenty-five years ago, in what has been called “Edsa I,” the Yellows removed Ferdinand Marcos and installed their “Dear Leader” Corazon Aquino, thus “restored democracy” in our country. But what did their “democracy” really mean? Through the years, it only meant the return of the old ruling class and the worsening of living standards, all the while chanting “Demokrasya,” “Kalayaan” and other slogans which it had dulled the minds of many. It’s sickening to think that while the masses are toiling for their very survival, the oligarchy are enjoying the spoils through their legal extortionists such as privatized public utilities (how ironic) which are supposed to provide the basic needs for everyone and at the same time hypocritically mouthing on how life has “improved” after restoring democracy in this country. If democracy meant the rule of the minority and not of the majority, then I must be in a parallel universe but unfortunately, such is not the case.
These Yellows often claim to respect democracy and the rule of law but Edsa II proved otherwise. In broad daylight, they pulled off a coup d’état disguised as a “civilian uprising” on a democratically elected leader who brought hope to the masses. In the guise of removing a corrupt and immoral leader, they seized the opportunity and illegally sworn in GMA who never had the mandate of the people and thus strengthened the hold of the repressive ruling class in bleeding the country dry of its resources, all the while fooling the people that democracy lived once again and that justice had been served.
And then there was the real people’s uprising, Edsa III. This event was largely ignored by the media stations, with the exception of Net-25. The very same Yellows who claimed to love democracy suddenly became snobs as they berated the event and its participants, calling them “unwashed,” amongst other derogatory terms. The sinful cardinal bemoaned about the sacrilege of the sacred Edsa, hypocritically remarking Jesus’ first of the last seven words. A certain journalist even derided Edsa III, the title of the piece saying it all “Excuse me, please don’t call it People Power.” Twenty-five years after Edsa I, can it still be said that democracy rules the country? Well, I daresay that democracy died on February 25, 1986.
Saving the planet. If one thinks about it, there is really nothing wrong with saving the planet. After all, what could be wrong with planting trees and dreaming of a better world for the next generation? Nothing, except that hypocrites and knuckleheads are abound whenever the issue of “saving the planet” comes up, especially when it’s about global warming. Meet Al Gore, former Vice-President of the United States of America and the so-called inventor of the internet who is currently on a world tour preaching the gospel of global warming/climate change/global climate change/whatever name they’re using. Because of his continuous preaching, he has become an expert eschatologist regarding global warming and its purported doom, more so than the climatologists themselves.
According to the gospel of Gore, if we humans do not stop emitting carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere, the CO2 will worsen what is called the greenhouse effect. And he and his followers (read: alarmists) also preach about how the debate on climate change is “over” and anyone who presents a different point of view about global warming are compared to Holocaust deniers and should be sent to a “Nuremberg-like trial.” Regarding the so-called “greenhouse effect”, it turns out that the phrase itself is deceptive, according to W.R. Pratt in a booklet entitled “CO2: The Debate Is Not Over” which can be found in this link: http://www.spinonthat.com/CO2_files/CO2tdino.pdf (requires Adobe Reader to open).
According to Pratt, “The term was first coined in 1824 by Joseph Fourier to describe the way the atmosphere is warmed by the heat from the Sun. But it is John Tyndall, who according to some, it is claimed, is responsible for proving that the Earth has a greenhouse effect. It is strange then that in his book entitled Contributions to Molecular Physics in the domain of Radiant Heat written in the 1860s when he was professor of Natural Philosophy at the Royal Institution (previously known as the Hidden College) that the closest he comes to alluding to anything like a greenhouse effect is a reference on page 117 to the atmosphere behaving like a dam on heat energy from the sun.
However even this is an extremely inaccurate and unhelpful analogy because there are only two dynamics invoked in the example of a dam: The water flowing down hill and the wall of the dam across the path of the body of flowing water. However the dynamics involved in the heat energy from the Sun entering the Earth’s atmosphere are so numerous that they simply cannot be quantified” (emphasis added).
Added to the fact that greenhouse gases only compose less than one percent of the atmosphere, with CO2 being only less than a thousandth of a percent (a thousandth of a percent would look like this: 0.001). And most of the CO2 comes from the world’s vast oceans. These bodies of water store large amounts of CO2 and release it to the atmosphere very slowly. In fact, there are many graphs that show a different kind of correlation when it came to CO2 and the fluctuations in temperature. These graphs show that the rise of CO2 levels followed the rise in temperature, not the other way around.
Regarding the alarmists slogan of “The debate is over,” well I have bad news for them. The debate is NOT over yet and it will NEVER end. The scientific process is supposed to be about the discussion of different point of views; about debating and critical analysis. It’s certainly not about consensus. An example is the theory of Big Bang. Even though many believe that it was the Big Bang that started the universe, the theory is still being debated until the present day, even inventing the Large Hadron Collider to attempt to prove that the theory is correct. But such is not the case in global warming. Dissenting voices are silenced and are often accused of receiving money from Big Oil, which is uncalled for.
Truly, the spread of disinformation and agnotology continues to grow. The only antidote to such malaise is truth. Because the truth remains the same, while a lie does not. But what is the truth, anyway? That, my friend, is something that I’ll leave to the philosophers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
