The presidency or the republic?

BACKBENCHER

Rod P. Kapunan

9/22-23/2012

(An excerpt from the author's forthcoming book)

Had it not for our misplaced values and oblique perceptions of things, Mrs. Marcos would be right in saying that the declaration of martial law by her late husband, Ferdinand E. Marcos, was his greatest political act as President. It could have been his greatest heroism, for then he acted to save the republic from being violently fragmented by an ideology determined to overthrow the constitutionally established government. Positively looking at that fateful decision, maybe in that sense Mrs. Marcos was right. It was an ultimate act of self-defense, for often the painful process connotes a degree of suppression to those who purposely sought to realize their objective outside the parameter of a peaceful process.

Many historians judged martial law not on the basis how it was successfully enforced to restore order, but often misjudged it on the basis that it exacted a price on the liberties of the people. Those who opposed Marcos judged him not for why he imposed it, but for the drastic measures to precisely deal with the national emergency. From that angle, Marcos is viewed negatively. The ratio decidendi why in the first place martial law was conceived as a constitutional and a valid defense is short-circuited by the cry of suppression without reexamining the nobility it sought to achieve. Having succeeded in negatively depicting martial law, Marcos, for all his heroism in wanting to preserve the Republic he presided, was demonized.

From a philosophical standpoint, the declaration of martial law deserves to be given a priori and apriori reexamination. It is only by understanding what led to its imposition could we, as a nation, judge that (un)historic action whether Marcos stands to be glorified or to be condemned permanently by history. It is most excruciating for one who was affected to detach himself from the person or to judge history with the end view of giving premium to the commonweal. by standing on higher ground could we visualize the events beyond the vistas of recrimination, detached from that dilemma of either to praise or condemn him. In that sense, we also liberate ourselves from the encapsulated bias of what happened.

First, we condemn Marcos for his decision to declare martial law without us knowing the circumstances that led him to impose it. For that, we tend to judge martial law as arbitrary and capricious, and not a necessary and defensive legal mechanism of the State.

Second, we tend to judge the effects of martial law on a personal basis, like how it affected us individually, and not from a collective point of view that it will do good to restore tranquility in our society.

Third, we tend to equate his decision as personally motivated, and not as an exacting duty reposed upon him as commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces.

Fourth, we tend to ignore that martial law constitutionally mandated the President to exercise that emergency power.

Fifth, being an extreme exercise of power for the defense of the State, we often fail to balance between its positive and negative effects to our people and to our society.

Sixth, since martial law was bound to affect people who sought to have it declared, paradoxically, they should have anticipated the high price for their participation.

On the first issue, many of us condemned Marcos for imposing martial law on September 21, 1972, than in asking whether there were valid grounds that compelled him to impose it. Such question is crucial because the circumstances that led to its declaration remain irrefutable; that martial law was used to save the republic. It was rebellion and subversion that they conceived, and "not a tea party or a picnic" as Mao Zedong would succinctly put it. For the State or for the Marcoses to accede to their demand for compensation is to admit that martial law was, at the outset, wrong and unconstitutional.

Martial law is an emergency political instrument used to surgically remove the abscess that is causing the social and political unrest. The circumstances of rebellion, secessionism, subversion, murder, kidnapping, arson, ambuscades, violent demonstrations, sporadic bombings, assassinations, and arson were carried out in broad day light and with impunity. Only a foolhardy President would ignore them. The reasons were enumerated in the "Whereas" clauses of Proclamation No. 1081 or Proclaiming A State of Martial Law.

It must be recalled that on October 22, 1950 President Quirino issued Proclamation No. 210 suspending the writ of habeas corpus. Fear gripped the people that the communists were at the outskirts of the city. The difference however is that, when President Quirino suspended the writ, the communist HUKBALAHAP was operating outside Metro Manila, while during the time of Marcos, the communists and their newly organized armed group New People's Army were operating almost freely inside Metro Manila. They managed to immerse themselves with the radical students and with labor organizations.

Those irrefutable facts stated in the "whereas" clauses were all verified to have taken place. The orchestrated violence waged against the civilians and the duly constituted authority proved beyond doubt that his suspension of the writ and the imposition of martial law were not fancy alibis to justify his desire to hold on to power.

Even the members of the opposition who sought to distance themselves from that doctrine seeking to overthrow the government admitted of the need to declare martial law. The Supreme Court, acting on the several petitions to nullify the declaration of martial law, including the early decision upholding the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus in the aftermath of the August 21, 1971 Plaza Miranda bombing, held that it would be the height of irresponsibility for the President to stand idly as violent chaos engulfed the nation.

• rpkapunan@gmail.com

Fears for our times

DIE HARD III

Herman Tiu Laurel

9/21/2012

Are we at the trigger point for new major wars and conflicts? The murder of the US ambassador to Libya is now accepted as a conspiracy of Zionist-funded career "Islamophobes" and state intelligence apparatuses. Before whipping up the crowds, a network of agitators on the ground in Libya and Egypt waited for the YouTube insult to the Prophet Mohammed as the perfect cover for the attack that was carried out with military precision. Libya's General National Congress president Izzat al-Megaryef said the assault "was prepared, especially since it coincided with the date of Sept. 11… (with) non-Libyan elements on Libyan soil," adding that "the manner in which (it) occurred… confirms that this was planned and programmed to achieve a purpose," which allegedly does not "exclude discovering things that will link al-Qaeda (to) the US consulate attack."

In Asia, evidence is clear of a provocation by the Japanese with their purchase of the controversial Diaoyu Islands disputed between their country and China. The Japanese government obviously chose not to "let sleeping dogs lie" by, take note, signing the official contract with the Kurihara family (the so-called private owner of those islands) on Sept. 11, 2012 to nationalize the territory under the name of the Japanese state.
I was bewildered by the uncanny coincidence of the Japanese provocation to the date signifying the 21st Century's Day of Infamy (from either conventional or conspiratorial points-of-view). There are only 365 days to a regular year and coincidences over time can happen often, but the frequency of destabilizing 9/11 events seems to have increased since 2001.

The other notable 9/11 events in history: On Sept. 11, 1990, President George Bush (Sr.) delivered a speech to the US Congress entitled, "Moving Toward a New World Order." (Exactly 11 years later in 2001, the 9/11 World Trade Center terror attacks occurred.) On Sept. 11, 1941, official construction on the world's symbol of imperial power — the Pentagon — started. On that same date in 1972, the Munich Olympic Massacre took place, indubitably the first terror act aired live worldwide. Earlier, the proclamation of the British mandate for Palestine happened on Sept. 11, 1922; then, two and a half centuries further back, Western civilization defeated the Ottoman Muslim Turks in the Battle of Zenta in 1697. While we do not accept numerologists' unscientific views of such coincidences, there could be psychological reasons among historic leader-personalities to such occultist dates and numbers fixations.

As we speak, the ruling powers in the West are again ratcheting up the containment of other powers via a global war. Who are the ruling powers? Are they the so-called elected leaders like Barack Obama? No. They are the financial cabals comprising the global financial center (called the City of London) where the recent interest rate manipulation scandal broke and where the Libor (London Interbank Offered Rate) controls the interest rates of the world; same with Wall Street banks like J.P. Morgan and Goldman Sachs that control the US Federal Reserve.

Unfortunately for them, the Western financial system is in its death throes as its "hypothetication," or its practice of pledging property or debt papers as security or collateral for debts without any transfer of title or possession — and without limit for the bankers of London and Wall Street — has finally caught up to it. The millions who have joined Occupy Wall Street, for instance, will lynch these "banksters" as only war without and within can spring these modern Shylocks.

Meanwhile, 4,000 US Marines are now on their way to Africa after Ambassador Steven's assassination in Benghazi, while an Armada of US, British, and French warships are sailing for the most massive naval exercise yet in the Straits of Hormuz — these as Google feigns loyalty to "freedom of information" in keeping the insulting 15-minute video vs Islam running while banning ideological controversial but decent videos of American dissenter Alex Jones; and as the US expands its Okinawa military base over protests of the Japanese people; as it crushes coral reefs in Jeju, South Korea to set up a 120-hectare military base; and as it expands its Darwin, Australia secret bases as well as tighten control of the Zamboanga bases such as Andrews Airfield where Filipino troops' presence is restricted, ad nausea.

Unfortunately, oligarchy-controlled media impose obliviousness by dwelling on petty scandals and quarrels of the natives. Yet equally worse, the nation's political leadership continues to kowtow to Western diktats by dutifully paying an annual tribute (P440-billion amortization, same amount on interest on the national debt) and genuflecting before the war god. Its economists, too, hype humps on the road as signs of "economic progress," all papering over the fears for our world and our times.

Frankly, there is no hope from the current political system. We must persist in hoping and struggling to awaken the people with real information and critical thinking if we are to wean them from entertainment opiates.

Let us unite the people in enlightenment so that we can reinstate our nation's dream of a decent life for all, coupled with security and economic prosperity for all our children.

(Watch Talk News TV with HTL, Saturday, 8 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m. and 8 a.m. Sunday, on GNN Destiny Cable Channel 8 and on http://www.gnntv-asia.com, this week, "Economics, Money, and Gold" with Ibon's Sonny Africa and KME's Hiro Vaswani; tune in to 1098AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 to 6 p.m.; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com)

Innocence of Muslims

DIE HARD III
Herman Tiu Laurel
9/17/2012

We should have expected it, another "shock and awe" event on the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 World Trade Center terror moment. There were speculations about another "Pearl Harbor" moment being plotted by architects of the global "Clash of Civilizations). These plotter reap the boon from the wars raging today, but the expected special ops were expected to be on the scale of the 9/11 WTC. It was speculated that the next 9/11 shock and awe could be a biological weapon attack on Europe. What happened in this second decade anniversary of 9/11 is a coordinated provocation via YouTube and a murderous assault on the US Embassy in Benghazi by a "small and savage group" killing US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other US personnel which according to Hillary Clinton was perpetrated by a "small and savage group."

There is credible basis for asserting that the Benghazi US Embassy attack was a planned and coordinated operation. From a dozen Internet sources some facts: American pastor Terry Jones, a Quran burning campaigner, had a live stream on Sept. 11 on the internet where he showed the 13-minute promotional clip of the blasphemous film the Innocence of Muslims purportedly directed by an American Jew called Sam Bacile for the alleged $5-million budget film donated by 100 Jews. It is believed Sam Bacile does not really exist. The actors and actresses in the film deny that they knew their project was about Muhammad, and the name was only later dubbed in. From the news site Press TV comes this, "That a blasphemous movie desecrating the person of the holy Prophet of Islam has been released in the United States simultaneously with the 9/11 tragic incident cannot be looked upon as sheer coincidence."

On the evening of pastor Terry Jones' Internet release of Innocence of Muslims on the Internet the Benghazi US Embassy attack happened. Reuters reports, "the militants had surprisingly precise intelligence about the whereabouts of a safe house where the ambassador was rushed after the clashes started. While luck clearly played a role — Stevens died of asphyxiation." This report of death by asphyxiation is now being questioned. Victor Kotsev of Asia Times writes and quotes, "it was clearly professionally executed. 'This was a well-armed, well-coordinated event,' the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee of the US Congress, Mike Rogers, told MSNBC. 'It had both indirect and direct fire, and it had military maneuvers that were all part of this very organized attack.'" Then there's that simultaneous attack in Egypt, indication of a much wider plot.

Kotsev continues, "The British think-tank Quilliam reports that the assault consisted of two waves and was carried out by around 20 militants seeking to avenge the death of al-Qaeda's second in command, Abu Yahya who was assassinated in June." Gordon Duff of Veterans Today Military and Foreign Affairs Journal writes of their intelligence on the ground, "The killings of the diplomats were done under the cover of the riots which had been orchestrated in advance over a series of days. Four color printed placards were ready to distribute prior to the Jones 'stream-cast'… The actual killings are said to have been done by a team of newly trained Special Forces from the United Arab Emirates working directly in conjunction with the Mossad. Crowds were being managed by French DGSE agents, seen by the dozen, and British security service personnel were present but their role was not clear."

The Libyan government blames Kadhafi loyalists for the killing of Ambassador Stevens, an indication that he may not have died of asphyxiation. That contradicts the British think tank Quilliam suggestion that al-Qaeda did it citing a video Internet release of its chief Ayman al-Zawahiri, 24 hours before the embassy attack, to avenge US assassination of Abu Yahya. But how could al-Zawahiri coordinate the pastor Terry Jones video-streaming? Whom to believe? We follow the questions: Who benefits and has the means to carry out such an operation? Obama is a big loser, its Libyan adventure in retrospect can now be blamed. The World is a loser as instability has increased. Could Israel be happier with Obama hurt and the Arab-US relations worsen? Obama's been foot dragging on the attack on Iran, while the Arab Spring countries like Egypt have turned to policies more favorable to Palestinians.

Does Israel have the means? Gordon Duff, a Marine Vietnam veteran, a combat infantryman, consultant in international banking, counter insurgency, surveillance technologies, intelligence, defense technologies, and for the UN, writes: "Netanyahu and his US affiliates carefully orchestrated these terror acts with supporters of the Romney camp including the 'donors' responsible for the production of the original film; CIA cooperation in an attack on American diplomats was arranged through Bush era intermediaries who manage contractor firms that are now tasked with all CIA 'black ops'; Netanyahu has been further emotionally destabilized by nearly violent confrontations with US Chief of Staff Martin Dempsey and US Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro, a close friend of President Obama's." Why kill the US ambassador? Would there be any impact without such a blood sacrifice?

(Watch Destiny Cable GNN's HTL edition of Talk News TV, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11:15 p.m. and Sunday, and on www.gnntv-asia.com: this week "Economics, Money and Gold" with Sonny Africa of Ibon and Hiro Vaswani of KME; tune to 1098AM radio every Thursday 3p.m.; visit http://newkatipunan.blogspot.com)