Today’s manifestation will be littered with the worst creatures who have ever peopled the Philippine political landscape. A couple of them? A dozen? A hundred?
I maintain that the voices of the many thousands more with intentions like mine should count more than Erap.
If the organizers do their job well, they will stick to the one-minute rule for all politicos who want a piece of the limelight – and will only be allowed to speak on charter change.
One enemy, one goal. Split hairs later.
ETA: I wrote this a year and half ago and yet it is even more relevant today. Our (Post)modern Revolution and the Tyranny of the Apolitical.
So here we are waging a modern revolution framed through postmodern means. It is just as “tainted” with postmodern ethos. Why does it matter that we arrive at the truth when we know that there is none? To be apolitical is to surrender to the inevitable, to be steamrollered by events – by things that happen randomly. What we become are contented/discontented witnesses. There is no sense, no meaning, just time ticking until we belly-up and die. To be apolitical is to give up that our actions matter, because nothing matters. To be apolitical is to surrender to the tyranny of disbelief. Disbelief is totalitarian in that we cannot break of the conceptual cages we create. There is no alternative so why bother? Why expend our energies? Why indeed? We create rationalisations to buttress our version of truth that nothing changes. To be apolitical is to vacate the driver’s seat and let the inertia of the moving vehicle take us where it may. It is nihilism at its best.
Popularity: 2% [?]
not to dwell on the matter, jcc, but isn’t libel a crime in philippines, and if the guy is still a pinoy citizen (the kind would not be granted citizenship anywhere else, i think), extradition may be feasible, assuming a treaty exists with u.k)?
yes bencard, but if i have to spend time prosecuting this guy, i want to get paid. sending this guy to jail or ruin his U.K. citizenship if he marries a Briton,is not one of my vices. i would like to be compensated if have to abandon my small business just to run after this guy. if only he gives a hint that he is solvent i will make one fast trip to the courthouse.
i don’t blame you, jcc. ideally, you just report the crime to the prosecuting authorities, furnish them the evidence you have and/or a hot lead, and wait for them to do their job. as you know, prosecution of crimes is the responsibility of the government.
btw, you don’t want to pay yourself a fee for legal services to yourself, do you?
yes, bencard, but to prove my case i have to appear before the prosecutor, swear in my affidavit-complaint, wait for the summons and hearing date and i have to go back to the philippines to file and try the case. my plane ticket and my business losses must be compensated on account of this case. the solvency of the person is the bottomline. and you know what, i have not seen a court room for a while except when i report for a traffic violation where i have to pay a fine for overspeeding. may be i need to flex my legal muscle sometime.
Yes Bencard, that’s JCC’s only concern. To be “compensated”. He is after all, only after the MONEY. Bencard, you are a lot better than this guy. At least you can come home without a shadow chasing after you. And unlike him, you are not a disgrace to the legal profession.
The nerve of this guy to even think he can chase after people for presenting facts that are documented. I wonder how he can sleep at night. What a farce.
MR. Camano you are a disgrace to the legal profession. Just deal with that, ok? I agree with the comment above. You are a farce. Now you want to extort from me? No thanks.
hay naku Attorney Jose Camano, I may be juvenile but at the end of the day you are JUST a lawyer…and the bad kind too (one of the 99.99% who give the profession a bad name.).
and yes I am poor and insolvent. maybe i should not pay my phone bills so that my utilities company can disconnect my service and i can sue them for depression for not being able to call madame auring. sadly, for you, i have no millions.
all i have is a clean record..unlike some people who have been stricken off their practice for a year for being morally unfit (1)
References
(1) http://www.supremecourt.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/aug2005/ac_6504.htm
“and for accepting funds from adverse party in the process of implementing a writ borders on technical extortion, for giving unsolicited advice to the adverse party a suggestion evidently in conflict with [the interest of] his own client and for casting doubts to the procedure of the levy, Atty. Jose C. Camano is hereby SUSPENDED from the practice of law for one (1) year,”
and bencard, your brilliant lawyerly mind disappoints me. libel??? where?? where is the malice?? was I the one who maliciously extorted? why blame me for the sins I have not committed? have I used terms not already used by the Supreme Court to refer to your companero? I’m not malicious, I’m just stating what is out there on public record.
the most i can be charged with is throwing a well deserved insult to someone who i find very offensive to my common sense…. and even that is not illegal given the philippines’ antiquated libel laws.
we can test your position by giving us your full name and address to find out if you posts here are within the bounds of the law.
juliana, jon_limjap,
i have given you my full name. how about you giving me your full name and addresses so we can all test your position?
guys, if you can’t do that, it simply means one thing. you want to show your brave side by hiding under the shadow of digital anonymity and you can stop your breast thumping and self-righteous hubris for at the end of the day, all those pontification are nothing but bloated self-promotion of your imagined immaculate characters.
jcc,
My full name has always been in my personal blog. And googling “Jon Limjap” will easily lead to it :)
And please do NOT mistake me for JL. I dunno who that JL person is.
sorry about that Jon, my fault. i thought you were that guy. you see the honest blogger would not about to hide under the shadow of digital anonymity. :)
so jcc you plan to be a libel tourist by filing in which jurisdiction? usa? uk? liechtenstein?
why would i give my name to an extortionist??? honesty?? you are suddenly honest? tell that to the ibp my friend.
References
(1) “if only he gives a hint that he is solvent i will make one fast trip to the courthouse.” – JCC implicating himself that he is after money
(2) “but this JL one seems to be living in the Philippines and with rich chinese clan. maybe i can try this one.” – JCC further embarrasing himself
jl, juliana,
DJB must be upset with this post which he claims is off thread, but I did not start this brouhaha, someone else did, and this would be my last repartee:
One tries to convey the idea that he suddenly found a goldmine and flaunt that goldmine in this blog to indicate that I have not been forthcoming about my case. Quite frankly it is in my blog site and it also chapter three of my book.
Here is the link:
http://jcc34.wordpress.com/2008/05/26/my-suspensio-from-the-practice-of-law/
Contested issue:
“During the meeting with Atty. Camano, a verbal agreement was made in which complainant and his mother agreed to pay the entire judgment debt of Gliceria Solatan, including fifty percent of the awarded attorney’s fees and One Thousand Six Hundred Pesos (P1,600.00) as costs of suit provided that Atty. Camano would allow complainant’s continued stay at Door 10, Phase B of the Genito Apartments. As partial compliance with the agreement, complainant issued in the name Atty. Camano a check for Five Thousand Pesos (P5,000.00) representing half of the P10,000.00 attorney’s fees adjudged against complainant’s sister.
Complainant and his mother failed to make any other payment. Thus, the sheriff in coordination with Atty. Camano and some policemen, enforced the writ of execution on 22 June 1988 and levied the properties found in the subject apartment.
An attempt at renegotiation took place at the insistence of complainant, resulting in Atty. Camano’s acquiescence to release the levied properties and allowing complainant to remain at the apartment, subject to the latter’s payment of costs incurred in enforcing the writ of execution and issuance of postdated checks representing installment rental payments. Complainant, thus, issued four (4) checks drawn on Far East Bank and Trust Company dated the fifteenth (15th) of July, August, September, and October 1988 each in the amount of Three Thousand Four Hundred Pesos (P3,400.00).11 Half of the amount represented
Complainant’s monthly rental, while the other half, a monthly installment for the payment of Gliceria Solatan’s judgment debt. X x x.
My input about what happened with the check payment was not part of the factual findings, which is, “ the second check bounced for account/closed or lack of funds and therefore the two remaining checks will bounce for similar reason, thus, George and his mother was ejected because of the payment which bounced.
The Court said that different versions about the case came but proceeded only to discuss the version of the complainant and the IBP, respondent’s version was not included.
Here is the link for my first motion for reconsideration:
http://jcc34.wordpress.com/2008/05/26/first-motion-for-reconsideration/
Here is the link for second motion:
http://jcc34.wordpress.com/2008/05/26/second-motion-for-reconsideration/
That I have kept the “unserviceable gas range”
Findings of the Court:
On 28 June 1988, acting on the advice of Atty. Camano, complainant presented an Affidavit of Ownership to the sheriff who then released the levied items to complainant. However, a Northern Hill 3-burner gas stove was not retuned to complainant. The stove was in fact kept by Atty. Camano in the unit of the Genito Apartments wherein he temporarily stayed12 and, thereafter, turned over the same to a certain Recto Esberto.
Counter argument which was not rebutted:
Atty. Camano was not in possession of the gas burner because it was in “custodial legis”, it was the Sheriff who has custody of the gas burner and not Atty. Camano. Atty. Camano did not acquiesce to release the chattels because he was not in possession of the chattels, it was the sheriff who has custody of the chattels.
Common sense argument: If Atty. Camano has advised George to execute an affidavit of ownership so he can get his chattels, and he was able to get most of his chattels why would he keep the gas burner which is already unserviceable?
That I was guilty double dealing:
Court’s own argument:
“We, thus, note that the act of informing complainant that the levied properties would be returned to him upon showing proof of his ownership thereof may hint at infidelity to the interest of the spouses Genito, but, in this circumstance, lacks the essence of double dealing and betrayal of the latter’s confidence so as to deserve outright categorization as infidelity or disloyalty to his clients’ cause.”
People, please read the case with attention to the ratio-decidendi, do not simply highlight the dispositive portion because as I said, that decision is a garbage. :)
“…..that decision is a garbage.”
Too bad the decision thinks you are garbage. Merry Xmas my dear corrupt extortionist lawyer.
Let us see if there are better convicts in
the Bilibid Prison who can run as President. Or
some paroled thieves or scammer.
If a convicted Plunderer and Jueteng Lord can
qualify to run as our President.
Why not import the Mafiosi Bosses from America,
Cosa Nostra Bosses from Italy, the Yakuza Bosses
from Japan, the Russian Mafia Bosses, etc…
They have good organizational structures. They impose the Code of Silence for discipline. They
do good “salvage” jobs on non deserving members.
Stealing from the organization is a no-no to them.
Punishable by the “kiss of death”.
So, what’s next ? Al Capone for President?