Tuesday, December 27, 2016

Spilling The Beans by Erick San Juan

Spilling The Beans by Erick San Juan

Certain issues with the US verbalized in a not so nice way by President Rody Duterte plus his name calling like kids engaged in petty quarrels has created a backfire through the former US Ambassador to the Philippines Philip Goldberg who is also a victim of PDU30’s  not so “flowery words”.

Like what I usually say in my daily radio program that the Duterte administration or anybody who has dealings with the US, they should be careful because speaking from experience, I know their ways and sentiments especially when it comes to character assassination so to speak.

From a source through the Manila Times, an article by Dr. Dante Ang - US ex-envoy plotting Duterte fall stated that source said former US Ambassador Philip Goldberg has outlined a list of “strategies” to undermine President Duterte and called for his eventual ouster. The blueprint gave a timetable of one-and-a-half years.

Quoting Goldberg, it said the “political actors (the opposition) would need all the political weapons in their arsenal to replace the Duterte administration and replace it with something more to the opposition’s liking.” He noted, however, “that (deposing Duterte) would be a challenge for the opposition.”

Analyzing the President’s weakness, Goldberg said that Mr. Duterte “has no real friends” outside of his region for his propensity to mock and ridicule people close to him. He also said that the President’s “views are shaped not by ideology or personal ambitions, but by old-fashioned nationalism where he holds the United States accountable for the Philippines’ current state of poverty and dependency.”

To bring down Duterte, the alleged Goldberg plan calls for stoking public dissatisfaction with the President over unfulfilled election promises, isolating the Philippines from the rest of the ASEAN by extending military assistance to member countries except the Philippines, and/or through economic “blackmail” that aims to limit trade by some ASEAN member countries with the Philippines.

Goldberg also reportedly encourages support for the opposition through aids and grants, sowing discontent among the Duterte supporters and cultivating the cleavage between the congressmen and the senators over the Charter Change issue.

In brief, the plan calls on the US government to employ a combination of socio-economic-political-diplomatic moves against Duterte “to bring him to his knees and eventually remove him from office.”

I did my part of reminding the President, time and again of the undercurrents that will translate to something else if not handled properly, locally and in the global front. The writings on the wall are very clear – signs of an impending storm in the offing.

The alleged predictions of former ambassador Goldberg will have a timetable of one-and-a-half years and the “strategies to be employed” are:

Political and economic isolation of the Philippines in the region by engaging the leaders of Japan, Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos and by “highlighting the basic question of the risk of doing business in the Philippines.”

Enhanced US military relationship with members of the ASEAN community except the Philippines.

Blackmail neighboring countries so they would turn against Duterte by reducing trade with the Philippines in favor of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos.

Deepen ties with Philippine officials (the opposition), the police/military and leaders in the region who share the US concerns over Duterte.

Track corruption cases and highlight the failures of Duterte.

“Focus on the needs of the people at the grassroots and assist the opposition groups in delivering those failed promises through USAID – such as alleviation of poverty, housing and education – to name a few.”

Utilize the media to expose the truth about Duterte – “his false vision for the Filipino people and his dangerous international relationships with China and Russia.”

Some might ask that exposing these alleged predictions of a former diplomat to the country is a warning and what will the new Trump administration will do, and in the process, who will benefit?

But the plot thickened when a close ally of PRRD, Mocha Uson who's now a columnist at Philippine Star exposed an ouster plot against the president and even fast tracking the plan. To quote, "There is also a rumor that some people are working to oust Duterte this 1st quarter of 2017. Are we just going to allow that to happen?"

Christmas in the Philippines is never postponed despite the unusual super typhoon but let us all be prepared for the coming storm in the coming new year.

Tuesday, December 20, 2016

Prepare for the Worst by Erick San Juan

Prepare for the Worst by Erick San Juan

China appears to have installed weapons including anti-aircraft and anti-missile systems - on all seven of the artificial islands it has built in the South China Sea.

Last Wednesday, December 14, the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (AMTI), a US think-tank, said that its findings come despite statements by the Chinese leadership that Beijing has no intention of militarizing the islands in the strategic trade route, where territory is claimed by several countries.

AMTI said it has been tracking construction of hexagonal structures on Fiery Cross, Mischief, and Subi reefs in the Spratly Islands since June and July. China has already built military-length airstrips on these islands.
"These gun and probable close-in weapons systems CIWS emplacements show that Beijing is serious about defense of its artificial islands in case of an armed contingency in the South China Sea," AMTI said. (Source: Reuters news agency)

And we thought (especially President Rody Duterte) that China has no intention of raising the already high tension in the contested area in the South China Sea but in reality China or shall we say President Xi Jinping did not stop or even hesitate in building the defense system to protect its interest in those reclaimed islands in the SCS.

We cannot blame the world’s perception that China is actually pushing towards achieving its so called 'China dream' no matter what, even to the point of going to war and seeking an outside enemy in the process just to unite the Chinese nation.

If the independent foreign policy that PDU30 wants to implement means engaging friendship and cooperation with China and doing away with the international law principles and arguments based on UNCLOS, we are heading for trouble.

Engaging in bilateral talks with China is not as easy as a walk in the park in which PDU30 wants to adopt to settle the territorial disputes. As what former Assistant Secretary for ASEAN Affairs (1988-89) and Asian and Pacific Affairs (l997-1999) at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Juanito P. Jarasa writes in his article @manilatimes online – “As a member of the Philippine delegation to two high-level bilateral meetings with China regarding the South China Sea held in Beijing in May 1997 and Manila in March 1999, I saw how difficult it was to deal with China on a one-on-one basis. The Chinese wanted us to swallow hook, line, and sinker their “historic rights and indisputable sovereignty over the South China Sea” while rejecting international law principles and arguments based on UNCLOS. Unless China changes its mind about the Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling, I am afraid entering into bilateral negotiations with China will belike going into a cul-de-sac(dead end). Indications are strong that the South China Sea will remain as one of China’s three core national interests, along with Taiwan and Tibet.

It seems the only hope for the Philippines, and the world for that matter, is for China to realize that the “China Dream” to bury its past humiliation in the hands of Western powers and to gain respect as a leading civilized state does not lie in disregard or disrespect of the rule of law but in abiding by the time-honored 'comitas gentium', or comity of nations. Merriam-Webster says that since 1862, comity of nations has referred to countries bound by a courteous relationship based on mutual recognition of executive, legislative, and judicial acts. In essence, comity entails friendship and respect among countries as well as mutual civility and courtesy between them. That could be hard to achieve in today’s world beset by turmoil of various kinds but it is an ideal situation worth aspiring for.”

But this China dream could be a tool to unite China and actually Xi Jinping’s propaganda to save himself from so many angry Chinese which will soon realize that their losing their funds invested to the government.

Let us help this present administration realize that it is not easy to deal with China and put our country’s security in danger. Let us pray for our president because no matter what, any wrong decision will drag us all down and face a war unwittingly in the process.

Who said that Digong's deal with the Marcoses is a jinx that will pull him down like anyone else who made deals with them? Just asking..

Tuesday, December 13, 2016

Strategic Dilemma by Erick San Juan

Strategic Dilemma by Erick San Juan

If we thought that the tension in the contested area in the South China has already subsided due to some factors like change in leadership in some countries in the region, actually it didn’t.

Based on the article of Peter Layton - The South China Sea’s Worsening Strategic Dilemmas, he gave two possible scenarios, negative and positive that might occur in the SCS in the next seven years.

“Alternative futures represent a way for us to think about possible tomorrows. Imagine that the future lies somewhere between the best of all possible worlds and the worst, somewhere between a cooperative and a conflictual state. Neither extreme future is necessarily more likely than the other, but they allow us to think about the spectrum of possibilities. Using the cooperative and conflictual variables creates two possible alternative as follows:

The cooperative future will be considered by many to be wildly optimistic, while pessimistic realists will say that the conflictual world bears some resemblance to where we are now. But the task for policymakers is to steer the future towards the ‘good’ tomorrow and away from the ‘bad’ one. Worryingly, the two major strategic thrusts at the moment, driven by ASEAN and the United States, don’t seem to be moving us in the good direction. .

ASEAN is trying to encourage China to sign a Code of Conduct (COC), an agreement conceived as a binding preventive diplomacy measure that’ll forestall conflict. Talks continue, as they have since 2002. Late 2017 is now the hope-for target date for completion of the code, or at least an agreed draft. China though has long argued—and formalized in various international agreements—that the South China Sea isn’t a multilateral issue and so ASEAN as a grouping has no place discussing it. And in recent years China has convinced Cambodia, Laos and now the Philippines to embrace the PRC’s South China Sea stance, making an ASEAN South China Sea consensus unlikely. More pointedly, why would China sign something that doesn’t advance its interests?”

The year 2017 could be the deciding moment for President Rody Duterte as our country will be the host of the next ASEAN meeting. For obvious reason that PDU30 is now ‘friendly’ with China, and it seems a consensus among ASEAN members is farfetched to encourage China to sign the Code of Conduct, being the host country, our President must consider what the other members’ stand on the COC in relation to the Code of Conduct. He must be sensitive enough not to hurt other ASEAN leaders because he favors China.

The mere fact that we purchased armaments from China, are we going to use them against our neighbors or from our long time ally? If the conflictual theory will prevail, like what I have been saying for quite some time now that if the program is on, yes it can be delayed but it will push through because the man made global crisis by the globalists whose interest is to depopulate the world, another world war is possible.

Our country will play a major role in this future war game for it to happen or not in Duterte’s term, just like what president-elect Donald Trump said about not to meddle in other country’s regime change, in the end the globalists will prevail and leaders will just be pawns in the chessboard of war mongers in the process.

Be wary!

Monday, December 5, 2016

Fake News by Erick San Juan

Fake News by Erick San Juan

We thought that the advancement in science and technology can weaponize vaccines and also manipulate weather to use it as weapon against target areas only, but there is another one that we never imagine that such evil geniuses will manipulate and use as weapon – the so called ‘fake news’ via the internet and mainstream media.

In his article “Is the US Government Behind the Fake News Media Attacks on President-elect Trump?” (12/4/16), Dr. Paul Craig Roberts writes - Eric Zuesse has brought to our attention that US intelligence officials have placed a story in Buzzfeed, “a Democratic party mouthpiece,” that the Russian government used fake news to get Donald Trump elected president.


According to Buzzfeed:

US intelligence officials believe Russia helped disseminate fake and propagandized news as part of a broader effort to influence and undermine the presidential election, two US intelligence sources told BuzzFeed News.

‘They’re doing this continuously, that’s a known fact,’ one US intelligence official said, requesting anonymity to discuss the sensitive national security issue.

‘This is beyond propaganda, that’s my understanding,’ the second US intelligence official said. The official said they believed those efforts likely included the dissemination of completely fake news stories. …

One intelligence official said, ‘In the context, did Russia attempt to influence the US elections; the aperture is as wide as it can possibly be.’” ‘The real unanswered question is, why did they do it?, the second US intelligence official said. ‘Is it because they love Donald Trump? Because they hated Hillary Clinton? Or just because they like undermining Western democracies?’

Who are these US intelligence officials who are portraying the president-elect of the United States to be a “Putin stooge, a tool of Russia”?

Pundits advice that once in office, Trump must investigate these hostile elements in US intelligence who are working to discredit the US president and the American people who voted him into office.

As one reader pointed out, those who debunk “conspiracy theories,” that is, explanations that they do not like, now have a conspiracy theory of their own: Vladimir Putin used independent American websites to elect Trump with fake news. Only voters living in a few large coastal cities were immune to the fake news.

In other words, the presstitute media has lost control over Americans’ minds to Putin.

With an opponent, this powerful, neoconservatives better think a dozen times before fomenting any more tension with the Kremlin.”

The use of weaponized fake news could actually lead to confrontation among nations and if such big nations are involved it might trigger a global conflict.

That is why the architects of these weaponized fake news had used all means to reach the masses day in and day out in all popular media outfits.

“You really know that masses of people are living within a mind-control matrix when the greatest, most pervasive purveyors of fake news denounce others for the practice.”  (Finian Cunningham)

Blaming others like alternative media and websites and credible blogsites is the scapegoat to lead the masses away from the truth and towards synthetic news.

Discussed with truth and credibility, Prof. Michel Chossudovsky in his article ‘Who is Behind “Fake News”? Mainstream Media Use Fake Videos and Images’ (Global Research, November 24, 2016) – “The mainstream corporate media is desperate.

They want to suppress independent and alternative online media, which it categorizes as “fake news”.

Readers on social media are warned not to go onto certain sites.

The intent of this initiative is to smear honest reporting and Truth in Media.

Our analysis confirms that some mainstream media are routinely involved in distorting the facts and turning realities upside down.

They are the unspoken architects of “Fake News”.

One area of routine distortion is the use of fake videos and images by the mainstream media.”

Prof. Chossudovsky has given Four Notorious Cases of Media Distortion and the most controversial and very deceiving was the news on 9/11.

Fake News regarding the Collapse of World Trade Center Building Seven in New York.

The most grotesque lie pertains to the BBC and CNN announcement in the afternoon of September 11, that WTC Building Seven (The Solomon Building) had collapsed.

The BBC report went live at 5.00pm, 21 minutes before the actual occurrence of the collapse, indelibly pointing to foreknowledge of the collapse of WTC 7.

CNN anchor Aaron Brown announced that the building “has either collapsed or is collapsing” about an hour before the event.”

The regular users of Facebook has experienced one way or another as victims of fake news using images and videos that were altered. Finding only in the end that they were taken for a ride, maybe after they were corrected by friends or worst bullied and laughed at for the mistake believing it was for real.

Actually we have our own share of fake news, intended or not, or sometimes tagged as a joke, but it has created a controversy already so the people responsible for such boo-boo has to do a lot of explaining and corrections.

There will be court cases to be filed by major newspapers soon due to trolls and PR wrecking crew operators using newspaper letterheads in their psy war op.

So the famous line ‘think before you click’ or be careful in using all the facets in the internet so as not to create trouble, should be in the minds of all users. Be wise and avoid being the carrier of fake news.

Wednesday, November 30, 2016

TPP: Calculated Risk by Erick San Juan

TPP: Calculated Risk by Erick San Juan

If we have our own ‘change is coming’ ala Duterte style, with President elect Donald Trump of the world’s superpower, changes are coming too and one of these changes is the withdrawal of the US from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Program or TPP.

US President Barack Obama is the one who pushed for the TPP together with his pivot to Asia back in 2011.

The Obama administration and many in the business community view the deal as both an economic opportunity and in some ways a foreign policy one.

In terms of foreign policy, Obama and his team saw the deal as part of a broader strategy to assert American values and interests both in Asia and around the world in opposition to China's growing power and influence.

China is not included in the TPP. Instead, the deal comprises a diverse group of nations (Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam) that the U.S. wanted to build stronger economic ties with.

Obama argued that by helping write the trade agreement that set policy for a wide group of nations, the United States could push for higher labor and environmental standards abroad. This would benefit American workers, he argued, because it would mean that companies in the TPP nations would abide by workplace standards that more closely resembled those in the U.S. With more equitable workplace standards, there would be fewer incentives for American companies to treat their workers poorly or outsource their jobs abroad.

The administration argued that the more direct benefit for Americans would be expanded and simplified trade with many of these nations. Obama's team estimated the TPP would lift 18,000 tariffs imposed on U.S. products sold abroad. This would lower the price of American-made products abroad and therefore potentially increase their sales, which could create jobs back home.

Obama did not state this so bluntly, but his argument is essentially that the trends that are causing American jobs to disappear — more international trade, technology, globalization, and automation — are not going away, and trade agreements like TPP can help the U.S. thrive in the new economy.

But soon-to-be US President Trump has different views on the TPP.

With the TPP, 12 countries would have been able to share in the perks of this free trade bonanza. That involves the reduction or elimination of tariffs (a tax or duty to be paid on goods), new rules for resolving trade disputes, and the renegotiation of subsidies for the manufacturing and agricultural sectors, among many, many other very complicated things.

Trump’s beef with the TPP is that he claims it will hurt American workers and undercut US companies. His stance on trade is protectionist: he believes that the average American farmer and auto worker has lost out from the fact that labor is cheap in developing countries like China, Vietnam, and Malaysia.

He’s definitely not wrong here—many low-skilled jobs that used to belong to the backbone of American industrial towns have been shipped overseas because, hey, if no one (read: the government) is stopping profit-driven corporations from lowering production costs, what incentive would they have to continue manufacturing products in higher cost jurisdictions like the US?

“Instead of negotiating with 12 countries in the TPP, he thinks he can get a better deal for Americans if there are fewer countries at the table,” says Stuart Trew, trade economist at the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and co-author of “The Trans-Pacific Partnership & Canada: A Citizen’s Guide.” “These are interesting times for trade. Trump is shaking up the orthodoxy.”

Indeed, the TPP has long been touted by critics as a grand American plan to plant their flag in East Asia and counter the perceived economic threat that is China, by getting first dibs in trade negotiations with key growth markets in Asia-Pacific like Australia, Brunei, Vietnam, and Malaysia.

But with the pledge of president elect Donald Trump, to dump or to renegotiate the TPP, a window of opportunity is now open to China.

China is now positioning itself as free trade's new champion and seizing economic leadership of the Pacific Rim.

Under President Barack Obama the TPP was sold as a way to counter China's rise, and its possible demise is now viewed in China as a US retreat from the region.

Chinese President Xi Jinping has seized the opportunity at the APEC summit last weekend and pushed his own free trade vision, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).

It involves 16 countries including Australia and Japan, but excludes America.

Mr. Xi is pushing to make it bigger and is leaving the door open to Latin American countries like Peru who are keen to benefit from the growing economies of Asia.

The move would be a massive boost for China's plans to shift the existing US-dominated world economic order.

With billions of dollars on offer, China is trying to supplant the World Bank and the IMF with its Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank.

Now that China is picking off ASEAN countries one by one through the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), will China rise as the new economic power using its cash diplomacy?

Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak signed off on US$34 billion ($46 billion) in trade and investment agreements.

A couple of weeks earlier, Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte signed US$13 billion ($17 billion) in trade and aid deals.

Cambodia was already on side but to secure support Beijing offered 31 trade agreements and US$300 million ($406 million). Now attention is turning to Thailand, which since its military coup in 2014 is tilting towards China.

One by one China is picking off the ASEAN countries that were traditionally aligned to America and united against China's territorial claims in the South China Sea.

China's control in the South China Sea is as much about economics as it is national pride. About US$5 trillion ($6.7 trillion) — or half the world's trade — moves through the waters of the South China Sea.

Controlling and regulating those waterways will give China enormous power in setting the economic rules of the game.

To achieve this China is breaking the template that has been in place since the end of Word War II — most Asian nations accepted American security guarantees and were then left to focus on economic growth, stability and prosperity.

In the new Chinese order the remaining ASEAN countries face a choice. If they want to benefit from China's chequebook diplomacy then the cost might be to accept China's claims over the South China Sea.

At the end of the day China hopes to cleave ASEAN from America's grasp and make the United States strategic pivot back into Asia unworkable.

They are counting on Donald Trump as president advocating a more isolationist stance.

Although Trump’s administration will begin in January 2017, the present confluence of events might lead to global financial crisis beginning with the US Federal Reserve possible rate increase and the outcome could be devastating to at least four big national banks including the European Union and China.

And if this means trouble, is the inevitable global war still in the offing? And as a nation, are we prepared?

Research Sources:

Here's why Trump hates the Trans-Pacific Partnership so much
By Vanmala Subramaniam, VICE News
Nov. 25, 2016

Trump's Pledge to Dump the TPP Just First Step in Anti-Trade Agenda
by Perry Bacon Jr. (NBC News)
November 23, 2016

Trans-Pacific Partnership: China seizes trade opportunity after Donald Trump's threat - Analysis
By China correspondent Matthew Carney (ABC News)
November 24, 2016

Tuesday, November 22, 2016

Never Learned from History by Erick San Juan

Never Learned from History by Erick San Juan

It seems that after over six months, the election fever is still on and the country’s socio-political gap is getting wider as crucial issues emerged. The latest of which is the ‘surprise burial’ of the former President Ferdinand E. Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani last November 18 at 12 high noon.

It will be remembered that Marcos’ burial is in the election promise list during the campaign period of team DU30 and allegedly in return for the campaign donation given by the Marcoses. It was even confirmed by President Rody Duterte in one of his interviews that Ilocos Norte Gov. Imee Marcos donated for his campaign funds.

So the big fuss that the anti-Marcos/anti-Martial Law protesters are staging is due to the fact that the burial was likened to a thief in the night and a lot were surprised. Former President Ramos got pissed off that despite his meeting with PRRD last week, he was not informed not even by his boys who are now in the cabinet of DU30.

Duterte has defended the burial, saying laws entitled Marcos to be buried at the heroes’ cemetery as a former president and soldier. Although varied reports said that PDU30 was not aware of the Marcos burial last November 18 and the flowers from Malacanang was a SOP  (standard procedure).

Is PDU30 convinced by the Marcoses to fast track all legal remedies so that the FM secret accounts in the Carribean under a shell corporation at the British Virgin Islands be recovered before the globalists garnished it due to the expose of the Panama Papers?

Aside from the so-called Martial Law victims and protesters, former President Fidel Ramos, once again reminded President Duterte to be very careful of his decisions that concerns almost healed wounds from the past.

The number one supporter and a staunch believer of a Duterte presidency, PFVR said that the move of the Marcos family to hasten the burial of the patriarch, with the help of the police and military, is a “step backwards” for the Duterte administration.

"You must understand that is just a happening in a series of happenings. The scheme of the Marcos family with the connivance of some elements of Armed Forces including the national police -- some only, not everybody -- is a step backwards for this administration in the sense that they are losing support, they are losing friends," Ramos said. (Various sources)

Is the former president’s statement a warning to the present administration to be cautious of things to come that may contribute to his downfall if he will not heed the writings on the wall? Just asking.

The alleged payback of the Marcos donation through the burial of the ‘dictator’ at the LNMB can be a trigger to a series of events that might be a repeat of the Erap ouster in 2001. Duterte should make decisions based on intelligent advises from people who know more like PFVR on matters of politics, diplomacy and national security.

Now that the outrage of the netizens and the millenials from the internet (via social media networking) to the streets is gaining momentum, are we geared towards a social volcano in the offing ready to erupt any moment now?

No matter how often people say to move on when it comes to the Marcos’ burial, it is quite obvious why the past administrations did not touch such controversial issue because wounds of hate and anger will pry open and create a divided nation in the process. Everything will be affected, people will turn to parliament of the streets and economic activities will be hampered. And here we go again, just like in the 70’s when Martial Law was declared, same old chants and placards, and same old, now old activists and protesters of the Marcos years.

Some say that this ‘Marcos’ political victory’ is a step closer for the younger Marcos, Jr. to win the second highest position of the land. What? We have been fooled once, and maybe twice but another Marcos in the Palace? WTF! Never again!

Let us not allow another deception by the family that plundered this nation and when exiled, helped by people like me and the original Marcos loyalists hoping that they will acknowledge and grant what was promised and be given what due us. Nothing. Many of the original loyalists got sick and died without even visited, assisted nor given condolences by any one of the family despite that they're all back and in government service. The worst, my good friend, Col. Rexor Ver, one of the sons of the late Fabian Ver died without getting any assistance for his medication from this family. All but empty promises and lies.

Let us all learn from history and never to allow a repeat.

Wednesday, November 16, 2016

Is Marxism Dead? By Erick San Juan

Is Marxism Dead? By Erick San Juan

Pray that the Obama/ Clinton/global elitist cabal hasn’t found the Marxist way to compromise the promise of Tuesday night, because it’s still a long way between now and January 20, 2017 Inauguration. (Source: Marxists still looking for the way to compromise Tuesday’s election by Judi McLeod)

Will there be a coup even before the president-elect takes its oath of office as the new US President?

In the article by Doug Hagmann last November 12 he writes, it is now Hillary Clinton and her Marxist supporters who are threatening our Representative Republic through the petition website Change.org. Immediately following Donald Trump’s election victory, a petition was launched to sway the Electoral College to “Make Hillary Clinton President on December 19.

The Electoral College will meet and vote on December 19, 2016, to certify the Trump victory as defined within our Constitution. Remember, the United States is a Representative Republic and not a Democracy, no matter how many times journalists want to change our constitution through language and the repetitiveness of their lies.

It is typical for the Clintons and those in their camp to do the exact opposite of what they say publicly. This has been proven through the Wikileaks release of Hillary Clinton’s speeches to big money interests behind closed doors confirming that what she says and does in public is not consistent with what she says to (and does for) her private, big dollar supporters and special interest groups.

Unable to comprehend such duplicity and blinded by their idolatry, these useful idiots, including the Hollywood elite are pushing for the Electors of the Electoral College to cast their ballots for Clinton on December 19, 2016. They believe that they have the chance to change the outcome of the election, an event that would surely throw this already heavily divided country into a very real civil war, something the Marxists Progressives have been longing for. Sounds familiar! In fact, my own government insider admitted as much exactly as I have documented in my previous reports.

As to the petition to the Electoral College, it should be noted that they currently have over 2.2 million “signatures” and are gaining on their goal of three million.
> No one should think that the globalist power structure, for which Hillary Rodham Clinton is the face, will willingly cede their power. They will not go quietly into the night. Unless a secret concession will be ok'd by incoming President Trump as told. Instead, they will utilize the tactics of their patron saint, Saul Alinsky, whose book Rules for Radicals was dedicated to Lucifer himself.  We are seeing this play out on the streets of Portland, Los Angeles, New York and other cities in between.”

If we have liberation theologists and Maoists support thru the National Democratic Front, Communist Party of the Philippines and New People’s Army, in America its the secret funds of China through pro-Beijing big business Chinese based in the US funding the Marxists. We have to remember that the same Chinese block supported the presidency of Bill Clinton. So its a no-no this time from the Zionists who really control America. I was even shock to know that some agit-props in the US are NDF US base supporting Hillary.

I'm right after all that's the main reason why the super elites shifted their secret support to Trump.

But is Donald Trump really an anti-establishment president?

“The establishment is concerned that Trump would “shake-up” long standing policies under the Democratic and Republican duopoly that benefited private interest groups:

He promised to build a wall along the Mexican border and temporarily bar Muslim immigrants from entering the United States. He questioned Washington’s longstanding commitment to NATO allies, called for cutting foreign aid, praised President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, vowed to rip up international trade deals, assailed China and suggested Asian allies develop nuclear weapons.

“I will build a great, great wall on our southern border. And I will have Mexico pay for that wall” Trump said in 2015. Trump’s plan to build a wall along the borders of Mexico will not stop immigrants from crossing the borders without addressing the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) which has devastated millions of small Mexican farmers.

As for NATO troops who are supported by U.S. taxpayers, Trump told Charles Lane and the editorial board of the Washington Post on March 21st, that he does “not” want to pull out NATO. Here is what he said: No, I don’t want to pull it out. NATO was set up at a different time. NATO was set up when we were a richer country. We’re not a rich country. We’re borrowing, we’re borrowing all of this money. We’re borrowing money from China, which is a sort of an amazing situation. But things are a much different thing. NATO is costing us a fortune and yes, we’re protecting Europe but we’re spending a lot of money. Number 1, I think the distribution of costs has to be changed. I think NATO as a concept is good, but it is not as good as it was when it first evolved. And I think we bear the, you know, not only financially, we bear the biggest brunt of it. Obama has been stronger on the Ukraine than all the other countries put together, and those other countries right next door to the Ukraine. And I just say we have, I’m not even knocking it, I’m just saying I don’t think it’s fair, we’re not treated fair. I don’t think we’re treated fair, Charles, anywhere. If you look everything we have. You know, South Korea is very rich. Great industrial country. And yet we’re not reimbursed fairly for what we do. We’re constantly, you know, sending our ships, sending our planes, doing our war games, doing other. We’re reimbursed a fraction of what this is all costing. Trump will support NATO as long as the EU pays for it.

One other positive note, Trump does want a better relationship with Russia who has been fighting alongside Syrian government forces against the Islamic State. Trump wants the U.S. and Russian forces to work together to defeat the Islamic State. Putin has expressed his willingness to work with Trump to rebuild a relationship that is mutually beneficial. The New York Times also made accusations that “with Mr. Trump praising Mr. Putin and American investigators concluding that Russians had hacked Democratic email messages.” There is no proof that Russia hacked the Democratic National Convention’s (DNC) emails or that Trump is linked to Vladimir Putin.” (Source: Is it Fact or Fiction? US Media Says that New World Order is in Jeopardy with a Trump Presidency by Timothy Alexander Guzman, Global Research, November 11, 2016)

But what concerns most of us on the other side of the globe, the biggest continent, Asia, What Does Trump Victory Mean for Asia? An “Isolationist America” or More “Soft Power”? as what was cited by The New Atlas @globalresearch.ca last November 10 – “With the victory of Donald Trump during the 2016 US presidential elections, many commentators, analysts and academics have “predicted” a more isolationist America. For Asia specifically, particularly those in need of US intervention to prop up their unpopular, impotent political causes, they fear an ebbing of US support.

However, as history has shown, the whims of US voters rarely has an impact on US foreign policy, particularly amidst the more subtle use of US “soft power.”

US policy toward Asia has been a historical, socioeconomic and military continuum marked by a consistent desire for geopolitical and socioeconomic primacy in the region stretching back for over a century. Since World War 2, the US has attempted to contain a rising China, temper and exploit emerging developing nations across Southeast Asia and prevent nations subjugated to US domination (Japan, South Korea and the Philippines) from achieving anything resembling an independent foreign and domestic policy.

This is a continuum that has transcended presidential administrations and congressional shifts of power for decades.

The networks that primarily seek to establish, protect and expand US primacy in Asia are driven by corporate and financial special interests including banks, the energy industry, defense contractors, agricultural and pharmaceutical giants, the US entertainment industry and media as well as tech giants.

They achieve primacy through a variety of activities ranging from market domination through incremental advances in “free trade,” the funding of academic and activist groups through organizations like the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED), Open Society, Freedom House and USAID as well as direct pressure on the governments of respective Asian states through both overt and covert political, economic and military means.

This is a process that takes place independent of both the White House and the US Congress.

Regardless of how elections turn out, this process will continue so long as the source of these collective special interests’ power remains intact and unopposed.

For Asian states, in the wake of Trump’s victory, keeping track of and dealing with the actual networks used to project American primacy into Asia Pacific is more important than weighing the isolationist rhetoric of president-elect Donald Trump.”

There are a lot to speculate on a Trump administration, like our own president, surprises and maybe blunders will surely occur for days to come.

Just like what President Obama said today to Trump, "Trump soon to face sobering reality check". Meaning- who's the real boss? Who rules?

Wednesday, November 9, 2016

Yolanda Debacle by Erick San Juan

Yolanda Debacle by Erick San Juan

The commemoration of the 3rd anniversary of the super typhoon Yolanda’s devastation in the Visayas was once again marred with the shortcomings of the previous administration. Funds were allegedly missing because the victims of the calamity are still suffering from poor living conditions.

Organizations under the auspices of the United Nations kept saying that our country is one of the vulnerable nations that has and will greatly suffer due to climate change. May it be dry or wet season, we experienced a great loss of lives and properties because of the so-called climate change (a.k.a. global warming).

Actually this could be the reason why the former president Fidel Ramos got pissed off when President Rody Duterte reiterated his stand against the signing of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. It was in July that PDU30 hinted in his speech that he will not honor the climate change pact on carbon emission.

But last November 7, during a speech at the oath-taking of the new officers of the National Press Club in Malacañang Palace, the president announced his decision that he will now back the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, after a near-unanimous approval by his Cabinet, and he will be signing the historic pact.

According to the 2016 Climate Change Vulnerability Index, the Philippines is one of the 15 countries most vulnerable to climate change. But what is the Paris Agreement all about?

According to the article of Tony La Viña (former dean of the Ateneo School of Government) @rappler.com, “The Paris Agreement is not just a carbon emissions agreement but a comprehensive sustainable development agreement. It is an adaptation, loss and damage, finance, technology and capacity building agreement – all of which are essential to our survival. We cannot cherry-pick but have to accept the whole package. But we can do so in our own terms.

To opt out of the Paris Agreement is to allow developed countries to escape from their responsibility to compensate us for causing climate change. The Paris Agreement is the only process where we can get developed countries to be accountable for their emissions through a loss and damage mechanism and through provisions that require them as a matter of climate justice to provide support to us so we can adapt to and mitigate climate change. Indeed, the Paris Agreement has good provisions on finance, technology transfer, and capacity building. Our delegation worked hard in Paris to get the best text possible for these provisions.

The Paris Agreement does not impose emissions reduction limitations on us. We can determine our own targets based on our development needs. We can adopt targets but we can make that conditional on support by developed countries. That’s what we did in Paris – we did offer 70% but we said we will do it only if support was given. If the Duterte administration wishes, it can lower the number to maybe 30-40% and perhaps commit to do 10-15% of that as unconditional since we are already doing many things on our own. Such a decision would be credible and acceptable.

The Paris Agreement is a good document whose consequences will last generations. While this legally binding agreement in itself is not enough to solve the climate crisis, it is as strong, ambitious, and as equitable as it can be for an agreement that required consensus by 195 countries—a positive beginning to a long and hard journey towards climate justice.”

Yes, there are concerted efforts of countries around the world to address the so called threats of global warming/climate change but as what we have been saying for several years now in our radio program and in our writings that there is one element that this body is missing or has refused to acknowledge, which is the man-made cause of climate change, that is weather manipulation or weather engineering.

Strange behavior of weather systems and abnormal movements of typhoons that we have never before witnessed are the signatures of someone or something is really manipulating Mother Nature that has caused great dangers to humankind.

Could it be that through this evil science of manipulating weather is the reason for people of various nations to be compelled to sign a pact to address the man made disaster? In the various UN-sponsored gatherings of leaders of various nations, there is always opposition to such move because it will only hamper the growth and development of countries especially the developing ones.

Treaties that will only manipulate nations and like a herd of cattle, will lead them to the slaughterhouse because the real culprit of such world disaster such as global warming is actually known as man-made and it will go on as long as the evil geniuses behind it are not exposed and punish.

Who may taught that such weather engineering is only seen in the sci-fi movies?

Tuesday, November 1, 2016

Is The Honeymoon Period Over? By Erick San Juan

Is The Honeymoon Period Over? By Erick San Juan

The first 100 days of the Duterte administration has shown several good and bad aspects in its governance.  Those who voted for DU30 gradually find mistakes and a lot of blunders especially in his style of using cuss words. Campaign supporters suddenly turned sour and now become critics to the administration’s shortcomings. Is the honeymoon period over?  What went wrong? Is there an exodus of supporters turning sour already?

The number one supporter and the man who believed he can do it as the president of the land is no other than former president Fidel Ramos.  Now a supporter-turned-critic, PFVR wrote in his articles what  a true leader  is and how he sees the Filipinos being led in the wrong direction. Even pundits accepted DU30 as a 'necessary evil' in a divided nation. But oppositors believed that former President Ramos created a 'Frankenstein' out of Digong. Of course the diehard Duterte fans in turn criticize PFVR, and in the long run we are again divided. Is this what we hoped for and asked for after being led to the pits of the previous administration’s 'tuwid na daan'? Where are the promised changes?

Ramos said from day one, a national leader must define where he will bring the nation and show the people how to get there. He leads by setting the right example that the citizenry should emulate. He leads by making the correct decisions for the betterment of the many, not the enrichment of the few.

The bottom line is, Ramos said, Duterte  cannot do it alone. Nether can the government do it alone.

“But when all of us strive together with one goal in mind, and abide by the same precious values and commitments—we become a strong nation, able to achieve the higher quality of life we have always yearned for—in an environment of enduring peace and sustainable development,” he said.

He added that the government was “losing badly” after Duterte’s first 100 days because the administration gave priority to the war on drugs at the expense of alleviating poverty, bringing down the cost of living, attracting foreign investments and generating jobs. (Source: PH a sinking ship — FVR by Sandy Araneta @manilastandard)

PFVR was right because of the so much attention given to the war on drugs and criminality, but where are the big fishes? Why eliminate the poor people who are victims of hardships and unemployment? The war on poverty was not addressed and it was shown on the latest survey that the government should now focus on the poverty issue and generating jobs. The common (tao) people most probably DU30’s supporters are now asking the present leadership to put the war on drugs operation in the back burner and have real and tangible government policies that will help the poor Pinoys in their day-to-day struggle to survive.

Another very crucial matter that is being overlooked by the DU30’s administration due to his war on drugs is the country’s security from external threats. For the president, the war on drugs is too big that the national police is not enough and so he also included the armed forces to help in the campaign against drug users, dealers and protectors. Added to this is his campaign to bring an end to the Abu Sayyaf menace in the south that has sent several troops in the area instead of getting the mastermind and financier who basically owns the businesses in Sulu and nearby provinces to lessen the collateral damage and deaths of our soldiers.

Now the crucial question lies in the external and maritime defense that we needed badly in this exciting time where the rumblings of a possible world war is in the offing. External threat is always there especially Duterte announced the suspension of maritime patrol with the US on the country’s coastal area.

With the endless verbal attack on the US, the United Nations and the EU, with the possible termination of agreements and ties with them, are we headed to deliberately weakening our capabilities and defense in relation to our alliances in case a war broke out.

The present leadership is perceived dragging the whole country to the wrong direction when it comes to foreign policy and diplomacy among nations. The growing number of Filipinos who are in favor of the US than China is already a clear sign that we must not trust China wholeheartedly and do away with Washington’s help in the process.

We are approaching a year of global turbulence and a helping hand from an old ally will somehow help us get through during the hard times. Unless President DU30 changes his mind on certain important matters such as this, we will all go down with him unwittingly,

God forbid!

Tuesday, October 25, 2016

"Galit sa Mundo' by Erick San Juan

"[The damage control] is the latest in a string of flip-flops, walk-backs and backtracks that have come to define Duterte's tenure, leaving Filipino and foreign observers unsure where rhetoric ends and real policy moves begin."
                                                   – The Washington Post, October 21

The above-mentioned excerpt from The Washington Post is just one of the many published reactions from international news organizations that had put our country in the limelight again due to the careless not-so-thought about comments from President Rody Duterte.

Such play of words also created a divided Philippines, those who are for and against the current administration, and recently after the China trip, those who are for and against China and the US.

Since the campaign period people in the Duterte’s loop were saying that it is his style of speaking with several use of bad words and name-calling against people. Maybe the DU30 is still in the transition period from being just a mayor of a provincial city to the highest position of the land. He forgot to leave in Davao City his attitude where he can say bad words and be very brutally frank to people without having second thoughts. Of course the effect of such manners, now that he is the president is very different, not just national but worldwide.

He had to internalize the importance of being the leader of a nation and act like one. Being brave and patriotic for the good of one’s country are not the issues, it is how he treats leaders of other countries or organizations. DU30’s ways can be classified as somehow barbaric, we are now living in a world of civilized people and more so living interdependently among nations.

People in his loop will not always kowtow to his whims and will not do the backtracking and apologizing for him especially when the situation can really be very complicated that might lead to international sanctions among others.

Various experts have expressed their views on the latest flip-flop of DU30 while in Beijing. Like a true expert in their field of geopolitics and diplomacy, the line of DU30 on the independent foreign policy issue vis-à-vis our US military and economic ties are worth considering so as to avoid unexpected confluence of events.

One such analysis about independent foreign policy came from Francisco Tatad:

“I do not at all wonder, and no one else should, why President Duterte has been talking of an “independent foreign policy.” What puzzles me, as it should everybody else, is why neither he nor his foreign secretary, Perfecto Yasay Jr., has said how the government intends to carry it out. By asking the US forces in Mindanao to leave? By dismantling the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement with the US? By buying weapons from China and Russia? Every Tom, Dick and Harry wants to throw in his two cents’ worth.

Section 7 of Article II—Declaration of Principles and State Policies—-is clear: “The State shall pursue an independent foreign policy. In relations with other states the paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial integrity, national interest, and the right to self-determination.” Each of the four phrases is known, if vaguely, to the average citizen. Otherwise the Constitution and the spirit of our laws make them plain.

“The Philippines is a democratic and republican state,” says the first section of Article II. “Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.”

National territory is that over which we exercise jurisdiction and control, and whose borders no state should try to change or promote secessionism within.

National interest, or “raison d’Etat” (reason of State) to the French, has a long history that evolved from the 1648 Peace of Westphalia that ended the Thirty Years War. We know it as our own political, economic, military and cultural goals and ambitions as distinguished from those of our closest friends and allies.

DU30 has proclaimed his desire to pursue an “independent foreign policy,” but has yet to pronounce what he means. Does “independent” mean renouncing any security alliance with our current major ally? If so, this would mean scrapping the Mutual Defense Treaty with the US, the Visiting Forces Agreement and the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, and possibly pursuing a policy of neutrality like the Vatican or Switzerland.”

The mere fact that we are historically part of every existing international groupings with specific missions and objectives to live harmoniously, in just one utterance from a city mayor-turned-president all these will be a thing of the past? Duh? Diplomacy and interdependence are not as simple as that.

Rhetoric is rhetoric. National foreign policy is different, it should be planned and discussed among experts in and out of the government. DU30 must consult experts in proper diplomacy, how it works and why it is needed in international protocols.

Many pundits are worried and asking why the president is acting with mixed emotion? "Parang galit sa mundo." Meaning him against the world. Cussing and calling world leaders who irritates him names. It is believed that these leaders and allies might not ignore his antics and will not take those insults sitting down which could drag us into chaos. Remember what happened to the late Indonesian President Sukarno. I hope it will not happen here.

Lastly, if he really loves this nation and the Filipino people, he should have raised the South China Sea issue with China and now with Japan, the issue of the Filipino comfort women. Need we say more?

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

Threats by Erick San Juan

Threats by Erick San Juan

"Why is US President Barack Obama threatening Russia with World War 3 right before the election?" A very profound question and actually the title of the article by Michael Snyder published at redflagnews.com which he began with “It sure seems like an odd time to be provoking a war with Russia.  As I write this, we stand just a little bit more than three weeks away from one of the most pivotal elections in U.S. history, and Barack Obama has chosen this moment to strongly threaten the Russians. Reuters reported that Obama is contemplating “direct U.S. military action” against Syrian military targets, and the Russians have already indicated that any assault on Syrian forces would be considered an attack on themselves.  The rapidly deteriorating crisis in Syria has already caused tensions with Russia to rise to the highest level since the end of the Cold War.”

Maybe a lot will wonder why Russia and the United States are dragged into this civil war inside Syria. Here is the analysis of Michael Snyder : “But without a doubt the crisis in Syria is not going to be resolved any time soon because it is one giant mess.  Most people don’t realize that the Syrian civil war has essentially been a proxy war between Sunni Islam and Shia Islam from the very beginning.  Jihadist rebels that are being armed and funded by Saudi Arabia and Turkey are fighting Hezbollah troops that are being armed and funded by Iran.  And now Turkish forces have invaded northern Syria, and this threatens to cause a full-blown war to erupt between Turkey and the Syrian Kurds.  Of course ISIS is right in the middle of everything causing havoc, blowing stuff up and beheading anyone that doesn’t believe in their radical version of Sunni Islam.

It is absolutely insane that the United States and Russia could potentially go to war because of this conflict.  Both sides are determined to show the other how tough they are, and one false move could set off a spiral of events from which there may be no recovery.”

Just like a ticking bomb, any false move or maybe a false flag operation orchestrated by covert operatives, the world can be dragged to another world war.

In the heat of the November US elections, barely three weeks to go, the Obama administration accused Russia of hacking and meddling with the coming election.

“The Obama administration is contemplating an unprecedented cyber covert action against Russia in retaliation for alleged Russian interference in the American presidential election, U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News.

Current and former officials with direct knowledge of the situation say the CIA has been asked to deliver options to the White House for a wide-ranging “clandestine” cyber operation designed to harass and 'embarrass' the Kremlin leadership.

The sources did not elaborate on the exact measures the CIA was considering, but said the agency has already begun opening cyber doors, selecting targets and making other preparations for an operation.

Somebody should tell Obama that he is not playing a video game.  A cyber attack is considered to be an act of war, and the Russians would inevitably retaliate.  And considering how exceedingly vulnerable our cyber infrastructure is, I don’t know if that is something that we want to invite.

At the end of last week, Vice President Joe Biden also publicly threatened the Russians…

On Friday, Vice President Joe Biden met “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd for an interview that has raised serious concern in Russia.

Without bothering to question the authenticity of the claims, Todd took the allegations of Russian hacking at face value, opening his interview with a loaded question: “Why haven’t we sent a message yet to Putin?”

After a moment of stunned silence, Biden responded, “We’re sending a message. We have the capacity to do it and it will be at the time of our choosing, and under the circumstances that will have the greatest impact.”

When Todd asked if the public will know a message was sent, Biden replied, “Hope not.”

The Russians firmly deny that they have any involvement in the hacking, and so far the Obama administration has not publicly produced any firm evidence that the Russians were behind it.

Perhaps the Obama administration privately has some evidence, but at this point they have not shown that evidence to the American public.” (Ibid)

From a possible shooting war to cyber war, either way there seems to be no stopping this madness unless cooler heads will interfere and prevail. Until then the Russians are being advised through their state-owned television channel that they have to be prepared for a  possible US nuclear attack and always be alert as to where they can find the nearest bomb shelter, just in case.

Are these threats and wars the necessary evil to achieve a one world control? Is Obama being programmed to do an FDR (Pres. Franklin Delano Roosevelt) war presidency which could hijack the November US presidential elections?

The big powers are actually preparing for the big one, a nuclear war, how about us? Still trapped with politics and a lot of word wars and rhetoric. When are we going to gather our act together and prepare for the worst?

Tuesday, October 11, 2016

Elder's Advice by Erick San Juan

Elder's Advice by Erick San Juan

‘Colorful person’ and a person with ‘colorful language’ that is President Rody Duterte according to US President Barack Obama and Jose Almonte (former national security adviser).  The former attribute may refer to a politician who can be seen dealing across the political spectrum, from left to right. While the latter, a description given to Pres. Duterte or shall I say a criticism, due to his use of cuss words especially to foreign top officials and organizations.

A hundred days of the 6-year term of the Duterte administration has been colorful enough that almost everyday in the tri-media, here and abroad, he always have those quotable quotes – may be good or bad to fill in that has caused the trending and debates between the for and against the president.

Even the former president and statesman in the international community as the most traveled leader of the country, former Pres. Fidel V. Ramos gave his comments on the performance of Pres. Duterte on his first 100 days in office. For him, Team Philippines is losing due to some incidents and broken promises. For PFVR, the status of the Philippines in the world as a community is important especially our economic and military ties with the United States.

Our status as an ally of the US with several existing treaties, from economic to military had gone a long, long way that will just end because Pres. Rody says so.

Like what PFVR said in his column, “are we throwing away decades of military partnership, tactical proficiency, compatible weaponry, predictable logistics, and soldier-to-soldier camaraderie just like that?

FVR’s focus regarding this assessment of Du30’s first 100 days is based simply on two concepts of primordial importance – LEADERSHIP and TEAMWORK – because that is where the perceived failures have emerged at this point in time.

Let all do-gooders, Pres. Rody included, please help the president's trusted lieutenants Jun Yasay(DFA), Lorenzana (DND), Ernie Abella and others clarify, contextualize, disbewilder, soothe, detoxify and otherwise enlighten most of us who believe that -in the 21st century – harmony, peace, inclusiveness, connectivity, and mutual benefit, etc. are people’s highest aspirations.”

As for Ms. Carmen N. Pedrosa in her column – ‘Joal’s reluctant admiration of Duterte’, she writes – “Both he (Jo Almonte) and President Duterte come from lower middle class (not rich but not very poor either). It is from these origins that both strove to make something of themselves through self-study and use real life experiences as their higher education.

They have developed extraordinary careers in their chosen fields of endeavor. Joal as an intellectual soldier (hard to find these days) and Duterte as an unorthodox politician (a rara avis). On the unorthodox politician most of us thought it would take a miracle to have one and win as President in an elite-dominated society like the Philippines. You must be acceptable to big business.

Almonte conceded that Duterte has done well, fulfilling most of his campaign promises in his first 100 days. He admitted it was Duterte’s approach to the country’s  fundamental problems – “internal war, broken politics and monopolized business.” He said Duterte’s record was exceptional. But like many others he criticized the President for his “colorful language.”

I beg to differ.

I think it was this “colorful language” that connected him with the masses and that to me is the most significant job in putting this country together. It is divided not just by politics as we know it. “Let us all be friends” is not the mantra for a well-run democratic society. What is, is “how to manage our differences” with strong institutions.

I don’t know how Duterte developed his “colorful language.” Did he plan it or did it come to him naturally that it was the style needed to get the attention and friendship of the masses?

I think Almonte referring to Duterte’s “colorful language” was more concerned with his tirades against President Obama and other western leaders. It is obviously coming from a deeply felt anti-colonialism.

Almonte says he (PRRD) should tone down his language. It detracts from his accomplishments.

I do not think so. Netanyahu also told Obama to go to hell but got what he wanted anyway. US criticisms of his war on illegal drugs, Duterte also told Obama to “go to hell” and warned he may decide to “break up with America.” There are other examples but it is not true that polite language is more effective. Rightly or wrongly polite language represents the power of the status quo when they ask Duterte to conform.

Duterte wants to change the world order into something less hypocritical. The history of US-Philippine relations shows that the ”good boy” behavior only gets them bullied.

But Duterte has a wild card – a review of the (EDCA) Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement which President Obama carried home with speed and haste before we even realized how it would affect our security and well-being.

President Duterte has said it often enough that his foreign policy is to be friends with everyone, including the United States and China. But to put such foreign policy in place, he must give notice to the world that it will no longer be America’s patsy in the region.

Joal must have had a tough time maneuvering thru the issue of Duterte’s “colorful language” and a desire to convince the general Filipino public that this is the heart of the problem. In fact the two are components of the push for a more independent Philippines.

Frankly, that capability has long been delayed by timid Philippine presidents who did not dare to cross the line. Duterte did. For that he faces the danger of being removed from political scene because it's the common perception that what America wants, America gets.”

Is it?

I agree with PFVR that the Duterte administration’s next 100 days (or the rest of his term) will be much, much better, considering the entire gamut of Philippine problems, starting with poverty.

Lets get our act together.

Wednesday, October 5, 2016

Who's Fault: The Salesmen or The Product? by Erick San Juan

Who's Fault: The Salesmen or The Product? by Erick San Juan

Another war is going on, aside from the war on drugs, it's coming from the very vocal supporters and non-supporters of President Rody Duterte. Strong words coming from both sides are everywhere – on the internet via the social media especially at the Facebook and Twitter, the texters who are very active giving their views even on radio and on television. And there are radio stations giving air time to callers airing their sentiments and can easily be recognized if one is for or against the present administration.

There is a growing number of Filipinos who are perceived gradually realizing that they voted a leader who is fast becoming an enemy, not only inside the country but even outside of this country but no matter what, the pro-Duterte will always fight to defend their leader up to the end.

Sadly the country is again divided, as if nobody is minding the store. Blunder after blunder, mistakes not checked by people in his loop before releasing information to the public. If only some key people in the Palace are responsible enough and did their homework, ‘hindi malulubak ng madalas ang Pangulo’. Although there are several times that it’s the President’s fault when he made remarks against people or organization due to his heightened emotion based on past experiences. But if President Duterte is quick to make harsh comments, he is also quick to apologize if he believes he committed a mistake. But pundits believe that a leader should act and talk as real head of the state. Some concerned citizens on air requested the president not to talk like he owns the nation and drag everyone in a possible war which we will all regret. Another unsolicited advice on air this afternoon was about 'respect begets respect' and cussing and loose talk could backfire.

Close to his first 100 days in office, a lot of positive things happened especially on the war on drugs despite the expected jailing of big fishes, masterminds and financiers from the underworld. Everybody were shock to see thousands of users-pushers surrendered. But in the process he is now fighting several fronts as the growing number of pros and cons are in the ‘blame game’ mode.

So much can be seen of these pros and cons in front of national TV as the country’s legislators are investigating the so-called extra-judicial killings in aid of legislation.

On the internet, several points were given in favor of the President. The Republic Defenders, a group of

respected professionals commented that- "In our 71 years of being independent, this is the first time we have a president who is not like the rest. He is genuinely pro-poor and was elected by the people without the support of traditional politicians and self serving businessmen. Some people are afraid that because of PRRD's political will and genuine desire to improve our country's plight, the oligarchs may be displaced. The traditional politicians' shenanigans may be uncovered. The narco generals and their lieutenants and the narco politicians may be unmasked. The gambling lords may lose their business. All of them run the risk of ending up in jail and/or losing their riches."

"These are the conditions that is why President Duterte is already fighting so many fronts, in various factions because he is very firm and sincere in his war on drugs and corruption that those who are hit, tends to retaliate by finding ways to topple him down or worst, assassinate him."

"PRRD is not the typical president who had to horse trade to win. Thus, he has a free hand to do as he deems best for the Philippines. This is the first time his supporters which run into the millions continue to involve themselves in the affairs of government and openly declare support for PRRD to the extent of using their own funds."

"His cabinet is composed mostly of septuagenarians, where money is no longer the main objective, but to leave legacies behind."

"He touched base with the poor specially the leftists such that for the first time, his SONA was not picketed but supported by the masses."

"PRRD is tough and walks his talk. He and his selected men cannot be bribed. Therefore, the crooked and the rich are no longer within their comfort zones."

The above-mentioned are just some of the statements observed by those in favor of the leadership of the present administration.

On the contrary, the opposite are also aired through the internet by some factions who are not in favor of what the present leadership is doing and saying.

They see the push for an independent foreign policy of the government (but in favor of China and Russia) as an “attack on the west to appease the east” particularly the country’s decades-long ties with the United States and our membership with the United Nations.

It is some kind of a suicidal move to break our tie with the US by putting an end to all military exercises and in the process scrapping bilateral military agreements.

Some anti-communist groups are more fiery in their attack against PRRD claiming that " if you quack like a duck, walk like a duck, you're a duck." They said that the people should not just be vigilant every time PRRD talks but be wary of his actions.

A former communist turned nationalist warned that a possible repeat of the Bolshevik revolution, a Stalin or Castro of Cuba takeover is in the offing.

A retired military officer disclosed that it could be a combination of all scenarios. He reminded discreetly some of his friends that it could be what they call in the intelligence lingo 'painting in the west but fighting in the east'. Meaning the possible air,sea and land battle between China and other country claimants at the South China Sea is not feasible due to so many allies war machines nearby.

But a purging from within is believed to be a possibility especially now that the PRRD administration has given the left an alliance which the left hardliners could fast-track their real agenda. He added that since the AFP and the Department of Education scrapped the ROTC military training including the hibernated Congressional Committee Against Anti-Filipino Activities, it reportedly emboldened China to recruit young Chinoys to be sleepers and trained PLA soldiers in disguise as taking their vacation in mainland China.

A scary scenario which happened in the past when the Japanese OFW's in the Philippines metamorphosed into officers of the Japanese Imperial Army when the war broke out.

The President's men were put on the spot on how and what to answer when asked if the government is really serious about his move without hurting our diplomatic ties with the US and PRRD's image in the international scene.

Really, a lot of balancing act like we are in a circus, and the Duterte administration is just beginning.

How far can the President’s men and women go to defend his every word that is not music to a lot of ears, and how often they will say sorry to every mistake? And in the end, when worse comes to worst, who’s fault? The salesman or the product?

 May the good Lord guide PRRD to have wisdom in all his undertakings.

Wednesday, September 28, 2016

Ominous by Erick San Juan

The presidency of Rodrigo Roa Duterte has its many firsts and for some it’s too good to be true especially that the country’s experiences from the past leaders, the recent ones were all tainted with so much irregularities and anomalies. Filipinos thought that the ‘new normal’ nowadays are the things that were passed on from previous administrations or could it be that the majority are just too tired and let things be as they are – the status quo.

Although netizens who are aware of the current issues are the ones who are very active in posting their views and comments of the things they strongly disagree or agree via the internet. It is a fact that the last election maximized the use of the internet in reaching out to the electorate.

Now that the ‘majority’ has voted a strong and brave leader, the rest has to bear with him for the rest of his six-year term or less? If one will notice that in several speeches of President Duterte,  he kept on mentioning that “if he can finish his term” or “if he is still alive” to fulfill his promises. The several “ifs” that seem to make him accomplish things in a hurry and in the long run, some empty promises being made.

What is also ominous according to a psychic friend, is his use of DU30. I was reminded that most journalists writes 30 which means death or end.

Desperately wanting to finish such a huge problem like the war on drugs in a short span of time, President Duterte also visited as many military camps as possible when he has the time. Seeking the help of the military arm to fulfill his goal of a drug-free country, he promised a lot of benefits to the men in uniform and their families including a doubled monthly salary, as soon as possible. But he forgot that the government is still tied to the last administration’s budget and that the huge problem of rehabilitation of hundreds of drug users/pushers is impossible to achieve and so he is perceived making commitments beyond in the process.

Our president has done this due to his heightened emotion against the drug problems but Mr. President, you have to be very careful in handling your emotions being exposed through your words, no matter how sincere you are, it will only be used against you if you fail. Sadly, most of these words were directed to officials of foreign countries and organizations. Economists and those who are not so fond with President Duterte are now blaming him for the poor performance of our ‘economic fundamentals’.

With the hearings in both houses of Congress (in aid of legislation), several matters of great importance were exposed.

In his article at the Manila Times, Atty. Al Vitangcol 3rd wrote his observations – “The recent justice committee hearings in the Senate and House of Representatives revealed and made public a lot of things that were only heard from the grapevine before. Now, these things are officially out and part of the public records, by way of the Minutes of the committee hearings.

One of these disclosures is the alleged Plan B, which is to destabilize the Duterte Administration and create a scenario to oust President Rodrigo Duterte. If this will not work, then impeach President Duterte. If all else fails, then assassinate the President. Once Duterte is gone, install Vice President Leni Robredo as the new President of the Republic.

Senator Alan Peter Cayetano revived talks, this time officially during the Senate Committee on Justice and Human Rights hearing, of the Liberal Party’s alleged Plan B to unseat President Duterte.

My insight says otherwise. The supposed Plan B will not prosper and will not muster the support of the people and the military. However, even before Plan B could take off, the groundwork for “Plan D” has already been laid.”

And what is this Plan D all about?

Plan D is the full military takeover of the government in the event of President Duterte’s sudden departure before 2022. His sudden departure could be the result of any of these things – impeachment, forced ouster by foreign states, assassination, or natural death.

In his speech before the 9th Infantry Brigade, the President said in part (while showing and waving the third “narco-list”), "How can I handle this? I cannot just arrest them and kill them. That is nothing. I do not like Martial Law. This will destroy your children, or your grandchildren and the next generation. That is why we are ready to die … because they are not safe anymore."

The President admitted that it is the technicality of the law that makes it hard for him to deal swiftly with the problem of illegal drugs and criminality.

He added, “if that problem outlasts me, for whatever reason, mamatay ako, matanggal, oh ano sa buhay na ito. Sinabi ko sa inyo, isa sa mga opisyal, do not, do not abandon. Resolbahin ninyo ang problema na iyan kasi sisirain ang Pilipinas niyan.” (If that problem outlasts me, for whatever reason, I died, I am removed from this life. I say to you, I said to one of your officers, do not, do not abandon it. Resolve this problem because this will destroy the Philippines.)

He ended his speech by extolling the troops to act on their own in this wise.

It is my opinion that if President Duterte will suddenly be gone, then the military will act on its own and take control of the government. (Atty. Al Vitangcol)

Yes, there are a lot of possibilities if worse comes to worst and we suddenly become a leaderless country. But for now let us give our support to President Duterte but be very vigilant and carry a lot of prayers in our heart that such eventuality will not happen because all of us will be dragged into the pits. Let's hope that will not be our destination. Sadly, it is now rumored that some of the people in the President’s loop are not thinking the same and few were concerned about is “what’s in it for me” coupled with arrogance.  They should gather their act together and make his presidency lasts up to the last day.

Wednesday, September 21, 2016

China's 5th Column by Erick San Juan

America’s overall image around the world remains largely positive. Across the nations surveyed (excluding the U.S.), a median of 69% hold a favorable opinion of the U.S., while just 24% express an unfavorable view. However, there is significant variation among regions and countries.

In the aftermath of the Great Recession, many foreign commentators including Americans remarked that the era of U.S. dominance of the global economy and position as sole superpower were at an end. However, in the intervening years, a sustained economic recovery in the U.S. has bolstered its leadership credentials, and in the current survey, about twice as many people worldwide say that the U.S., and not China, is the world’s leading economy.

Nonetheless, global public perception continue to express the view that China either has or eventually will replace the U.S. as the leading superpower. (Source Pew Research Center)

America’s image is mostly positive among the Asian nations polled. Among these countries surveyed was the Philippines with an 85 percent score in 2014 and 92 percent in 2015 according to the Global Attitudes Project of Pew Research Center in Washington DC. People were asked “Do you have a favorable or unfavorable view of the US?”

Methinks we still maintain a high percentage score up to this moment with a favorable view of the US in spite of the ‘bullish’ attitude of our president towards some high-ranking American officials. Some observers believe that President Rody Duterte, in the midst of his balancing act between the US and China, is actually showing that he favors China more.

But the present administration has to be wary because the current war on drugs not only in and out of the largest prison camp like the National Bilibid Prison involves some confirmed Triad gang Chinese nationals. And the perennial problem in the South China Sea over territories that we won from the Hague’s Permanent Court of Arbitration is not being recognized and respected by China, and in the process, our fishermen are still being ‘harassed’.

The perception is that the US is still the better 'devil' that we know than the red Chinese who has exported their underworld ops to our country instead of being grateful to the Filipinos who gave them comfort several times and second home where they now become the ‘novo’ rich.

We have to be wary of China’s sleepers (hybernated spies) and DPA (deep penetration agents) pretending to be part of the social media and our society. They are just waiting in the wings to take over anytime.

Remember the Japanese agents in the Philippines before the second world war. Most of them are lowly employees, drivers, gardeners, small time merchants, etc. but when the war erupted, they metamorphosed and our parents were shocked to know that their neighbor was a military officer of the Japanese Imperial Army.

It could be worst this time, these pro-Beijing ethnic Chinese basically control everything. Many politicians, key government functionaries, even some officials in our AFP, PNP, judiciary and the 'church' are now in their pockets.

Be vigilant always. These sleepers are now bold enough to attack us. The mere fact that even their Facebook pages and social media accounts are fictitious.

And I got this message from a rich friend from China- "it’s a pity that overseas Chinese especially in the Philippines thought that China can save them in a nuke war. We have more billionaires here in China not flaunting their wealth nor included at Forbes Magazine richest. If China's nuke hit the Philippines, they will be part of the so called collateral damage whether they like it or not." 

Who do we believe now? Beware of the propaganda machines. The program is on.


Wednesday, September 14, 2016

Live Bullet War Exercises, A Prelude To A Real War? By Erick San Juan

 Live Bullet War Exercises, A Prelude To A Real War? By Erick San Juan

The fifth annual China-Russia naval drill (that will go on for eight days) started last Monday, featuring stalwarts from both navies in action at the eastern waters of Zhanjiang, in Guangdong province, the HQ of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) Navy Nanhai Fleet.

Considering this is the first time that the Joint Sea is happening in the South China Sea, apocalyptic alarms from the usual suspects could not be more predictable – and thoroughly dismissed by the Beijing leadership. (Pepe Escobar @Reuters online)

Usually, the joint military exercise between Russia and China took place in the Sea of Japan also known as East Asia.

What a coincidence that a US military drill named 'Variant Shield', 2,000 miles to the east, the US military around the Pacific gathered for a two weeks drill with 18,000 personnel, 180 aircrafts and USS Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier.

Overheard that President Rody Duterte said that any possible miscalculation during such naval exercise in the contested area, using live ammunitions at that, might lead to a regional conflict. Ominous?

But can we blame President Duterte by thinking such possibility might happen? Actually there are other observers who feel the same and fear the same might just occur if either side will not be careful during the military exercises.

It is in this context that we should allow and continue our military relationship with the US, whether we like it or not, our status as a treaty ally of the US did not start last June 30, 2016. With the cooperation of our past leaders (others were collaborators) with Uncle Sam in the name of national security and to preserve democracy, various treaties were signed.

Revisiting some of these treaties by the present administration will somehow correct the lopsided parts where we are being shortchanged and the fact that such agreements should be ratified by the proper institutions like our Congress and not just the Executive branch.

Of course we welcome the statement of President Duterte of an independent foreign policy for the country but it should be handled with utmost diplomacy without hurting our existing allies for so many years now. And like any policy, it should be without bias and always for the common good and not only for the favored few. Pres. Duterte if he will do it right, can use this as a leverage and his charting an independent policy will be a good bargaining point with the Americans and with China. A balancing act that should be supported by the people.

In the course of the President’s balancing act locally and globally, he should listen to the Filipino people who believe in him and in what he can do for the good of this nation if he doesn’t want to be called a dictator in the making.

In his article, Duterte’s ‘shock and awe’ diplomacy, La Salle professor Richard Javad Heydarian cited some of his observations on the President’s kind of diplomacy and his attitude towards certain matters – “For those, who have underestimated his ability to reconfigure existing relations with the Southeast Asian country’s most enduring ally, the United States, the past two weeks have been a rude awakening. Rapidly consolidating power over key institutions of the state, and backed up by robust support among various civil society groups, Duterte is in a position to redirect the Philippines’ foreign policy like none of his predecessors."

“I’m really a rude person. I’m enjoying my last time as a rude person,” Duterte famously promised earlier. “When I become president, when I take my oath of office . . . there will be a metamorphosis.” It was a statement of re-assurance that compelled many to (mistakenly) presume that Duterte’s tough campaign-period rhetoric – including those directed at America – was nothing but a clever gimmick.

So when Duterte embarked on his global diplomatic debut, attending the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit, many were expecting a more subdued and statesmanlike Duterte. Instead, the world witnessed a Hyde and Jekyll diplomatic behavior. Duterte, who accepted the Philippines’ (rotational) chairmanship of the regional group, gracefully embraced his fellow Asian leaders, who appreciated his pragmatism on the South China Sea disputes and relations with China, while going on the offensive against the United States President Barack Obama, who was on his final official trip to Asia.

After uttering what appeared as expletives against the American president, the much-anticipated Obama-Duterte bilateral meeting was cancelled. Shortly after, amid growing panic over a potential diplomatic meltdown, Manila released a statement of “regret”, while the Obama administration reiterated that U.S.-Philippine relations remain “rock solid.” Duterte clarified that his foul-mouthed remarks weren’t directed at Obama, who reassured his Filipino partners that he didn’t take Duterte’s insulting remarks personally.

Yet, just when everyone thought that the damage control efforts were bearing fruit, Duterte once again went on the offensive. And most recently has even asked, albeit rhetorically so far, American special forces in the troubled region of Mindanao to get out of the country. He has also made it clear that he is setting his sights on more robust ties, including military, with eastern powers of Russia and China. In fact, Duterte is expected to embark on his state visit to China, a first by any Filipino leader, in coming weeks. In a span of months, Philippine-US relations have gone from special and sacrosanct to uncertain and jittery. And this seems to be the new normal in one of the most intimate and enduring bilateral relations on the planet.”

Are we going to end the most enduring bilateral relations that we had for years now and start a new bilateral relations with China?

Methinks it's better to deal with the 'devil' we know than a perceived 'angel' with the same clothes and interest like the demon. I hope Pres. Duterte will be in the right direction to correct our misfortunes.

Just asking.

Wednesday, September 7, 2016

Hegemony by Design by Erick San Juan

Hegemony by Design by Erick San Juan

When you study how the United States goes to war, there is a prevalent, though not perfect, pattern. The triggering event is often a sudden crisis that galvanizes popular opinion and becomes the immediate occasion for military intervention, but subsequently is exposed as a misguided perception or outright fabrication. (Source: Joseph Ellis, Los Angeles Times, 7-6-2014)                                                                                                                          

Such pattern, most of the time is considered as false flag operation by a lot of pundits where a superpower wanted to maintain a unipolar world – hegemony over sovereign states. Gradually this 'op' is losing its clout because world leaders are now beginning to realize that humankind has to shift to multipolar world.

Of course the mighty 'Uncle' will not allow such move and so is the containment of Russia and China, countries advocating a multipolar world. Their effort ranges from economic to military cooperation. With the initiative of both Russia and China, there are several cooperation, coalitions and organizations created to counter the hegemony of a single power over the world. Despite that these two big powers don't really trust each other, using the principle of- 'The enemy of my enemy is my friend', they have to cooperate with each other in some ways to protect their interests.

To name some, from the article of Pepe Escobar published in the Information Clearing House – “Slowly but surely — see for instance the possibility of an ATM (Ankara-Tehran-Moscow) coalition in the making — global power continues to insist on shifting East. That goes beyond Russia's pivoting to Asia; Germany's industrialists are just waiting for the right political conjunction, before the end of the decade, to also pivot to Asia, conforming a BMB (Berlin-Moscow-Beijing) coalition.

Germany already rules over Europe. The only way for a global trade power to solidify its reach is to go East. NATO member Germany, with a GDP that outstrips the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, is not even allowed to share information with the "Five Eyes" secret cabal.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, years ago, was keen on a Lisbon-to-Vladivostok emporium. He may eventually be rewarded — delayed gratification?— by BMB, a trade/economic union that, combined with the Chinese-driven One Belt, One Road (OBOR), will eventually dwarf and effectively replace the dwindling post-WWII Anglo-Saxon crafted/controlled international order.

This inexorable movement East underscores all the interconnections — and evolving connectivity — related to the New Silk Roads, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the BRICS's New Development Bank (NDB), the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), the Eurasia Economic Union (EEU). The crux of RC, the Russia-China strategic partnership, is to make the multipolar, post-Atlantic world happen. Or, updating Ezra Pound, to Make It New.

Such luminary ideologues as Dr. Zbig "Grand Chessboard" Brzezinski — foreign policy mentor to President Barack Obama — are supremely dejected.

When Brzezinski looks at progressive Eurasia integration, he simply cannot fail to detect how those "three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy" he outlined in 'The Grand Chessboard' are simply dissolving; "to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together."

Those GCC vassals — starting with the House of Saud — are now terrified about their own security; same with the hysteric Baltics. Tributaries are not pliant anymore — and that includes an array of Europeans. The "barbarians" coming together are in fact old civilizations — China, Persia, Russia — fed up with upstart-controlled unipolarity.

Unsurprisingly, to "contain" RC, defined as "potentially threatening" (the Pentagon considers the threats are existential) Brzezinski suggests — what else — Divide and Rule; as in "containing the least predictable but potentially the most likely to overreach." Still he doesn't know which is which; "Currently, the more likely to overreach is Russia, but in the longer run it could be China."   

The board game will have to reach a point where a change of players and rules of the game be created in order to prevent a world war. Although we have to accept that the change of players on the side of the single superpower will affect the pivot from unipolar to multipolar, or worst to stage a war or not.

“In many aspects, not much has changed from 24 years ago when, only three months after the dissolution of the USSR, the Pentagon's Defense Planning Guidance proclaimed.

"Our first objective is to prevent the reemergence of a new rival…This requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power. These regions include Western Europe, East Asia, the territory of the former Soviet Union and southwest Asia."

Talk about a prescient road map of what's happening right now; the "rival",  hostile power is actually two powers involved in a strategic partnership: Russia and China. 

Compounding this Pentagon nightmare, the endgame keeps drawing near; the next manifestations and reverberations of the never-ending 2008 financial crisis may eventually torpedo the fundamentals of the global "order" — as in the petrodollar racket/tributary scam.

There will be blood. Hillary Clinton smells it already — from Syria to Iran to the South China Sea. The question is whether she — and virtually the whole Beltway establishment behind her — will be mad enough to provoke Russia and China and buy a one-way ticket to post-MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) territory.”

The programmed world war is coming as designed. Can the emerging multipolar world prevent it from happening? Scary indeed.