maria ressa of rappler.com interview with atty. imbong, lawyer for petitioners against the RH Law at the SC
a few things:
- atty. imbong keeps referring to the interviewer as “ressa” or in many parts as “riza”. the interviewer’s name is maria ressa.
- the interview questions and answers are actually a rehash of the debates done in twitter on the rh bill specially those raised by the anti rh bill groups who claim to be devout catholics and to a large part those raised in the debates in the senate and congress also raised by the anti rh bill senators and congressmen.
- the interview hardly touched on the points of law, arguments or merits raised by the petitioners against the RH Law at the SC.
- in today’s interview maria ressa of rappler.com had asked the following questions from the #gangsters
- from popi sunga at around 2:50
- ressa extends the invitation from #gangsters for a tweetup with atty imbong at around 5:25 of the 3rd video. ressa also says “guys, gotta get a name that is ano…”
click here :
#gangsters tweetup #VI (open to all)
a few things happened yesterday at the House Of Representatives on the RH Bill (reproductive health bill) – the bill took a victory in congress when the anti rh bill congressmen were blocked by the house leadership and allowed the discussion to proceed on the rh bill. anti rh bill congressmen (and anti rh bill senators) have resorted to shameless delays and filibustering moves. but this time the house leadership finally did it’s job and got it going for the rh bill.
the end result was that the house has adapted the proposed amendments on the rh bill with no debate unlike what happened in the senate. this is the victory that the rh bill has claimed at the house.
read rappler.com article here: http://www.rappler.com/nation/16804-small-victory-for-rh-bill-in-house
but that was not just what happened.
the other day, twitter was on fire when rh bill supporter rep. kimi conjuangco tweeted about her encounter with majority floor leader (MFL) boyet gonzales when he apparently “threatened” conjuangco and told her to “shut up” on the rh bill. gonzales apparently also said that it was over for the rh bill in the current congress and should they just “repackage” it for the next congress.
but a day did make a difference in this drama between cojuangco and gonzales. cojuangco after yesterday’s victory at the house tweeted this:
all is well that ends well – that can be applicable here. but we just wonder why cojuangco apologized to gonzales when the previous day she said gonzales has “threatened” her and that from her tweets it was gonzales who had a few things to apologize to her for. this was quite a sudden change and in fact a complete reversal.
we suppose strange things happen in congress that us humans will never be able to understand.
we wondered what are the amendments that the house adapted. and this is where we are at on the rh bill.
In a press statement, Lagman listed the amendments as the following:
1. The State guarantees public access to and relevant information and education on medically safe, legal, ethical, affordable, effective and quality reproductive health care services, methods, devices and supplies which do not prevent implantation of a fertilized ovum as determined by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
2. The State shall likewise prioritize the needs of poor women and men in marginalized households as identified by the National Household Targeting System for Poverty Reduction (NHTS-PR) and other government measures of identifying marginalization, who shall be voluntary beneficiaries of reproductive health care, services and supplies for free.
3. The State shall also provide funding support to promote modern-natural methods of family planning consistent with the needs of acceptors.
4. The State shall promote openness to life, provided that parents bring forth to the world only those children that they can raise in a truly humane way.
5. There shall be no demographic and population targets and the mitigation, promotion and/or stabilization of the population growth rate are incidental to the advancement of reproductive health and sustainable human development.
6. Family planning information and services shall include as a first priority making women of reproductive age fully aware of their respective fertility cycles.
7. The teaching of reproductive health and sexuality education shall be promoted and conducted with due deference to cultural, religious and ethical norms of various communities.
8. Flexibility in the teaching of reproductive health and sexuality education shall be accorded to sectarian schools within the provisions and parameters of the Section on age-appropriate mandatory reproductive health and sexuality education.
9. The FDA shall update the Philippine National Drug Formulary (PNDF) with respect to modern family planning products and supplies in accordance with standard medical practice.
The foregoing amendments are contained in the proposed substitute bill which was announced by Majority Leader Neptali Gonzales, Jr. in the plenary and distributed to all Members of the House.
First batch of amendments
1. Deletion of the provision on “Ideal Family Size” to assure critics that the bill does not impose a “two-child policy” like China’s “one-child policy”. The original version merely contemplates an ideal norm which is neither mandatory, compulsory nor punitive.
2. Deletion of the section on “Employer’s Responsibilities” to address concerns that a similar provision in Article 134 of the Labor Code is already adequate.
3. Deletion of the section on “Family Planning Supplies as Essential Medicines” to accommodate objections that such a prior classification cannot be made by law. In lieu of the protested provision, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is charged with the determination of the safety, efficacy and classification of modern family planning products and supplies pursuant to existing law.
4. Deletion of the prohibited act on malicious disinformation in order to fully guarantee the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion.
5. Assurance of funding support to promote modern natural methods of family planning like the Billings, Sympto-Thermal and Standard Days methods.
6. Hospitals owned and operated by a religious group are given the option not to provide “a full range of modern family planning methods” in order to further guarantee religious freedom.
7. Imposition of penalties to pharmaceutical companies, whether domestic or multi-national, which collude with government officials and employees in the purchase, procurement and distribution of modern family planning supplies, products and devices, and/or contribute to partisan political activities, in order to disabuse the minds of critics that there is a pharmaceutical lobby for the enactment of the RH bill.
8. Deletion of the provision making the congressional Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) as the mandatory source for the acquisition and operation of the Mobile Health Care Service vehicles to respect the differing views of Congresspersons.
9. Emphasis that the bill is not a population control measure.
10. Parents are given the option not to allow their minor children to attend reproductive health and sexuality education classes to accord respect to religious convictions and beliefs. – Rappler.com
there were a few things we learned from this incident:
- there is a failure in the leadership of the House Of Representatives, the speaker of the house belmonte and majority floor leader boyet gonzales in marshaling the rh bill through congress. it is a failure as president noynoy aquino during the presidential election campaign and in the last SONA has said he supports the rh bill. belmonte and gonzales are aligned with aquino.
- the other failure of belmonte and gonzales is their inability to get the congressmen to attend sessions in congress. the delay on the rh bill vote has been hampered very much by a lack of quorum on days when rh bill advocates wanted to take the bill up in congress. getting member to attend HOR sessions we think is one of the most basic responsibilities and duties of the house leadership.
- the congressmen share the failings of the leadership on the responsibility of attending sessions in congress. as a taxpayer and citizen of the country, i am grossly disappointed that congressmen don’t seem to be doing their jobs. we know that as they hardly attend sessions, so it seems.
- the pro rh bill has the numbers in the house as shown from the vote that was taken adapting the amendments. that is, if there is a quorum.
majority floor leader boyet gonzales “threatens” rep. kimi cojuangco to “keep your mouth shut” on rhbill
we are posting here the screen caps of representative kimi cojuangco’s tweets this morning as they were tweeted and in sequence. rep. conjuangco is one of the leaders of the pro #rhbill at the house of representatives. we are posting here the exact screen caps at nothing added, nothing taken away. readers can make their own conclusions by reading them.
- MLF gonzales is aligned with president noynoy aquino and the president has given his support on the rhbill. in fact aquino has bravely taken flak from the catholic church for this support. at one point a bishop even threatened to “excommunicate” aquino for his stand. does this mean gonzales has broken away from aquino?
- gonzales seem to be playing some “let-me-fool-you-let-me-fool-everybody” political game where he is saying two different things to the people and media, to speaker of the house gonzales, congress, congressman edcel lagman (main proponent of the rh bill) and representative cojuangco. and the things gonzales is saying cannot be described as “honest”.
- gonzales “threatens” rep. cojuangco to “shut your mouth”. we were not there when these words were said but we should accept it as its recipient, cojuangco saw it as a “threat”. cojuangco is quite a lady, she has her own mind that she speaks out very well. threatening someone like cojuangco is really a very bad idea.
- which begs some questions – how many more “threats” have been given by gonzales and to how many more congressmen other than cojuangco? what will come next if cojuangco’s threats are not heeded? the majority floor leader at the HOR gets things done or undone through “threats”?
- where is rep gonzales on the rh bill? he appears to be against it based on this tweets and his “threats” to cojuangco. he is then going against the stand of the party that he belongs to, that of president aquino who is pro rh bill. has he declared his position to belmonte and the president? or did he “shut up” on that too?
- we have to admire congresswoman cojuangco for her tweets today. it may be a few days late (she said this happened some days ago) but revealing them today is good enough.
- she has the courage to go against the “boys club” (we hesitate to call it a “gentleman’s club” for its sleazy connotation and also, gonzales was no “gentleman” in this event. but then again, isn’t the HOR through this event is being very sleazy?) and spoke her mind and tell the twitter world what happened.
- it not only shows her courage, it shows her commitment to the cause of the rh bill and her strong and unwavering stand on principles and what is right.
- the rh bill we believe will benefit women, the poor, the pinoy family and the nation at large. cojuangco is standing up for those.
- courage as she is standing up against the majority floor leader who is also a seasoned politician and leader of the house.
- cojuangco will defend and uphold the principles she believes in and risk everything as a congresswoman. she knows the revelation can put her position in jeopardy but she is willing to put that on the table just so she defends what is right and what is principled.
kerry kennedy : sotto plagiarized words of my dad, offended at distortion of Robert F. Kennedy’s words
makes me wonder what disappointed kerry kennedy – the plagiarism that senator sotto did or that senator sotto didn’t understanductivand misused the quoted text?
my son asked me about this when he saw the nes on tv. i explained to him kerry is the daughter of the great robert kennedy and that she sent out a letter regarding the plagiarism that senator sotto did on the kennedy speech. i told my son kerry is also the president of this group called Robert F. Kennedy Center For Justice & Human Rights.
i told my son kerry called out the sotto on two things – that senator sotto no doubt plagiarized the speech of her dad and that sotto used the words he plagiarized to stop the rh bill which among other things promote free and open choice for women on their reproductive option while the passage that was plagiarized was meant to promote freedom and human rights.
my son who is 15 years old looked at me and plainly said : “it’s the opposite!”.
this is a 15 year old son who reached the correct conclusion on what sotto did just a split second after i explained to him what happened. how can a 63 year old and a senator at that not get that?
the kennedy name and family is one of the icons of America and of freedom. they occupy a large part of what is right and good about america. for robert kennedy’s speech used the way sotto did must be the one that hurts the most for kerry.
i don’t think she would have minded so much if the speech was plagiarized for the same values and reasons their family stand for and have been known for. but the plagiarized parts were actually used for things the kennedy family have been against for generations.
in twitter i said that the tagalog translation of kerry’s letter on the sotto plagiarism is this “nangopya na, tanga pa”.
and yes, senator sotto, kerry writes in tagalog too.
MANILA, Philippines – Long is the saga of Sottogate, yet allegations against Senator Tito Sotto continue.
Now 4 US copyright holders have spoken out, including the president of the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights: RFK’s daughter, Kerry Kennedy.
All this began again the other day, when Sarah Pope, Janice Formichella, and Peter Engelman issued a joint statement alleging that Sotto had “infringed on our intellectual property rights and plagiarized.”
Their protest was swiftly dismissed by Sotto and his staff, who, according to GMA News, “questioned its authenticity, pointing out that it did not even have an official letterhead.”
read full article here: http://www.rappler.com/nation/15858-kennedy-to-sotto-this-is-a-clear-case-of-plagiarism
sotto on rh bill is the laughing stock of social media, he victimized himself – patricia evangelista
The lightning rod
Tito Sotto is a victim, or so Tito Sotto claims. He believes he is the focus of a concerted effort by the heavily funded supporters of the Reproductive Health bill, all of whom are desperate to demonize him and weaken his resolve. He suspects he is the first senator to be made victim of cyberbullying. He has been insulted, criticized and threatened with lawsuits. His history has been exploited. It is a hatchet job, he says, a demolition job.
The senator is correct when he says that plagiarism has become the issue, instead of the nuances of the bill itself. He is also correct when he talks about the online response to his speeches. He is the laughingstock of cyberspace. “Sinotto” is a trending hashtag for plagiarized lines. The face that once decorated blockbuster movie billboards is a Facebook meme. When the senator used translated-into-Filipino chunks of Robert F. Kennedy’s 1966 Affirmation speech in his latest privilege speech, the online community responded with a slew of translated song lyrics and movie lines from Lady Gaga to Cherie Gil, all attributed to Tito Sotto.
He also finds it odd that none of his opponents, not a single one of his critics, has attempted to rebut the ideas he has put forward in his privilege speeches.
“I have not heard a response to any of the criticisms I have thrown against the RH bill.”
The senator is not correct. It is true that the plagiarism issue has made him less believable, far less credible, but advocates of the Reproductive Health bill have refuted his ideas point by point, in columns and blogs and television interviews, establishing his sources as outdated, his claims misrepresentations, and his statistics misinterpreted, while pointing out the fundamental factual error in his emotional claim that his child died in 1975 because his wife had ingested birth control pills. The pill he specified, Diane, was yet to be distributed the year he lost his son.