Ang HeretikoGamot Sa Lason
Rizalist2006
read my profile
sign my guestbook

Visit Rizalist2006's Xanga Site!

Name: Ang
Country: Philippines
Metro: Manila
Gender: Male


Message: message meEmail: email me
Website: visit my website


Member Since: 12/2/2005

SubscriptionsSites I Read

Posting Calendar

|<< oldest | newest >>|
view all weblog archives

Get Involved!

Suggest a link

Recommend to friend

Create a site


Sunday, December 18, 2005

MONDAY IN THE ARCHIPELAGO: Education Revolution

EUGENIA D. APOSTOL Chair of the Worldwide People Power Foundation (FWWPP) writes a Commentary in the Philippine Daily Inquirer today on the Education Revolution, a movement launched by her organization in 2002.  That Commentary follows last week's editorial, Values Education at Every Opportunity, which is a report on the dismal showing of the Philippines in the  2003 Trends in Math & Science Study. She does not mention that 2003 is a repeat of its cellar-dweller performances in 1995 and 1999.

But what is wrong with Philippine Education in the view of Ms. Apostol and FWWPP?  Here is an excerpt --

"The crisis facing Philippine education is already out in the open, but learning outcomes form only part of the picture. What about the school's inherent role in the formation of positive civic values among our youths.

You see, private foundations and NGOs, including the FWWPP, have made substantial donations to help meet the quite enormous resource gaps that our public schools face every year. In 2004 for instance, Corporate Giving for Education was estimated at P1.2 billion.

Unfortunately, all this philanthropy loses luster when our schools still turn out unskilled graduates who have a vague appreciation of citizenhood and a weak understanding of democratic principle.

In fact, better resources alone do not necessary mean quality education. Remember Lope De Vega High School? Despite the lack of facilities, the students of this Samar high school topped the most recent National Achievement Tests because the entire community committed itself to making quality education its top priority."

I am sorely puzzled that after acknowledging the scientific findings of TIMSS, Ms. Apostol and FWWPP choose to pin the blame for the failures of philantropy and public spending on education on a lack of emphasis on "the inherent role" of the schools to promote "the formation of positive civic values among our youths," thus producing "graduates who have a vague appreciation of citizenhood and a weak understanding of democratic principle."

It is this kind of steadfast blindness to the obvious that keeps public education in the Philippines no better, according to TIMSS, than Somalia or Haiti.  For even TIMSS pointed out  it is the CONGESTION of the curriculum with all sorts of "extra curriculars" like Values Education, Nationalist Education (Makabayan) and all sorts of other politically-motivated subjects.

Yet that is exactly what FWWPP seems to stand for. More "values education".  The real problems lie in less ethereal realities.  For example, she does not mention the fact that nearly 94% of the P125 billion proposed budget for public education in 2006 will go to SALARIES for the over 400,000 teachers AND bureaucrats that run the Dept. of Education.  This is like running Fedex (the package delivery leader) with 400,000 drivers on lifetime contracts, but without buying trucks, planes, phones or computers, since the education budget does not allocate anywhere near what it should for school buildings, textbooks, computers, science labs, and a system that doesn't PASS every single one of its 20,000,000 students every year, regardless of PERFORMANCE. 

You see, public education in the Philippines is really a WELFARE PROJECT for the teachers and bureaucrats, who are the indentured servants of the Political Mafias, especially at election time, when the teachers get to risk their lives counting the votes and manning the polling places.

For the students, Public Education is a worthless AGING VAT.


Thursday, December 15, 2005

Nauunahan na tayo ng mga Iraqi sa Demokrasya


Sunday, December 11, 2005

RA 4200 THE ANTI WIRE TAPPING LAW

For the purposes of this discussion a single statement is assumed to be true: That Military Intelligence Group MIG-21, a unit of the Intelligence Services of the AFP (ISAFP), under unknown authority, conducted a wiretapping operation on high government officials including the President of the Philippines and a member of the Commission on Elections during the election period in 2004.


REPUBLIC ACT NO. 4200
 
AN ACT TO PROHIBIT AND PENALIZE WIRE TAPPING AND OTHER RELATED VIOLATIONS OF THE PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

SECTION [1A]. It shall be unlawful for any person, not being authorized by all the parties to any private communication or spoken word, to tap any wire or cable, or by using any other device or arrangement, to secretly overhear, intercept, or record such communication or spoken word by using a device commonly known as a dictaphone or dictagraph or detectaphone or walkie-talkie or tape recorder, or however otherwise described:

CAVEAT: It would certainly seem as if the members of MIG-21, like Sgt. Vidal Doble,  engaged in some activities enumerated in Section (1A) above, since they recorded the conversations they were "wiretapping" in the Blue Rooms of ISAFP.  Most likely however, they were acting under the control of the ISAFP chain of command.

[1B] It shall also be unlawful for any person, be he a participant or not in the act or acts penalized in the next preceding sentence, to knowingly possess any tape record, wire record, disc record, or any other such record, or copies thereof, of any communication or spoken word secured either before or after the effective date of this Act in the manner prohibited by this law; or to replay the same for any other person or persons; or to communicate the contents thereof, either verbally or in writing, or to furnish transcriptions thereof, whether complete or partial, to any other person: Provided, That the use of such record or any copies thereof as evidence in any civil, criminal investigation or trial of offenses mentioned in Section 3 hereof, shall not be covered by this prohibition.

SECTION 2. Any person who wilfully or knowingly does or who shall aid, permit, or cause to be done any of the acts declared to be unlawful in the preceding section or who violates the provisions of the following section or of any order issued thereunder, or aids, permits, or causes such violation shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than six months or more than six years and with the accessory penalty of perpetual absolute disqualification from public office if the offender be a public official at the time of the commission of the offense, and, if the offender is an alien he shall be subject to deportation proceedings. chan robles virtual law library

SECTION 3. Nothing contained in this Act, however, shall render it unlawful or punishable for any peace officer, who is authorized by a written order of the Court, to execute any of the acts declared to be unlawful in the two preceding sections in cases involving the crimes of treason, espionage, provoking war and disloyalty in case of war, piracy, mutiny in the high seas, rebellion, conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion, inciting to rebellion, sedition, conspiracy to commit sedition, inciting to sedition, kidnapping as defined by the Revised Penal Code, and violations of Commonwealth Act No. 616, punishing espionage and other offenses against national security: Provided, That such written order shall only be issued or granted upon written application and the examination under oath or affirmation of the applicant and the witnesses he may produce and a showing: (1) that there are reasonable grounds to believe that any of the crimes enumerated hereinabove has been committed or is being committed or is about to be committed: Provided, however, That in cases involving the offenses of rebellion, conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion, inciting to rebellion, sedition, conspiracy to commit sedition, and inciting to sedition, such authority shall be granted only upon prior proof that a rebellion or acts of sedition, as the case may be, have actually been or are being committed; (2) that there are reasonable grounds to believe that evidence will be obtained essential to the conviction of any person for, or to the solution of, or to the prevention of, any such crimes; and (3) that there are no other means readily available for obtaining such evidence.  chan robles virtual law library

The order granted or issued shall specify: (1) the identity of the person or persons whose communications, conversations, discussions, or spoken words are to be overheard, intercepted, or recorded and, in the case of telegraphic or telephonic communications, the telegraph line or the telephone number involved and its location; (2) the identity of the peace officer authorized to overhear, intercept, or record the communications, conversations, discussions, or spoken words; (3) the offense or offenses committed or sought to be prevented; and (4) the period of the authorization. The authorization shall be effective for the period specified in the order which shall not exceed sixty (60) days from the date of issuance of the order, unless extended or renewed by the court upon being satisfied that such extension or renewal is in the public interest.

All recordings made under court authorization shall, within forty-eight hours after the expiration of the period fixed in the order, be deposited with the court in a sealed envelope or sealed package, and shall be accompanied by an affidavit of the peace officer granted such authority stating the number of recordings made, the dates and times covered by each recording, the number of tapes, discs, or records included in the deposit, and certifying that no duplicates or copies of the whole or any part thereof have been made, or if made, that all such duplicates or copies are included in the envelope or package deposited with the court. The envelope or package so deposited shall not be opened, or the recordings replayed, or used in evidence, or their contents revealed, except upon order of the court, which shall not be granted except upon motion, with due notice and opportunity to be heard to the person or persons whose conversation or communications have been recorded. chan robles virtual law library

The court referred to in this section shall be understood to mean the Court of First Instance within whose territorial jurisdiction the acts for which authority is applied for are to be executed.

SECTION 4. Any communication or spoken word, or the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of the same or any part thereof, or any information therein contained obtained or secured by any person in violation of the preceding sections of this Act shall not be admissible in evidence in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative or administrative hearing or investigation.

SECTION 5. All laws inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed or accordingly amended. chan robles virtual law library

SECTION 6. This Act shall take effect upon its approval.


GARCILLANO'S SECOND PETITION

PDI
FORMER Commission on Elections (Comelec) commissioner Virgilio Garcillano has asked the Supreme Court to stop lawmakers at the House of Representatives from airing anew wiretapped recordings of his alleged conversations with President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo purportedly on the 2004 election.

In his petition for prohibition and injunction, Garcillano, through his lawyer Eddie Tamondong, said the wiretapped tapes were illegal and inadmissible in court.

He said the high court should prohibit lawmakers from using the wiretapped conversation as basis for their committee report.

"You cannot use something that is illegal as basis for an official committee report," Tamondong said Friday.

Garcillano on Thursday asked the Supreme Court to nullify the warrant of arrest issued by the House after he failed to appear in its investigation of the wiretapped tapes where he and the President were allegedly heard discussing how to manipulate the results of the election.


Saturday, December 10, 2005

ANG BATAS NA NILABAG NG ISAFP DIUMANO

Heto na nga ang tanyag na ANTI-WIRETAPPING ACT, na sinasabi naman ni Senate President Frank Drilon ay nilibag ng Intelligence Service of the AFP.  Naku! Matindi ito. Ang mga mapapatunayang lumabag sa batas na ito ay may malaking kasalan sa National Security ng Pinas...

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 4200
 
AN ACT TO PROHIBIT AND PENALIZE WIRE TAPPING AND OTHER RELATED VIOLATIONS OF THE PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

SECTION 1. It shall be unlawful for any person, not being authorized by all the parties to any private communication or spoken word, to tap any wire or cable, or by using any other device or arrangement, to secretly overhear, intercept, or record such communication or spoken word by using a device commonly known as a dictaphone or dictagraph or detectaphone or walkie-talkie or tape recorder, or however otherwise described



Next 5 >>