Poison on Paper

[psychoanaleesis]

Here I was, browsing the net, looking for news about what's happening in my country, the Philippines and I happen to come across this news about how the "Right to Reply" Bill passed the Philippine Senate, that is to say, they approved it and now the journalists of this country are protesting against by wearing black. Not at least bit shocked for I know for a fact that those goons have been springing on its supposed "constituents" and citizens laws which are not only preposterous but also detrimental to the inalienable rights i.e. Life, Liberty and Property held by persons and organizations in which they belong. These goons, and I say goons because they hold the guns by which they force people (media, journalists in this matter) to tell/write/print/publish the "other side" of a story that they reserve the right to broadcast.

This bill is, on the surface, a redundancy of the constitutional Freedom of Expression which is derived from the right to Liberty. Freedom of Expression essentially implies that YOU reserve the right to "say" or "not to say" something regarding a person, object, organization, etc. So why is the frigging Senate reiterating (on the surface) the right of Freedom of Expression but actually choking it out? Is it supposedly to promote equality amongst Plaintiff and the Accused in the papers/websites/any media or is it to force an author to commit perjury to himself by compulsory delimiting his opinions?

The right basically states that the accused (not necessarily brought to a court of law) can give an opinion to his defense using the same media as the complainant with same amount of "space" to be occupied. So for example, a newspaper prints someone with a complaint saying, "blah,blah,blah (points to another person/organization)..." the accused has the "right" to call up the editor and have him post his own reply (for free!) but how about if this person can refute 3 out of 3 the "blahs" plus, have an extra say on the matter? Why do they force the editor to "cut-out" some portions if every word in that opinion bears significant weight on the matter-at-hand? That's just on the sheets mind you.

Another example would be in the airwaves: Senator A says something about Senator B which lasts for 10s on media time, and Senator B has a lengthier version say, lasting 20s but one could not edit it altogether for the statement would lose its coherency and other factors essential to proper presentation? Of course, it is up to the journalist to go on publishing this (and making it presentable).

Questionable statement to this bill are: Who is the media? What is the delimitation of this bill? Section 1 of Bill 2150 states that all accused persons... "have the right to reply to charges published (in any media) circulated commercially or free..." and I'm thinking, "What the fuck are these politicians thinking or if they think at all? If you mean by free media, then that means this blog through me, as it's administrator would have to right down with the same length or in this same space reactions, commentaries, 'replies' of each and every bastard that would be offended by my blogs and opinions and furthermore, as the owner, editor, administrator of this space I would have to edit theirs to make it more 'presentable' lest I get hellfire from those who again wants to reply (directly or indirectly) accused." Should this bill be enacted into a law, I'd be one of the first to boycott this with my last post saying: "Go Screw Yourselves!"

This Bill is basically silencing freedom of speech by saying, "Shut the Fuck Up" and it asks you to lose the responsibility of telling the side(s) of a story that interests you because every word that you utter or key-in can, and will be used against you (by your own mind!) because you have offended or "accused" some fool of something whether directly or indirectly.

If you fail to say/print/publish his reply then you will be incarcerated and be charged fine as much as PHP50,000.00 (roughly $1,000.00) can be imposed on you. The result? No person can say an opinion about anything (against or for) another person or topic without dreading the fear of having someone else (through the Government) encroaching on their pockets, freedom and lives anymore. You can't give your 10 cents without being robbed of your whole wallet.

I must say, however, that those people can and may "reply" but to their own accord. No need to say that again because it is guaranteed by the constitution and essentially by being human. Nevertheless it goes without saying or implies that they use their own resources and media and method and whatever "arsenal" they might possess. Never force anyone to consider something which they do not want or need.

Let me keep my freedom to live my life and express it according to my will OR kill me right here and now using your guns with everybody as a witnessing (since I am writing against the "Ruling body" of this country).

Believe me, this is not the first nor the last of the attempt of these marauders and parasites on our life, liberty and property. We just have to be vigilant of these bastards and shoot to kill them or disarm their weapons in defense of our values. Otherwise, this be a dose of poison in your mind which will kill you as quickly as you accepted it.

Right to Reply Bill

Edited March 18, 2010 by David Lee

[Brant Gaede]

This kind of legislation encourages real violence for it chokes off free speech.

--Brant

[RagJohn]

Why not just get together some $, pay some US gal to marry you, and get the hell out? If married, need twice as much $, divorce her, and pay TWO people, one to marry her, one to marry you? If that much $ is not possible, can probably just learn to sail, get an inflatable by one means or another, and get out. The Polynesians crossed much of the Pacific in canoes, without sail, you know? I'd look into bribing the captain of a freighter, or really effectively stowing away (say in a sealed crate,with water, food, waste management gear,gear to listen-look outside of the crate (thru a little hole) and a way to break out of the crate, too.