Filipino arrogance and stupidity (The...

Filipino arrogance and stupidity (Their conflicts in Sabah and SCS)

Posted in the China Forum

crazy Filipino people

Leduc, Canada

#1 Mar 11, 2013
We have seen the stupid cruel behaviors of the Sulu fighters who killed so many innocent villagers in Sabad early this month. They dismembered many dead bodies.

They still refuse to surrender to Malaysian armed forces even though MAF urge them to put down their weapons. So far they refuse to surrender. The MAF is seen being too soft by their own citizens when the Prime Minister and defense leaders repeatedly give the Sulus opportunities to surrender, rather than attacking them right away.

Quite many Filipino fighters were arrested by MAF and many were killed.

Now the some politicians in the Philippines try to talk about human rights of the Sulu fighters who have committed heinous crimes against innocent people in Sabad. That is blatant terrorism committed by these militiamen.

The stupid Pinoy politicians started a round of badmouthing against the Malaysia govt recently. Well, no one should be surprised because they want more votes from the people in the next election. As pointed out by a Yahoo news survey, the majority of Pinoys want the govt to take a stronger stand against Malaysia and take back Sabah.

So these stupid politicians blame Malaysia of slaughtering the Sulu fighters (instead of keeping themselves at a distance from these terrorists). So they said Malaysia is violating the human rights of the terrorists.

Are they as sympathetic with the innocent victims in Sabah?

Are they not stupid?
crazy Filipino people

Leduc, Canada

#2 Mar 11, 2013
Let see what other people say about the Pinoys in other conflicts.

The following is from comments posted by someone in the world forum.

http://www.topix.com/forum/world/TS8SFBNHKG6Q...

Psst… US isn’t with Unclos
By: Rigoberto Tiglao
Philippine Daily Inquirer

1:03 am | Thursday, May 10th, 2012

It’s been awkward—even comical—for the Aquino administration to be begging the United States for arms to defend our Scarborough Shoal claim, which it declared is based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos): the Americans aren’t with the convention.

The US—together with Israel and Turkey—is among 34 nations that have not ratified Unclos; they therefore officially do not recognize it. State Secretary Hillary Clinton in 2009 said the US Senate would ratify it soon. Three years later, it hasn’t even scheduled a vote on it.

The US’ rejection of Unclos—ratified by 162 nations including China and Russia—in fact unmasks American foreign policy’s basic guideline:“Might is right.” The US is the sole military global superpower now, its navy dwarfing that of Russia and China combined. Why would the US allow these 162 Unclos military weaklings tell what its all-powerful navy can and cannot do, where it can or cannot go?

Two Unclos provisions illustrate this point. Article 20:“In the territorial sea, submarines and other underwater vehicles are required to navigate on the surface and to show their flag.” Would American nuclear submarines, which routinely, secretly traverse Chinese and Russian waters want that? Article 88:“The high seas shall be reserved for peaceful purposes.” But international waters make up the base of US warships, from which it projects its military power globally.

President Aquino and his officials have been banging their fists on the table complaining to the world that China is refusing to have the dispute settled by the International Tribunal for Unclos.
They’re in for a surprise: The Philippines isn’t also with Unclos—when it comes to sovereignty disputes like that on Scarborough.
The Marcos government ratified Unclos in 1984. But it did not ratify the treaty in full, declaring that it doesn’t recognize Unclos on certain issues. Guess which?

On issues of sovereignty. Our country formally filed an eight-paragraph document when it ratified Unclos, which declared that nothing in the treaty would apply to its territorial claims. Its Paragraph 4 reads:“Such signing shall not in any manner impair or prejudice the sovereignty of the Philippines over any territory over which it exercises sovereign authority, such as the Kalayaan Islands, and the waters appurtenant thereto.”
In other words, we’ve declared that we do not recognize Unclos when it comes to our territorial disputes, such as that on Scarborough. The only body that can revise that restriction is the Philippine Senate.

And what were China’s qualifications when it ratified Unclos in 1996?

On issues of sovereignty. China in its own declaration said that it “reaffirms its sovereignty over all its archipelagos and islands as listed in article 2 of the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the territorial sea and the contiguous zone, which was promulgated on 25 February 1992.” That law declared as part of China what it called the Zhongsha Islands, which included Huangyan (Panatag to us).

In other words, both the Philippines and China—in fact most of the countries which ratified Unclos—don’t recognize the treaty when it comes to determining territorial disputes.

Didn’t they bother check what Unclos tribunal does? Of the 19 cases brought to it since 1997, nearly all were about maritime disputes, i.e., commercial vessels in some tiff with a foreign government. The only case that remotely dealt with sovereignty was about Burma’s (Myanmar) and Bangladesh’s maritime boundaries at the Bay of Bengal between the two countries.
crazy Filipino people

Leduc, Canada

#3 Mar 11, 2013
http://www.topix.com/forum/world/TR7OIC44D0EN...

Scarborough fail: How Aquino blew it
By: Rigoberto Tiglao
Philippine Daily Inquirer

2:52 am | Thursday, May 3rd, 2012
Solid as our territorial claims against China are, we could lose these areas if President Aquino keeps making colossal blunders on this front.

Blunder No. 1: The biggest, and the damage done probably irreparable until we get somebody else to represent our nation: Mr. Aquino deployed a warship, the BRP Gregorio del Pilar, to Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal to confront the Chinese fishermen, with naval soldiers even boarding their vessels.

With this move, Mr. Aquino made the Philippines the party militarizing the dispute. The Chinese must be thanking the President for giving them the higher moral ground in this crisis. It gave the hawks in the Chinese leadership all the ammunition they need to demand military action in Panatag.

The Chinese have squeezed every ounce of this blunder, claiming that a “Philippine warship harassed helpless Chinese fishermen who were seeking refuge from a storm inside Scarborough Shoal. It is the Philippine Navy that pointed their guns at our fishermen,” the Chinese embassy spokesman kept repeating.

The People’s Republic of China’s navy is known to be secretly but extensively patrolling the South China and West Philippine Seas. Yet China has never openly deployed naval ships in confrontations in disputed territories, so it wouldn’t be accused of militarizing the dispute. The vessels that went to Panatag to defend the fishermen weren’t even their “naval militia,” but—at least overtly—unarmed surveillance vessels of China’s Oceanic Administration and fisheries department.

Was Mr. Aquino hallucinating that BRP Gregorio del Pilar, our only real warship, was a mighty battleship that he can scare the Chinese away with?
crazy Filipino people

Leduc, Canada

#4 Mar 11, 2013
Mr. Aquino just made us the laughing stock of the world. After a few days confronting the Chinese vessels, our warship turned tail and returned to port, as it had ran out of drinking water, food, or fuel—or all of these.

This is even the worst time for Mr. Aquino to create a flashpoint in our territorial disputes with China. The once-every-decade transition of power in China is ongoing, to be formalized in October at the National Congress of China’s Communist Party, and an intense struggle between two factions has broken out. Each faction will try to appear to be the most nationalistic and most determined in defending China’s sovereignty. Currently, that means a hard-line stance on the Panatag crisis.

Blunder No. 2: Matching the deployment of a warship was our officials’ saber-rattling braggadocio that they will be defending our territory “at all costs.” Mr. Aquino himself set the pugnacious tone months back when he boasted that he would respond to threats in our backyard such as Recto bank “as if it were in Recto Avenue.”
There has been no combat situation in Panatag—at least not yet—and, after our warship left, there are only civilian Filipino and Chinese vessels there. Yet our defense secretary, the Navy chief, even the head of the Northern Luzon Military Command have been blabbering about the dispute with their martial tenor, making us look like the bellicose protagonist.

In contrast, who were speaking for China? Even the Chinese ambassador had the sense to keep her mouth shut. Those who talked publicly were the embassy spokesperson and a political counselor—both among the Chinese’ lowest-ranking diplomats here. In Beijing, it was solely the foreign ministry spokesman who commented on the crisis.(Only recently, after the Chinese felt they already successfully painted the Philippines as the aggressor did a Chinese general and the foreign affairs vice minister comment on the issue.)
How would we feel if the Chinese defense minister or China’s navy chief made belligerent statements when the crisis started?
crazy Filipino people

Leduc, Canada

#5 Mar 11, 2013
Blunder No. 3: Mr. Aquino has done nothing to repair Philippine-China relationship so that there is practically no venue for good-faith negotiations during such a serious crisis as the Scarborough flashpoint. China has not forgiven Mr. Aquino for failing to prosecute the officials who mishandled the 2010 Luneta hostage crisis in which eight Chinese were killed. Mr. Aquino has snubbed China’s official development aid, even demonizing these as prone to corruption.

Mr. Aquino has not even undertaken the most basic step in improving our relations with China: installing a Philippine ambassador in Beijing. For the Chinese and for the diplomatic community, having only a charge d’affaires in Beijing for so long is a veiled insult.

And why hasn’t he? Because Mr. Aquino insisted on long-time family friend Domingo Lee as envoy. Lee, however, is so comically unqualified that it was Sen. Sergio Osmeña III, a zealous administration man, who passionately fought against his confirmation. It’s been nearly a month since the Panatag crisis broke out; Aquino hasn’t even nominated an envoy to Beijing yet.
2 Cents

Taipei, Taiwan

#6 May 10, 2013
Yet another mistake by the Filipinos. Now they've shot and killed a fisherman from Taiwan.
pinoy is barbarian

Kowloon, Hong Kong

#7 May 10, 2013
of course, not all pinoy are bad, but those government officials, those police and military personnel. they are evil.

the police and military have no discipline at all. they are not well train, they don't have discipline. they are corrupt. they love money and love to invade.
2 Cents

Taipei, Taiwan

#8 May 16, 2013
I'm starting to believe those rumors about P-Noy being an idiot.
Philippines Observer

Edmonton, Canada

#9 May 16, 2013
Ambassador Rigoberto Tiglao criticised Acquino and deputies for their erred UNCLOS move.

Acquino's move is based on double standards but not the law.

http://hreplib.
wordpress.
com/2013/01/25/unclos-suit-a-p r-move-costly-for-us-a-boon-fo r-the-us-the-manila-times/

UNCLOS suit: A PR move, costly for us, a boon for the US | The Manila Times

Published on 25 January 2013
Written by Rigoberto D. Tiglao Columnist
Philippines Observer

Edmonton, Canada

#10 May 16, 2013
"...The suit is a PR operation that internationally humiliates China. Brilliant perhaps, but it will be at a high cost to our country."
Why only us? And who or what would really benefit from that move? For a hint, just check out the foreign affairs department’s website, which for several days now shows del Rosario smiling ear-to-ear giving outgoing US State Secretary Hillary Clinton the government’s highest award. Isn’t del Rosario wondering why of the planet’s over hundred countries, not one sovereign state has given Clinton such an award—not even Afghanistan and Iraq, whose governments the US controls?

Del Rosario didn’t even bother to distance the suit from the US by contracting a Washington firm, Foley and Hoag, which represented Georgia in its suit in 2008 asking the International Court of Justice to stop Russia’s alleged campaign of ethnic cleansing in South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

To understand why del Rosario’s move is merely a PR move that would benefit the US we have to understand what UNCLOS really is, to realize how the Foreign Affairs department either misunderstands it or just deliberately misinforms the public about it.

In the first place, despite the use of the word “law” in the term “Law of the Sea,” UNCLOS is essentially a treaty, not some “law” passed by a World Congress every nation has to comply with, or else. A country is bound by UNCLOS only it if agrees to it—“ratifies” is the technical word. A country can even agree to some of its provisions but not all.

Mrs. Clinton probably squirmed in her seat in her press conference with del Rosario when he said again and again that China should comply with UNCLOS.

The US—together with Israel and Turkey—is among 34 nations that have not ratified Unclos; they therefore officially do not recognize it. Clinton in her confirmation meeting in 2009 in fact promised that one of her main goals would be to convince the US Senate to ratify it. Three years later, the Senate it hasn’t even scheduled a vote on it, and Clinton left her post two days ago.

Unlike del Rosario’s favorite superpower, China ratified UNCLOS in 2006 but qualified this that nothing in UNCLOS can challenge its sovereignty over its “archipelagoes and islands as listed 2 of the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the territorial sea and contiguous zone, which was promulgated on 25 February 1992.” That includes all of the areas such as the Spratlys and Panatag, which the Philippines and four other countries claim are theirs. That means any case brought before UNCLOS cannot involve challenges to China’s territory."
Philippines Observer

Edmonton, Canada

#11 May 16, 2013
Unfair? But that’s also the qualification we made, way back in 1982 and 1984—which means that China could even say it was merely doing what the Philippines did. The very first paragraph of our declaration says:“The signing of the Convention by the Republic of the Philippines shall not in any manner impair or prejudice the sovereign rights of the Republic of the Philippines under and arising from the Constitution of the Philippines.” Which means whatever UNCLOS is, whatever suits undertaken under it, these cannot affect any of our territorial claims.

In his heavily American accent, del Rosario pompously declared in his press conference Tuesday:“The Philippines asserts that the Arbitral Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear and make an award” since “UNCLOS provides that settlement of disputes concerning the interpretation and application of this Convention may be referred by the Parties for resolution under Part XV of UNCLOS.’”

Is del Rosario aware of the words he is uttering?“Disputes. Referred by the Parties.” It has to be referred to an “Arbitral Tribunal” not just by one Party (the Philippines) but by both parties (Philippines and China).

Del Rosario obviously didn’t read UNCLOS documents, particularly on China’s declaration made on August 26:“The Government of the Republic of China does not accept any of the procedures provided for ...Part XV of the convention.”

That means China’s agreement to UNCLOS does not include its willingness to enter into arbitration with any country involving the extent of its exclusive economic zone and especially challenges to its territory.

Unfair? Our qualification on UNCLOS made in 1984 was Machiavellian but ridiculously transparent.“The agreement of the Republic of the Philippines to the submission for peaceful resolution, under any of the provisions in the Convention, of disputes under article 298 shall not be considered a derogation of Philippines sovereignty.” In English that means: If a decision by any UNCLOS body can’t reduce our territory, as we have defined it, we are not bound to it.

Will there be a country so stupid as to agree to go through arbitration on territorial disputes when its protagonist says that a decision unfavorable to it will not be honored?"

Tasmaniac

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#12 May 16, 2013
2 Cents wrote:
I'm starting to believe those rumors about P-Noy being an idiot.
There is some merit to it. But the whole thing makes both sides look stupid. The area is claimed by both countries. What do you expect?

The more wealthy Asians are getting, the more problems they are causing which just makes you all look stupid..
2 Cents

Taiwan

#13 May 16, 2013
My pinoy friends, let's be honest. Filipinos love drama and bureaucracy because it makes them feel important. Feeling important for Filipinos is a very important thing because they really have nothing important going on in their lives. This UNCLOS thing makes them feel important. Just read the local newspapers - they throw in Latin words and four syllable words when a two syllable word in English will do just fine. Do they expect their readers to understand Latin. Nope. But they do it because it makes them feel important. Acting important is their modus operandi. Haha.

Tasmaniac

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#14 May 16, 2013
2 Cents wrote:
My pinoy friends, let's be honest. Filipinos love drama and bureaucracy because it makes them feel important. Feeling important for Filipinos is a very important thing because they really have nothing important going on in their lives. This UNCLOS thing makes them feel important. Just read the local newspapers - they throw in Latin words and four syllable words when a two syllable word in English will do just fine. Do they expect their readers to understand Latin. Nope. But they do it because it makes them feel important. Acting important is their modus operandi. Haha.
Hahahahahaha oh the irony...
It is Amazing

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

#15 May 17, 2013
There is a THIN LINE between PRIDE and STUPIDITY.

I guess the Aquino's Regime is BOTH!

Now his excuse is that there is a Pinoy military conspiracy against him on his re-election campaign.

What does he expects, our sumpathy or a pat on his shoulder for his STUPIDITY. Hahahaha
Indonesian

Jakarta, Indonesia

#16 Dec 20, 2013
Now I just realize that these stupid creatures are most arrogant people on earth! not just in ASEAN!... Malaysians are ways better than these stupid pinoys!... they think they are the most and the best in everything, and look down all their neighbors as if they are again the best in everything... thanks God, now you have opened my eyes!... even the aussies which is the richest people in this region not that arrogant to other people!...
Gandhi was a poof

Campbellfield, Australia

#17 Dec 20, 2013
2 Cents wrote:
I'm starting to believe those rumors about P-Noy being an idiot.
There's some truth to a lot of it but it doesn't mean this racist thread should exist
Poor Memory

Canada

#18 Dec 21, 2013
Do not forget the Treaty of Paris!

Do not forget to look at the constitutional laws enacted by the Philippines parliament in the 1960's.

All re-iterated the 118 degree longitudinal line which marked the western border of the Philippines.

Which is the country that has ignored its own laws and international treaties in order to satisfy its own greed?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

China Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Are Northeast Indians ethnically same as Chinese? (Feb '10) Sun we R not filthy I... 77
News College student detained in China for allegedly... May 20 Test 2
Are Chinese Barbaric? (Nov '07) May 17 suzlesterbeach 692
News Palestinian protester shot by Israeli troops dies (Aug '15) May 17 idf 11
News Analysis: Natural Gas, NOT Green Energy, Caused... May 16 JPADEA 2
News China Expands Naval Power to Waters U.S. Dominates (Apr '10) May 16 America First 3,281
News Fear of a Chinese Planet? (Dec '06) May 16 Go Blue Forever 5,953
More from around the web