Originally Posted by
Borgy
Maybe what former Pres. Cory meant is that Pres. Erap deserves to be impeach from office and remove from power , but not the way he was booted out from office in which she participated. After all what ever angle you look upon it even in wikipidea.org, its just a brilliant executed coup d'état from mobilizing the mobs to recruiting the generals from the so famous Edsa series. So much for the people have risen up ..etc..
And also she was installed in a coup so maybe from her own reflections she realize ,the end does not justify the means as these will just be a never ending saga.
sorry but i beg to differ. u got it all wrong. EDSA I and II are not even close to being called coup d'etats. how the heck do u equate "people power" to "coup d'etat"? they have totally different meanings.
Coup d'etat is the sudden unconstitutional overthrow of a gov't by a small group of military to replace that stricken gov't, either with another civil gov't or with a military gov't. And the means are generally violent, but not always...(that was what Enrile, Honasan, and the rest of the RAM boys did during the time of Cory but failed)
While
"people power" on the other hand, is a series of nonviolent and prayerful mass street demonstrations by civil societies, the church, etc... w/ the gaining support of the military to provide the restoration of democratic institutions after from experiencing an authoritarian rule (EDSA I) or from a plundering leader (EDSA II).
Even if we say that Cory's sorry meant Erap deserves to be impeached rather than removed from power via people power, still, it doesn't make sense. either ways, both means are actually justifiable. the only difference are of the resulting consequences...
to those who marched to the streets in EDSA I and II, what they did was never never never a mistake.
Reply With Quote
Posting Permissions
