NDF: a terrorist group or not?

[flik]

---

flik:

ok NDF is not a terrorist group but do you think burning buses,attcking cell sites,attacking police precincts and etc are not considered an act of terror?

perhaps you have forgotten that the GRP and the NDF are actually at war with each other? police precints are legitimate military taregts sir. please acquaint yourself with international rules regarding war.

burning buses, attacking cell sites, so you mean destruction of property. i will again put up squatter shanties demolition as an example of destruction of property. is it a terroristic act then? read my previous posts regarding the definition of a terrorist act. you obviously haven't.

bcasabee:

or do I still have to enroll in a political science course just to know they are terrorist?.........

from the looks of it, i think you should.

tolstoi:

as what i've said before, whatever 'terrorist' definitions you muster will still fit on NDF's terrorÂ* acts like 'Extortion'.."fear on the aggrieved individual' and 'imminent danger..." still befalls to beÂ* a terror clause because a certain individual could not feel a sense of nirvana if he/she will beÂ* collected a lump sum of 80 million pesos, and the properties will be torched to ashes if they willÂ* not beÂ* in compliance.

and btw, can you not consider the owner of the business establishments who are subject forÂ* revolutionary taxes asÂ* CIVILIANS?

hay naku. need i repeat my arguments again?

"extrotion" is a relative term, depending on whether you agree that a certain entity/group/institution has the right to ask something from you. but your agreeing or disgagreeing, should not affect a government's right to collect taxes. it enters legalese out of necessity.

if a certain chinese firm is 'afraid' of a government collecting 80 million, does that automatically constitute a "terroristic act" on the part of that government? no. if a certain chinese firm then is NOT afraid to give out 80 million, then is the government's asking for 80 million is NOT a terroristic act then. so does a terroristic act soley depend on the presence of fear? no. that is why

"fear on the aggrieved individual" as a definition of "terrorism" is not enough. it includes too many situations.

"imminent danger..." can be a definition of "terrorism" aside perhaps for the fact that the danger is yet to happen.

but the funny thing is we can say that imprisonment is also an "imminent danger" to a civilian if he/she does not pay taxes to the GRP. so i ask again, is BIR and its collection of taxes, based on this premise a terroristic organization espousing terroristic acts? NO. why? because it is exercising its right as a government on civilians. the same thing with NDF.

collection of taxes is is a right of a government on civilians. it only follows that revolutionary taxes is collected from civilians. how hard is this to understand?

demolition of squatters is very well justifiable, of course as the landÂ* owner you have the right to boot-out whoever/whatever tresspassers that sits in your property.

so we conveniently use force of guns if necessary to evict them. we use violence as a last resort. the owners of the land has the right to evict them since it is their property. these squatters anyway knew beforehand that this is going to happen if they do not go out.

same thing with the NDF. as a government, it has the right to ask taxes. these companies know beforehand what is going to happen if they do not pay their obligations. violence is last resort. it always should be.

any average citizen can point out which among the two is grossly horrific and which is not.

both can be termed as "grossly horrific" and that label of course is relative. but whatever you say, fact remains that such means are used as a last resort, and are within the legal bounds of the law, as each is defined by both governments.

i'm referring to the way your beloved NDF collects revolutionary tax

MY NDF? since when has NDF been "mine"? Â* you presume too much.

perhaps you believe because i come here "in defense" of NDF (as you see it) then it only follows that NDF is "mine".Â* wow. what a laughable notion. i honestly cannot blame you. it isn't a new phenomenon that just because one comes to clear certain misonceptions one is automatically associated to that which is being misconstrued. look at the previous pages of this topic and you can see who i am talking about.

mind you, i come here to do exactly that; help in clearing all these stupid propaganda that is hounding the NDF, coutesy of the US government and the GRP, so that the peace talks can continue. if you can still remember that is exactly why we had those PM's on the first place.

pandisal:

it's just all this comes to our personal definition of what a terrorist group or what not...

i disagree.

laws (as defined by governments) are not subject to your or anyone's discretion on whether you should follow them or not. when governments at war define opposing laws, international laws especially that of the laws on war (Protocol I and II), should be followed.

laws, especially international laws, have operational definitions on terms such as "terrorism". in case of absence of such definitions, it is imperative that we follow internationally accepted definitions, in the case of "terrorism" we use the 1987 Geneva Declaration.

demolition of sqautter shanties is totally different story sir...
lets not compare two different scenarios here...i dont see any simlarities with what youre saying...demoliation of squatters is done with consent unlike those what rebels are doing...they just burn and destroy properties and do you think they did that with the knowledge of the citizens?\

wether you define that or not,the act is not tolerable...and it should be stopped...

[tolstoi]

so we conveniently use force of guns if necessary to evict them. we use violence as a last resort. the owners of the land has the right to evict them since it is their property. these squatters anyway knew beforehand that this is going to happen if they do not go out.

same thing with the NDF. as a government, it has the right to ask taxes. these companies know beforehand what is going to happen if they do not pay their obligations. violence is last resort. it always should be.

umm..same with springfields argument..are the people/establishment who belongs to NPA's lair recognize wholeheartedly about NDF as their government?..because if they don't recognize them [NDF] as the true authority then any forms of taxation will be resented, and if the NDF will exercise force then that's when FEAR/TERROR kicks-in on the minds of the aggrieved.

historywise..if you want to form a government on a specific nation, you have to CONQUER first the present authority that ruled the entire people and liberate them from that authority..just like what the Lenin's Bolshevics did to the once Tsarist Russia, and to the Vietnamese Reds..in the case of NDF what have they achieved so far?

[FK]

demolition of sqautter shanties is totally different story sir...
lets not compare two different scenarios here...i dont see any simlarities with what youre saying...demoliation of squatters is done with consent unlike those what rebels are doing...they just burn and destroy properties and do you think they did that with the knowledge of the citizens?

but not all demolition of squatter shanties were allowed by the person who squat. Â*That's why to the persons who are to be demolished they too experience fear...

kong mao ni ka simple sa atong definition of being a terrorist.

"fear on the aggrieved individual"
"imminent danger..."

mura kita tanan pwede mahimong terrorista.

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

@ FK ... why would be the persons who squatted have FEAR when they are given ample time to vacate and relocate ? Agencies are provided for them for help in urban housing n livlihood n relocation process ? Kinsa pod na siya di mo allow na libre na gani na ang pag tukod niya sa payag w/o taxes pa sa yuta . Mao na ni ron , ang squatters pa ang masuko ??

[gareb]

Since when did NDF became a GOVT ? That it has a right to collect taxes on civilians and the companies should know what happens if they dont and violence is the last resort ??

is this a moral or legal question?

moral: it becomes a government by social contract and or natural right. but this is a matter of preference and is highly disputable. what is fact is that certain areas of the philippines, are under complete control of this "government on the run". the military accepts this fact but does not subscribe to the idea that the NDF is a government on itself.

legal: with the promulgation of its constitutionm which immediately placed it at war with the GRP.

what you should be asking is if the existence of this government is acknowledged by the GRP. so is it? NO. because doing so would jeopardize its own powers inside its territory. that is why they are at war, each trying to eliminate the other.

but the thing is, peace talks have been going on. and the Hague Joint Declaration has come out of it. it does not acknowledge the existence of the NDF as a government, but by negotiating with the NDF, the GRP automatically places their relationship under a status of belligerency.

and take note, the NDF does not acknowledge the legitimacy of the GRP government. the opposite is also true when it comes to the views of the GRP on NDF's legitimacy as a government.

wha`t Ive stated , ang taxan ra sa NDF ang mga komonista ra unta kay wala man buhisi sa govt ang mga rebelde na ga tago sa bukid . So kay wala man sila buhisi sa gobyerno, wala silay katungod mo buhis sa sibilyan ug ilang mga sakop ra under sa NDF govt ang subjected unta .

everybody is subject to GRP's taxation system. we should remember this fact. when one buys a cigarette stick or a candy even, a protion of that goes to GRP's taxes. the rebels in the hinterlands for sure need certain things that are subject to GRP's taxation system so it is wrong to say that they do not pay taxes.

whether or not one agrees that a government has a "moral" right to collect taxes, or one simply prefers to refuse to pay taxes, does not remove the "legal" right of a government to ask for taxes to people inside its territory. i do not believe that the GRP has the "moral" right to ask taxes from me since only a very small portion of it comes back and the rest is going out of the country as debt relief, or in the pockets of politicians, but that does not remove the "legal" right of the government to collect taxes anyway.

AFAIK ... si JOMA ra ga buot buot ana di ba ?

you still believe that JOMA dictates the policies of the CPP-NPA-NDF? wow. he is one of the political consultants of the NDF but the policies of NDF comes from within the philippines. he is a figurehead but nothing more. he's had clashes with certain locally-based personalities within the NDF and the CPP, even Ka Roger, which were really funny, regarding issue analysis and action.

[FK]

@ FK ... why would be the persons who squatted have FEAR when they are given ample time to vacate and relocate ? Agencies are provided for them for help in urban housing n livlihood n relocation process ? Kinsa pod na siya di mo allow na libre na gani na ang pag tukod niya sa payag w/o taxes pa sa yuta . Mao na ni ron , ang squatters pa ang masuko ??

yup gihatagan sila og ample time... but makapahawa ba gud na sa FEAR sa usa ka taw? Though tinuod sila ang sayop anang panahona pero ako man gud gi tan-aw ang implication sa simple ra kaau nga definition sa terrorista. With regards sa ample time, Communist rebels pwede sab himoon ni nila defense nga amo bitaw sila gi-tagaan og igong panahon para mo bayad og revolutionary tax, wala jud so amo gi guba/sunog ang bus.

ang ako lang sab ba... i think dili ra ang NDF nag collect og revolutionary tax og gahimo og violent ways of punishing those who will not pay. Pero ngano dili man tanan grupo nga gahimo ani gi-labelan og terrorista?

[foxtrot]

The NDF may not be classified as within the same class of more ruthless terrorists groups lurking around the world today, but what terrorizes me is the prospect of some day waking up to find them in power in my beloved RP!

The first thing they will do is abolish all oppositions. Only one political party the Communist Party is allowed to exercise power and all of us must follow or else!!! (This will solve the political noise of a multi-party and multi-level political system we are witnessing now?)

Street demonstrations will not be allowed, kung may matigas pa ang ulo at magpataas-taas ng mga kamao nila, they will be dispersed by the use of tanks (Ala-Tiananmen Square) if necessary. (This will erase all EDSA Power revolutions for good?)

Next the Party will not permit publication of anything that is against the present dispensation. Only positive or success stories and praise releases will be allowed. (This will solve the proliferation of newspapers and radio and tv stations?)

A National ID system will be enforced to monitor the movements of everybody. Rural dwellers will not be given permanent homes in urban centers to ensure that they are not congested. (This will solve the squatter problem?)

Communes will be created out of the barangays nationwide, after confiscating all land and redistributing to all the citizen (This will solve the proliferation of haciendas with common stocks kuno nationwide?)

Religion will be tolerated but to a much greater extent, monitored, (They know the power of the Church in harnessing the sentiments of the masses, sayang na lang experience nila di ba?) and slowly propagandize that there is no heaven and hell awaiting us after death.

...Then famine will set in because after obligating everybody to till the land, the state gets their produce and distribute to everyone including of course the emerging Party elites who may be allowed not to till the land (Trabaho ng trabaho pareho din ang ration ko). Then looking for a solution they allow again the farmers to own the land they till and allow them the right to sell their produce and even lease their land. Then they allow Party members to engage in business to open up job opportunities ending to be Capiltalists themselves! This complete re-turn around will be inevitable (e.g. Russia, China, Vietnam). The turn around may take at least thirty years after the coummunists take over but I do not know the expense it will entail in terms of property, human lives, effect on the Filipino psyche, the Catholic Church, media, schools, other democratic institutions, the military... but at least we know we will be back with the same old democratic system someday...then again we pray that by then, if ever we will regain our democracy from the Communists, the left, the right, the moderate, the greedy landlords, ambitious politicians may have learned their lessons and our beloved RP will rise to its rightful place in the hierarchy of nations!!!

[gareb]

tolstoi:

umm..same with springfields argument..are the people/establishment who belongs to NPA's lair recognize wholeheartedly about NDF as their government?..because if they don't recognize them [NDF] as the true authority then any forms of taxation will be resented, and if the NDF will exercise force then that's when FEAR/TERROR kicks-in on the minds of the aggrieved.

you conveniently equate terror with fear, hoping that by doing so, you can equate terror with terrorism, therefore fear = terrorism. sneaky. you are trying to mislead, but i failed to fall for it.

historywise..if you want to form a government on a specific nation, you have to CONQUER first the present authority that ruled the entire people and liberate them from that authority..just like what the Lenin's Bolshevics did to the once Tsarist Russia, and to the Vietnamese Reds..in the case of NDF what have they achieved so far?

that is precisely why there is a WAR because each wants to eliminate the other. each calls itself the legitimate government of this nation, and calls the other fake for a plethora of reasons. we have to realize that the war is ongoing and their declarations are political posturings aimed at victory. we also have to realize that the CPP-NPA-NDF has declared a "protracted war" (being Maoists that they are) meaning this is going to extend for a long period of time.

a long period of time that the peace talks are aiming to cut short by peaceful negotiation.

the point here is, the way NDF collects revolutionary taxes is what makes it terroristic in nature..have you heard about GRP collected that kind of amount in a form of taxation, and worst is in lump sum?. if there is then kindly provide a link..

you are being exceptionalistic.

you first refer to "terrorism" as basically just "fear". i disproved that and said it should be "horrible and violent acts against civilians". you agreed and pointed to the consequences for non-compliance as "horrible" and "horrific" as it is against private property. i show you the GRP committing a "horrible" and/or "horrific" act of destruction of private property, so now you pushed it aside and focus on amount of money asked as tax and public perception as "fearful" and "harsh" with regards to NDF's tax implementation.

and now you are asking me to provide something that i asked you beforehand, to contrast on the NDF's asking the Chinese firm 80 million (at first), data regarding the amount of tax the Chinese firm was asked for by the GRP? no, the burden of proof is in you to provide the amount the GRP asked, as you are the one labelling the "way" the NDF collects taxes as "terroristic".

and now i will say that the public perception of what is "fearful" and what is "harsh" is not in the exclusive domain of the NDF nor is it simply on its tax implementations, and that the act of demolishing houses too is a "fearful" and "harsh" punitive measure by the GRP on civilians, "fearful" and "harsh" in the eyes of ordinary civilians more to those who are directly affected.

are the words "fearful", "harsh", "terror" only applicable to actions done by the NDF if it exercises an inherent right, and not if it is done by the GRP when it does the same?

answer me, why the exceptionalism? or is it a simple, ordinary, day-to-day bias?

flik:

demoliation of squatters is done with consent

then why do they fight back? were you in cebu when the vendors at the Sto. Nino. Basilica were demolished by Tomas Osmena? they fought back because they did not agree that their stalls were demolished. really, you should witness more squatter demolitions and see for yourself if everytime their houses were demolished, it was done with consent.

take the comparison into context, sir. i am talking about the destruction of private property and the use of violence in the implementation of a government's right.

SPRINGFIELD_XD_40:

why would be the persons who squatted have FEAR when they are given ample time to vacate and relocate ?

they are not given "ample time to vacate/relocate" all the time. and many times the "relocation site" is unjustifiably not fit for their livelihoods or are too far from places of work, or simply lack basic amenities (road, water, power, sewage and drainage systems) all of these are suppose to be provided by law. (fisherfolk from SRP being relocated to the hilly areas of Talisay, etc.) but many times these demolitions are stamped by court as legal anyway.

so why do they fear, their houses are being demolished and they have nowhere else to go. the fact that they are illegitimate structures is without consequence. what is with consequence is that their houses are being demolished. that is the reason to fear.

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

@ GAREB .... appreciate the in depth explanation but I dont know if I will be able to put them in the proper places of my understanding . Thats why I asked you to enlighten me also about JOMA .

Regarding SQUATTERS , medyo OT na because ilang scenario is ang gigamit towards FEAR that is synonymous to TERRORISM , they FEAR that their houses will be demolished sometime in the future . Question bai ... wa`la sila mag FEAR na magtukod ug balay sa di nila na yuta in the 1st place ?

Regarding TAXATION , I understand ur approach na tanan ma TAXAN man gyud ie buying cigarettes etc but what I meant was kana ikaltas sa sweldo nimo taga buwan . nakaltasan ba ang mga NPA ? Maybe ang mga NDF who are employed by some private sectors . Akong punto , TAXAN sa NDF ang mga followers lang nila sama sa mga aktibista , rebelde , leftist etc .

[gareb]

wa`la sila mag FEAR na magtukod ug balay sa di nila na yuta in the 1st place ?

i bet they should have felt some fear. i bet everyone has that in them however tiny, when they do not concur to certain rules. fear of retribution and or punishment. i bet too that the same thing applies to those who do not pay revolutionary tax.

what I meant was kana ikaltas sa sweldo nimo taga buwan . nakaltasan ba ang mga NPA ? Maybe ang mga NDF who are employed by some private sectors . Akong punto , TAXAN sa NDF ang mga followers lang nila sama sa mga aktibista , rebelde , leftist etc .

you mean income tax. what i know for sure is that despite government propaganda regarding the issue, the personnel of the NPA does not get any personal incomes from the organization. so they do not have "income tax" per se. but being under the NDF, they should pay taxes. with regards to legal "activists" there are many kinds. it is plain stupidity to lump them all as "communists" ergo under the CPP-NPA-NDF. many are not. what i know for sure is that everyone, who acknowledges and accepts what the CPP-NPA-NDF is fighting for is under its aegis and must pays taxes.