NDF: a terrorist group or not?

[tolstoi]

GAREB

true. it's plain stupid to deny that.but 'terror' is not equal to 'terrorism' and i am not saying that there is no fear present in 'terrorism' but instead of just plain fear, violence against civilians should also be included in the definition of 'terrorism' as the Geneva Declarations wants it.
and who says that i am trying to debunk that? you misconstrue me. again. fear is present in the dealings of the NDF as fear is present in the dealings of the GRP. so will this be the only basis to define terror then? NO.

as i pointed out on previous post, any definition of terrorism from any reliable sources [see below] will do as long as it tackles the very motive of its existence, that is exercising violence in order to attain political or ideological goal. and when a group exercise violence for ideological/political reasons, it follows that this group instills fear on the individuals they acted on..a concrete example here is the burning of cellsites, the act of burning itself is a form of violence, and the inconvenience that it caused to the affected subscribers will promote anxiety knowing that this group can do barbaric means just to advance political/ideological agenda.

extortion cases on the other hand are a vindicated form of violence in a sense that a firm [i.e CHINESE FIRM] willl be collected unjustifiable amount of money, add up the aftermath of being non-compliance and the workers/people of the particular firm will be in great awe..[oops] i mean terror, for their livelihood would end up in smoke. the very thought of how the bandits carried out the aftermath was plainly not humane.

if you can give me a snippets in Hague/Geneva declaration that torching a property is justifiable, then i would humbly retracts and end my case abruptly.

violence against civilian property is present in the dealings of the NDF and the same is true with the GRP's. both say that they are doing this in their capacities as governments and as punitive acts. so is this our definition then? if this it, then we should classify both GRP and NDF as 'terrorists'.
but horrifying forms of violence againts civilians ah, that is another matter. that is where the Geneva Declaration step in. stimulating "fear", acts of violence against ordinary people everywhere is how the Declaration sees terrorism as.

again, don't try to perceive that GRP and NDF/CPP-NPA are two forms of government in the Phils. because the latter is simply an ideological GROUP consisting of merely 9,000 or less armed individuals where the only motive is to inject communism to the rest of [b]millions of citizens/b[] that the GRP embodies..what's worst, the leader is in exile in another country..now how can they be called a government if the leader is unseen [and cash-strapped]?

they haven't won the war yet therefore they are not entitled to exercise any form of government functions like TAXATION..etc


* TERRORISM - the deliberate creation and exploitation of fear for bringing about political change. All terrorist acts involve violence or—equally important—the threat of violence. These violent acts are committed by nongovernmental groups or individuals—that is, by those who are neither part of nor officially serving in the military forces, law enforcement agencies, intelligence services, or other governmental agencies of an established nation-state. www.encarta.com

[tolstoi]

oh but i did not insinuate that the GRP collected the same amount. i asked "did you get the information on how much the GRP actually asked as tax for those Chinese operations? " you said the NET did not yield the information. i did not claim anything against the GRP. i was asking for information on how much the GRP collected as tax. but you just twisted my words so much and made it look as if i was claiming anything.

and on top of it all, you still havent given how much the GRP collected as tax as suppose to the NDF's alleged asking them for 80 million.

i don't have infos regarding how much the GRP collected as tax on the said Chinese firm, all i do know is that the owner of this firm will not feel DREAD in paying taxes to GRP [like all/most establishments in the Phil.] compared to when they will be compelled to pay extortion cash to the NPA..and also the the GRP will not resort to violence if ever the firm is a tax offender..like TORCHING-DOWN OF PROPERTIES or similar of that sort.

[tolstoi]

a yes, the hitlist. two points.

first, is there substantial evidence that there indeed is a hitlist? how is this illustrated?
second, are the people in it legitimate military targets as defined by the Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions?

i can't seem find any reason why u will not accept that as a hitlist when all parties involved or killed were mostly ex-NPA's who ceased allegiance from the group.

the news here proved that a fellow NPA had been identified as one of the killer.

Alcover claims to know killers of former rebel
By Lorenzo P. Niñal/Garry Cabotaje

THE National Alliance for Democracy (NAD) tagged the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army (CPP-NPA) as responsible for the killing of former rebel chief Rolly Kintanar, even giving out names of suspects.

NAD chairman Pastor “Jun� Alcover identified a Leo Velasco and a certain Philip as leading a team of “more than five persons� in attacking Kintanar inside a Japanese Restaurant in Quezon City last Thursday.

The killing is part of the ploy of the CPP-NPA to prove that it is still a force to reckon with, apparently to warn businessmen and politicians to give in to its extortion activities, Alcover said.

http://www.sunstar.com.ph/static/ceb...mer.rebel.html

like any other communist answers around, all they can do to counter this allegation is to appear it as another AFP propaganda...

[tolstoi]

was hoping that by now you would understand that by coming here 'in defense' of the NDF, i come here in defense of the peace talks. i was hoping that by now you would have gotten over your(and others') initial bias that those who come 'in defense' of the NDF are automatically 'sympathizers', 'communists', 'terrorists' or much worse, actually members of NDF. i was hoping that you were enlightened enough to sort through and see the glaring difference.

but i guess i was very wrong. i guess i just overestimated you.

its ironic how you don't like to be called as symphatizer when you share common ideology with this group and shows support by being in defense of the so-called "peace negotation" process.

tell me bai Gareb...is the fear of being tagged as terrorist has something to do with this?..i hope not =)

[gareb]

tolstoi:

i am afraid to be the bearer of sad news, but we are back to square 1. the latest comments you you have posted only shows that you have not read entirely or may have not fully understood the Geneva Declaration.

any definition of terrorism from any reliable sources [see below] will do as long as it tackles the very motive of its existence, that is exercising violence in order to attain political or ideological goal. and when a group exercise violence for ideological/political reasons, it follows that this group instills fear on the individuals they acted on..a concrete example here is the burning of cellsites, the act of burning itself is a form of violence, and the inconvenience that it caused to the affected subscribers will promote anxiety knowing that this group can do barbaric means just to advance political/ideological agenda.

but it does not do, sir. by rehashing (for i dont know how many times) how you define 'terrorism' to include violence aimed at a 'political and/or ideological goal' you have effectively sent this discussion back to where we started.

you seem to forget that the job of the AFP and the PNP is political and ideological in nature. and they are allowed to use violence. and you may ask is 'fear' present. a very big YES. every time the military conduct operations in any area the people in that area are gipped by fear, not just because of the impending danger of an actual encounter between the AFP and its enemies, but they fear the AFP itself. please take into consideration the dismal record of the AFP and the PNP when it comes to human rights and you will see why the people are afraid.

why do you think the Geneva Declaration on Terrorism did not follow the definition that Encarta supplied?

to quote the Geneva Declaration:

"As repeatedly recognized by the United Nations General Assembly, peoples who are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination have the right to use force to accomplish their objectives within the framework of international humanitarian law. Such lawful uses of force must not be confused with acts of international terrorism."

the definition you supplied is not sufficient because it tends to blur the lines between internationally recognized lawful use of force by national liberation movements and terrorist groups. fear, as i have said quite a number of times already, is not enough. there should be gross harm inflicted upon ordinary individuals/civilians to elevate an act into a 'terroristic act.'

because the presence of 'fear' on the side of civilians is palpable even in legitimate (however arbitrary) acts of governments (NDF or GRP) when they exercise their power internally within the framework of their laws. and 'fear to advance a political/ideological aim' is very broad that in some definitions, even certain churches can be classified as a 'terrorist organization' as it advances a certain ideology and uses fear and intimidation among its followers.

extortion cases on the other hand are a vindicated form of violence in a sense that a firm [i.e CHINESE FIRM] willl be collected unjustifiable amount of money, add up the aftermath of being non-compliance and the workers/people of the particular firm will be in great awe..[oops] i mean terror, for their livelihood would end up in smoke. the very thought of how the bandits carried out the aftermath was plainly not humane.

must i summon up again the parallelisms of BIR ending up your livelihood in smoke (figuratively speaking that is) if you do not pay your taxes. and you have jumped to the conclusion of the revolutionary tax of initially 80 million as 'unjustifiable' without giving comparison to what the GRP actually got out from the firm, and whether the latter's sum was also justifiable or unjustifiable.

if you can give me a snippets in Hague/Geneva declaration that torching a property is justifiable, then i would humbly retracts and end my case abruptly.

i cannot give you this. but i can ask you if destruction of property, as punitive action, is legal in GRP laws. mind you, this is answerable by a yes or a no. if yes, then is this again a show of your bias against the NDF? quite likely.

the latter is simply an ideological GROUP consisting of merely 9,000 or less armed individuals where the only motive is to inject communism to the rest of millions of citizens that the GRP embodies..

refer to the execerpt i got out of the Geneva Declaration.

they haven't won the war yet therefore they are not entitled to exercise any form of government functions like TAXATION..etc

what legal doctrine did you refer to to justify that the prerequisite of excercising a government's right is to win a war against its adversary? this is just plain silly.

review your history lessons sir. the 'government' that was the Katipunan during the late 1900's led by Bonifacio, even if the Spanish still has not given up the Philippines, exercised its right and collected taxes. the Malolos Republic of Aguinaldo which was later subdued by the Americans exercised police power among its ranks. same thing with the 'government-in-exile' of Manuel Quezon when the Japanese invaded.

all i do know is that the owner of this firm will not feel DREAD in paying taxes to GRP [like all/most establishments in the Phil.] compared to when they will be compelled to pay extortion cash to the NPA..and also the the GRP will not resort to violence if ever the firm is a tax offender..like TORCHING-DOWN OF PROPERTIES or similar of that sort.

of course they will 'dread' it because they do not recognize it. but that does not mean that the NDF does not have the right to do so. and i bet i have already addressed the issue that mere recognition or sympathy is not a basis on whom can be taxed and whom should not be.

the GRP may not resort to 'violence' (the word you use to describe the destruction of property, e.g. cell sites) in these cases, but it sure does use 'violence' (the word i use to describe the destruction of property, e.g. houses) when it legally demolishes squatters' shanties. hmm... do i see another stubborn bias here?

[gareb]

i can't seem find any reason why u will not accept that as a hitlist when all parties involved or killed were mostly ex-NPA's who ceased allegiance from the group.

and how many ex-NPA's do you know that that have taken opposite stands against the party, but at least have not been charged with anything in the 'revolutionary court' and are still alive and well, and have led new lives? how many NPA's do you know who have actually shed their 'revolutionary skins' and led 'normal lives'?

i know plenty and they are safe. what's more, they are not included in this 'list'. so, tell me, what does that mean?

oh but the CPP-NPA admits in executing Kintanar and Tabara. and i believe it is a violation of human rights since i never was a believer of capital punishment. both GRP and the NDF has 'em. but i personally do not agree with it.

its ironic how you don't like to be called as symphatizer when you share common ideology with this group and shows support by being in defense of the so-called "peace negotation" process.

very bad assumption bai tolstoi. and how many have you made so far?

first, i share their ideology up until the means to reach the desired goals. i agree to the Marxist analysis of society as divided into social classes and the socio-economic, socio-cultural and political hegemony that comes from the landed, minority elite. i agree that a systematic overhaul of the current socio-economic system should be the solution to this malady that this country faces.

but they call for arms to overthrow this system. i call for sobriety and work as much as we can inside the system, as much as the hegemony will allow. it will not allow much as to do so would be its own death sentence, so the other way here is to actually make the rest of the people aware of this alternative, this analysis.

i pin my hopes on the peace process because i do not want more blood to be spilled, on both sides. both have already outlined the major phases of the peace process, the 4 points that i have included in a PM i sent you before all this started. if only it can be reached then this war will be over with the final deposition of arms by the NPA the ultimate 'surrender' of the NPA, and they will only do so if the conditions in those 4 points are achieved.

tell me bai Gareb...is the fear of being tagged as terrorist has something to do with this?..i hope not =)

i do not have anything to fear, since i have not burned any cell sites or buses lately or killed former NPA's lately, with that being your (and GRP's) erroneous example of a 'terroristic act'.

but with the GRP's paranoia against critics, classic example of irrational defense mechanisms of the guilty, instead of resolving this matter peacefully, it has resorted into bullying tactics, warrantless arrests, irresponsible proclamations that will ultimately lead to the radicalization of an increasing number of the populace. a lesson from Marcos that still hasn't been learned.

and by maintaining this 'terrorist tag' and having people including you to support it, you are also dragged unwittingly into delaying the peace process, delaying the resolution of three decades worth of conflict, intensification of this insurgency, and the radicalization of the population.

i do not know about you, but i am not afraid to end this conflict through peaceful means by supporting the peace process.

for someone who does not agree with the CPP-NPA-NDF for its use of violence, by refusing the call to remove this tag so that the peace process to continue, you seem to show no remorse for another decade's worth of violence.

and that does not show much good in you at all.

[tolstoi]

"As repeatedly recognized by the United Nations General Assembly, peoples who are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination have the right to use force to accomplish their objectives within the framework of international humanitarian law. Such lawful uses of force must not be confused with acts of international terrorism."

the definition you supplied is not sufficient because it tends to blur the lines between internationally recognized lawful use of force by national liberation movements and terrorist groups. fear, as i have said quite a number of times already, is not enough. there should be gross harm inflicted upon ordinary individuals/civilians to elevate an act into a 'terroristic act.'

it seems you will definitely cling on the context of the Geneva Convention with regards to the definition of terrorism. so I decided to play along...

according to this Geneva articles that i ferreted, the CPP-NPA clearly defied some of its provision like the reprisal of personal property [i.e burning of buses/cellsites.etc] and the summary killings of ex-NPA's who had long been enjoying the fruits of democracy, some of the names you mentioned like TABARA and KINTANAR are clear examples of this violation since as you stated that the NPA recognize the killings themselves.

i agree with you that as a self-proclaimed liberation movement like the NDF, they have the right to carry out their objective with the use of force BUT should be within the boundaries of INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW, and as i represented clearly above they consistently violated these laws therefore tagging them as terrorist group is simply justifiable.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Art. 33. No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

Pillage is prohibited.

Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited.

Art. 34. The taking of hostages is prohibited.

Art. 147. Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or
property protected by the present Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement of a protected person, compelling a protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power, or wilfully depriving a protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in the present Convention, taking of hostages and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[tolstoi]

must i summon up again the parallelisms of BIR ending up your livelihood in smoke (figuratively speaking that is) if you do not pay your taxes. and you have jumped to the conclusion of the revolutionary tax of initially 80 million as 'unjustifiable' without giving comparison to what the GRP actually got out from the firm, and whether the latter's sum was also justifiable or unjustifiable.

that's the reason why we differ with opinions regarding the way GRP and NDF implements tax collection, it's because of your [figurative] comparison of the two..you just simply equate the way NDF torched-up [literally] properties of a tax offender with the confiscation method of the GRP.

again i'l ask you, what penalty is more horrific when it comes to non-paying of taxes, TORCHING IT TO ASHES or a simple CONFISCATION?

i pin my hopes on the peace process because i do not want more blood to be spilled, on both sides. both have already outlined the major phases of the peace process, the 4 points that i have included in a PM i sent you before all this started. if only it can be reached then this war will be over with the final deposition of arms by the NPA the ultimate 'surrender' of the NPA, and they will only do so if the conditions in those 4 points are achieved.

.........................the 4 points............................................ .......
1. Human rights and International Humanitarian Law (HR/IHL)
2. Socio-economic reforms
3. Political and constitutional reforms to lay the social basis for genuine and lasting peace, and
4. End of hostilities and disposition of forces, upon implementation of the three prior agreements.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

isn't it absurd that they violated the rules that they set in the first place?..as i pointed above they are in clear violation of the International Human Rights Law..perhaps these are the reasons why the GRP Peace panel can't find any sense in continuing the peace process all because of these absurdities.

and for all i care i'm also praying to GOD that both sides should iron-out their conflict in a PEACEFUL and civil manner, we have a fragile economy and we can't afford another bloody encounter OR nuisance militant rallies that could hinder its growth.

THE NDF HAD ACHIEVED ITS CAUSE ALREADY EVER SINCE MARCOS FLED THE COUNTRY, WHAT REFORMS ARE THEY ASKING FOR WHEN THEIR LEADER [SISON] OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVES CAN FREELY SERVE THE COUNTRY AND EFFECTUATE THEIR REFORM AGENDA?..that is by way of election!

[mosimos]

there is still oppression. Marcos was just one of the problems. Ali Baba has escaped. But the forty thieves remain. The fundamental problems of society lingers. Until the elite surrender the power to the masses there can be no genuine peace.

[LytSlpr]

di gyud ni maghuman kay di man gyud na sila mo admit nga "nahimo" na silang terrorist. Â*just like how they come to know that fraternities have become gangs.

this is what people think the NPA/NDF has become and not us or people defending the NDF/NPA here can ever change that. that's all there is to it.

personally, i think it is futile to discuss the technical, history or political aspect of it because we cannot stop or change the way majority of the people thinks about the NPA/NDF even if some people here are keep on repeating and stressing that we are totally ignorant about communism.