Garcillano is Back... ANC showed him wearing a muslim head scarf like abu sayaff

[zengatsu]

---

mangingilad man tanang tao..at least at one point in his/her life..hehehe..pero kung imong pasabot is nangilad ba siya about sa hello garci nga issue..ambot lang wala ko kahibaw..siya ra kahibaw..

[omar50071]

Who knows? for me maybe 5 months! for Garci? maybe 5 years, just enough time for GMA to complete her term NYAHAHAHAHA! haaay nako life talaga!

So you are saying you believed him (Garci)?

Never said i do. I only commented on the criticism against him and that i see some conclusions to be drawn way off from the premise.

Ok I got your point...you are giving him the benefit of the doubt.

As for me, a man with a reputation that he made for himself in Comelec for 35 years, he certainly does not deserve the benefit of the doubt.

[FK]

Never said i do. I only commented on the criticism against him and that i see some conclusions to be drawn way off from the premise.

It was how he said it that he was criticized... he said "IF I COULD FIND IT" onsa gud tawn nga klase nga pagkataw importante nga document dili nimo tapigan.

[Onins]

Never said i do. I only commented on the criticism against him and that i see some conclusions to be drawn way off from the premise.

It was how he said it that he was criticized... he said "IF I COULD FIND IT" onsa gud tawn nga klase nga pagkataw importante nga document dili nimo tapigan.

"if i could find it" does the phrase make him a liar? in fact i think it is a good answer! 'if he could find it' for exactly how can he submit his passport for review by the committee if he cant find it? maau sad diay sya mudala ug sarcasm maski guwang na.

[Minuano27]

Never said i do. I only commented on the criticism against him and that i see some conclusions to be drawn way off from the premise.

It was how he said it that he was criticized... he said "IF I COULD FIND IT" onsa gud tawn nga klase nga pagkataw importante nga document dili nimo tapigan.

"if i could find it" does the phrase make him a liar? in fact i think it is a good answer! 'if he could find it' for exactly how can he submit his passport for review by the committee if he cant find it? maau sad diay sya mudala ug sarcasm maski guwang na.

"if i could find it" is actually "legalese" - garci is leaving an opening for himself. maybe he'll say later on "i couldn't find it", so what then? congress can't say that he could have found it, etc., bec. it can never prove that he had it with him all along, and that he was therefore lying. for all we know, he already burned his passport, which means that "he can never find it", and that will be the end of that.

it's the same technique as when you are asked a question that you want to avoid answering...you will never say yes, or no, or even "i don't know". what you will say is "i don't remember"...after all, how can someone prove that you actually remember, and that you are therefore lying?

[Onins]

Exactly, how can someone prove that someone is indeed lying? iv been seeing the word maybe more than once in this thread. Unless we have definite answers to so many questions, we cant carelessly use the word therfore, ergo, conclude in referral to Garci's actions and motives.

[Minuano27]

IMO, if you analyze this closely, the opposition probably preferred that Garci didn't show up. if he remained "missing", they could bash GMA to death by using Garci's "flight" as indirect evidence of guilt. but now that Garci is back, they don't know what they're going to do with him. while they knew that he is going to deny the accusations against him, they don't know exactly how he's going to do it and what he's going to say to support it.

this puts the opposition at a tactical disadvantage because in maneuverings such as this, you must have a reasonable idea of what's going to happen so you can anticipate your next moves; otherwise, you're going to put the the other side in control of the situation.

an example of this was the statement before the hearing that named senators and congressman who also "called" garci. since they didn't know what garci was actually going to say about this, then escudero, et al. had no choice but to deny talking to him. but what did garci actually say? he simply said that he will leave it up to the people who talked to him to reveal the substance of their "conversation".

garci probably figures that since no one will believe him anyway - bec. the opposition will accept only the "truth" that fits their side - he might as well turn the tables and try to drag as many people on the other side with him on the way down. who knows, he might even be willing to be held in contempt by congress in an effort to paint the opposition in as much negative light as possible.

[br]Date Posted: December 09, 2005, 12:46:39 AM_________________________________________________

Exactly, how can someone prove that someone is indeed lying? iv been seeing the word maybe more than once in this thread. Unless we have definite answers to so many questions, we cant carelessly use the word therfore, ergo, conclude in referral to Garci's actions and motives.

actually, you can prove that someone is lying but you need independent proof. garci's passport is supposed to prove that he did or did not leave for singapore. if garci says that he can't find the passport, then that's the end of that (bec. you can't say he's lying when he said "if i can find it"), unless you can prove that he left the country through other means. the problem, of course, is WHERE do you get that proof, esp. if garci left through the "backdoor".

[LytSlpr]

There is only one word for that passport issue/comment how absurd it maybe and that my friends is called STRATEGY.

[FK]

It was how he said it that he was criticized... he said "IF I COULD FIND IT" onsa gud tawn nga klase nga pagkataw importante nga document dili nimo tapigan.

well I'm not categorically saying that he is lying... but as you've said, it gives him the excuse to say this later "I COULDN'T FIND IT". Minaro nga tubag, in short he is not totally telling the truth.
- That he wants closure to this.
- That he is not protecting someone.
- That he wants to tell the truth but nothing but the truth.

he simply said that he will leave it up to the people who talked to him to reveal the substance of their "conversation".

and it seems like you even enjoyed on how he avoids questions like this. Instead of what he claims that he will bring closure, he even brings more questions. Ngano dili man niya isulti dayon? Mangita siya og trade-off?

[kyuusai]

mokirig pana si garci.. it's apparent that all he'd mouthed was a lie!..