MERGED: Vigilantism and related issues

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

---

..and could you give me links to prove your statement? a lot has been reported about it.. i believe that the media has the ability to control information that the public needs to know.. and with all these reports, the media can't just feed us with ALL LIES as to why and how these bystanders were killed etc.. etc.. in case you don't know, the headline of the news alone can tell the whole story..

In case you havent known either Jugs .... MEDIA loves to sensationalized to sell their papers . I dont need to show any links to prove my point . My point regarding the MEDIA issue is self understanding and anyone can understand how they love to twist and shout .

excuse in a way that you use SUNSTAR as one of your defense on your being a pro-vigilante..

I dont really get what you are trting to say from this statement bai .

NEWS is NEWS.. simple as that.. they don't present news to people without legitimate facts and further investigation.. it's up to the news agency on how they present it to the public..

You just answered and explained your own confusion regarding how the MEDIA functions in the soeciety we dwelled in ." ITS UP TO THE NEWS AGENCY " .... bisan di TINUOD ? Remember DUMPIT na ningbakasyon kay gi RAYUMA daw ? Utot ni Dumpit bai ... na igo siya ni Alemar ... how do I know ? I know Alemar personally and talked to him in the phone thru long distance the very first time he was attacked by the Vigilantes because he survived . That example alone is a very concrete evidence of how INCOMPETENT and INACCURATE the media in relaying NEWS .

[mannyamador]

VIGILANTES existed for one purpose , to REGULATE the CRIMINALS because the justice system is not functioning to its standards.

How do you know that? Since you admit you can't identify the vigilantes, how do you know they are the ones killing only criminals? They could be the ones killing innocent bystanders too. In fact, it could just be that they are under copntrol of criminal gangs too and that they are being used by organized crime to protect their turf. So there is no proof whatsoever to support your claim that the vigilantes are "good criminals killing bad criminals". But what we do know for q fact is that they are criminals!

Still, you can't seem to grasp the simple logic.

BTW .... you are right .... the FREEMAN too , so are PHILSTAR , BANAT and etc . Your point is ??

Those are two independent sources CORROBORATING each other. That makes the story more credible. Certainly they are more credible than your personal opinion.

I dont need to show any links to prove my point . My point regarding the MEDIA issue is self understanding and anyone can understand how they love to twist and shout.

You expect us to believe your PERSONAL opinion over the newspapers that have corroborating evidence? Forget it. Why should anyone think your unsupported opinion is credible, especially when you can't even give any evidence to support your claim? Why should we believe you are more competent than the media?

[Teban2006]

hahay buhay

[Gwynhuever]

im into Vigilantes.. if ma victim ka sa hold up for sure you could say your into Vigilantes..

sorry to repute this generalization bro....na biktima na ko...pero NO gihapon ko

[jugs_06]

OT: ni singit raman ta ko kadyot.. *takes popcorn*

In case you havent known either Jugs .... MEDIA loves to sensationalized to sell their papers . I dont need to show any links to prove my point . My point regarding the MEDIA issue is self understanding and anyone can understand how they love to twist and shout .

i got your point.. but again as iv said, the media can control what the public needs to know but they can't feed them with all lies.. they collect FACTS and make a story that could be interesting for the public to read.. and oh, like what me and mannyamador said, the media has CONCRETE evidence and conducts further investigation before they present a report.. geez this smells like a vicious cycle to me..


I dont really get what you are trting to say from this statement bai .

All of them are bad according to you because you still have your guitar right ? And please stop copy and pasting articles specially from SUNSTAR .... they are like you . ONE SIDED and thinks they are right .

this quote from you is what im trying to say with my statement..

You just answered and explained your own confusion regarding how the MEDIA functions in the soeciety we dwelled in ." ITS UP TO THE NEWS AGENCY " .... bisan di TINUOD ?

springfield, you should also consider that the media is not like a monarchy government that only one person provides the source and all the media men feasts on it.. it's not like one news report has EXACTLY the same content as with others.. chances are, what's not reported on SUNSTAR is reported on THE FREEMAN.. point is, saying the phrase "BSAN DI TINUOD" is making a conclusion..you are basing it on your own opinion.. that's why i asked you to provide me some links to justify your statement that not all innocent bystanders are killed by vigilantes..

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

How do you know that? Since you admit you can't identify the vigilantes, how do you know they are the ones killing only criminals?

How do I know that ?? Even if I tell you how I knew it .... I am not credible LOLZ !! I cant identify the VIGILANTES because .... DO I LOOK LIKE THE VIGILANTES YAYA ?? Sentido komon Mr Manny Boy .

They could be the ones killing innocent bystanders too.

Nobody argued to that SPECULATION . AT least I labeled it as a SPECULATION unlike you , POSITIVELY IDENTIFIED the VIGILANTE to have injured the 2 innocent women .

In fact, it could just be that they are under copntrol of criminal gangs too and that they are being used by organized crime to protect their turf.

How could it be a FACT when you are doubting your own statement ? You are just SPECULATING and BTW ... nothing is wrong with that . Just dont be too carried away with your emotions because you read something from the headlines LOLZ .

So there is no proof whatsoever to support your claim that the vigilantes are "good criminals killing bad criminals". But what we do know for q fact is that they are criminals!

LOLZ .... if you open your brilliant mind and comprehend what I said , it pertains to VIGILANTES and not the DAVAO DEATH SQUAD or the CEBU DEATH SQUAD if thats how you want to call it .

Still, you can't seem to grasp the simple logic.

How can I not grasp your LOGIC ? Because you are trting to drag me into your hole that is very out of the context and you want someone like me to bark at the wrong tree in chorus with you.

Those are two independent sources CORROBORATING each other. That makes the story more credible. Certainly they are more credible than your personal opinion.

LOLZ .... it makes the story more credible ? Why dont you talk to your MEDIA FRIENDS and find out how they COLLABORATE then reply here again .

You expect us to believe your PERSONAL opinion over the newspapers that have corroborating evidence?

Did I shove it in your throat ? YES or NO . Nobody ask you to believe in me ... most of all I didnt ask you to believe in me because you only believe on what you hear anyways and read from the net .

Forget it. Why should anyone think your unsupported opinion is credible, especially when you can't even give any evidence to support your claim? Why should we believe you are more competent than the media?

A dog that barks does not bite . You talk like there is no tomorrow and you keep on repeating youself . Save it because you might need it soon . Again ... read read read , understand understand understand .... less talk and typing .

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

i got your point.. but again as iv said, the media can control what the public needs to know but they can't feed them with all lies.. they collect FACTS and make a story that could be interesting for the public to read.. and oh, like what me and mannyamador said, the media has CONCRETE evidence and conducts further investigation before they present a report.. geez this smells like a vicious cycle to me..

CONCRETE EVIDENCE ? You want me to cite a couple of instances how they mess up because " thats how they ( MEDIA )want the public to know about " ? It will be OT because it is not VIGILANTE RELATED ... I am too lazy to look for examples regarding VIGILANTE TOPICS but then again I already gave you 1 about Dumpit .

springfield, you should also consider that the media is not like a monarchy government that only one person provides the source and all the media men feasts on it.. it's not like one news report has EXACTLY the same content as with others.. chances are, what's not reported on SUNSTAR is reported on THE FREEMAN.. point is, saying the phrase "BSAN DI TINUOD" is making a conclusion..you are basing it on your own opinion.. that's why i asked you to provide me some links to justify your statement that not all innocent bystanders are killed by vigilantes..

Just put it this way .... give me an all count of all the " VICIMS " since Dec 2004 till today and point me one who is INNOCENT or not a CHRONIC CRIMINAL unless it is labeled by the media as a VIGILANTE STYLE killing . It may be VIGILANTE STYLE but it does not provide a conclusion of HITS by the REAL VIGIOLANTES itself . Saying the phrase " BISAN DI TINUOD " .... kadaghan na nahitabo bai namalita na sila na di tinuod . I dont need to provide links because you even know it yourself .... it just happen that you are nti Vigilante and you dont want to lose your leverage because we ended up sa MEDIA ISSUES .

[jugs_06]

CONCRETE EVIDENCE ? You want me to cite a couple of instances how they mess up because " thats how they ( MEDIA )want the public to know about " ? It will be OT because it is not VIGILANTE RELATED ... I am too lazy to look for examples regarding VIGILANTE TOPICS but then again I already gave you 1 about Dumpit .

yeah, CONCRETE EVIDENCE.. the media wouldn't just feed the public with news that is not credible enough.. it's actually credible than your own opinion.. the example you cited is obviously an isolated case and you DID prove it was wrong by the testimonials of your friend.. we don't even know if your friend is credible too in the first place..

Just put it this way .... give me an all count of all the " VICIMS " since Dec 2004 till today and point me one who is INNOCENT or not a CHRONIC CRIMINAL unless it is labeled by the media as a VIGILANTE STYLE killing . It may be VIGILANTE STYLE but it does not provide a conclusion of HITS by the REAL VIGIOLANTES itself . Saying the phrase " BISAN DI TINUOD " .... kadaghan na nahitabo bai namalita na sila na di tinuod . I dont need to provide links because you even know it yourself .... it just happen that you are nti Vigilante and you dont want to lose your leverage because we ended up sa MEDIA ISSUES .


so everything's fair, im also too lazy to search some links and provide you with one.. instead, ill just quote mr. manny amador with his article:


CEBU CITY'S VIGILANTE KILLINGS: VICTIMS COUNT REACHES 165

CEBU CITY, JUNE 14, 2006 (STAR) By Jose P. Sollano and Gregg M. Rubio The Freeman - It's now 165 and maybe still counting
as the police continue to face the proverbial blank wall in their investigation on the vigilante-style killings in Cebu City.

The 165th victim was shot dead yesterday, ironically, right outside one of the city's main Catholic cemeteries where he plied his
trade making tombstones.

The latest victim is 42-year-old Benjamin Raganas of barangay Carreta, sustained gunshot wounds on his head and body. Raganas,
single, reportedly had no previous record according to the police.



..if you read closely, Raganas NEVER had a previous record of criminal acts whatsoever.. but was SHOT ON HIS HEAD AND BODY.. question is, by whom? as iv pointed out on my previous post, HEADLINES alone can tell the whole story.. read the article's headline and if you use simple analysis, you can conclude that the suspect responsible for the killing is INDEED a vigilante..

[wak_wak]

sorry to repute this generalization bro....na biktima na ko...pero NO gihapon ko

ok, imuha sad na.. pero for me worth it ra sila pamatyun, samot na katong mga kawatan na wala ka luoy sa ila victim, ok ra unta kuhaon ang valuables di na patyun ang victim, wala sila kaluoy so di sad sila angay tagaan ug kaluoy..

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

yeah, CONCRETE EVIDENCE.. the media wouldn't just feed the public with news that is not credible enough..

Not credible enough ? I just told you that a lot of times already happened that the MEDIA messed up . Either to twist issues and sensationalized stories . Remember Dumpit and Alemar ? Remember Aristotole " Aris " Aves ? Remember Vigilantes and still refer them as SUSPECTED and ALLEGED ? But then they already counted numbers and puts weight on Vigilantes whoever they may be .

it's actually credible than your own opinion..

You are starting to sound like Mr Manny AMador .... it is not a matter of who is CREDIBLE or not . It is not a matter of who you believed in . Its a matter of how do you percieve and accept the system w/o the MEDIA's role in the society . But then again ..... you say media is more credible than me ... how more credible they are with the REAL DEAL ??

the example you cited is obviously an isolated case and you DID prove it was wrong by the testimonials of your friend.. we don't even know if your friend is credible too in the first place..

But then again ... when RYAN BORINAGA of The FREEMAN reports news ... do you know HER este him too ?? And the rest of the MEDIA COMMUNITY ? Do you really know them as what you are trying to portray to the testimonial of my friend ? BTW .... how could one incident be ISOLATED when for a fact .... take note for a FACT , what happened to him was a real VIGILANTE hit . Walay nadamay , ni palpak lang .


so everything's fair, im also too lazy to search some links and provide you with one.. instead, ill just quote mr. manny amador with his article:

CEBU CITY'S VIGILANTE KILLINGS: VICTIMS COUNT REACHES 165

You are right ... a HEADLINE alone will tell the story ....how accurate though is the big question .

..if you read closely, Raganas NEVER had a previous record of criminal acts whatsoever.. but was SHOT ON HIS HEAD AND BODY.. question is, by whom? as iv pointed out on my previous post, HEADLINES alone can tell the whole story..

LOL ..... that is not according to you nor anyone else but the MEDIA . Alangan man ug mo report sila ug Gi VIGILANTE STYLE ang biktima pero di myembro sa VIGILANTE SQUAD ang suspect . Lagpas kaayo balitaa .

read the article's headline and if you use simple analysis, you can conclude that the suspect responsible for the killing is INDEED a vigilante..

If you also use SIMPLE ANALYSIS .. in what way does it justify that it is INDEED a VIGILANTE ??