Select Page
50% vaccine efficacy is like ‘cara y cruz’

50% vaccine efficacy is like ‘cara y cruz’

by | Dec 30, 2020 | Gotcha

GOTCHA

50% vaccine efficacy is like ‘cara y cruz’

Malacañang controversies over unlicensed COVID-19 vaccines

            Controversies swirl in Malacañang over unlicensed COVID-19 vaccines. Latest is President Rody Duterte’s disclosure of Sinopharm injections of soldiers. Questions hound the rush to purchase doses from Sinovac. Both are state-controlled China firms; neither have completed clinical trials, nor applied with Philippine authorities for domestic use.

            “Halos lahat ng sundalo natusukan na,” Duterte bared in a televised meeting with health officials Saturday night. “I have to be frank, I have to tell the truth… marami nang nagpatusok and lahat up to now wala akong narinig for the select few, not all soldiers hindi pa kasi policy eh.”

            Under various development stages worldwide are 96 vaccines and 135 drugs against COVID-19. The Food and Drug Administration has yet to issue any Emergency Use Authority. Only Pfizer-USA has applied for such EUA. Evaluation can take till Jan. 2021. Sinovac is seeking permission to include the Philippines in clinical trials. Sinopharm has no official dealings with Filipino regulators. No import, distribution, and dispensing can be made until FDA’s go-signal. Duterte reiterated that early this month.

            A vaccinee’s informed choice is a must, says the Philippine Council for Health Research and Development. Under its mass inoculation plan, doctors, nurses, and technicians directly fighting COVID-19 are to be first. Vulnerable sectors, including the sickly and elderly, are next. Uniformed servicemen and other frontline workers come later.

They are going to inject my fellow health workers. We have a right to know more.

Dr. Tony Leachon

Ex-Chief Medical Adviser, National anti-COVID task force

Malacañang controversies over unlicensed COVID-19 vaccines

            Presidential spokesman Harry Roque initially disavowed knowledge of the Sinopharm inoculations. But Interior Secretary Ed Año clarified that the jabs were administered on soldiers and policemen in the Presidential Security Group. Some Cabinet members also were vaccinated, said Año, vice-chairman of the Inter-Agency Task Force on Emerging Infectious Diseases. Army chief Lt. Gen. Cirilito Sobejana confirmed that some troops were vaccinated but was unsure of the number. Asked if Duterte allowed the vaccinations, Sobejana reportedly said, “Of course, our president is our Commander-in-Chief.”

            Then Roque tried to douse hot comments of rule violations. “Let’s just say that our military who guards our security is now safe from COVID when they can do their job,” he said. Denying that Duterte authorized the shots, he added: “It must have been the decision of the commanders and the soldiers. It’s not illegal to be vaccinated with an unregistered vaccine. What is prohibited is the distribution and sale.”

            FDA director general Eric Domingo disagreed. His agency is to investigate whoever imported and dispensed the unlicensed doses. The Health department advised vaccinees to consult doctors at once in case of adverse effects.

            Sinopharm has advertised 80-percent vaccine efficacy. But its studies have yet to be published and subjected to peer review.

            Similar preference for Chinese Sinovac’s inoculant is touchy. Why purchase a vaccine with unpublished studies, and no official examination, blogged Dr. Tony Leachon. At once, Roque berated the former chief medical adviser of the national anti-COVID task force. Leachon persisted: “They are going to inject my fellow health workers. We have a right to know more.”

            Sinovac’s product rated 50-percent efficacy in initial trials. Meaning, it can prevent contagion of half a population previously uninfected and to be injected, medical journals explain. The World Health Organization came out in April with such 50-percent minimum acceptability, but preferred 70 percent. Most FDAs followed suit.

            That was before Pfizer notched 95-percent efficacy; Moderna of USA, 94; and AstraZeneca of Britain, 70. Those results, reported in Oct. and Nov., promise far more people to be saved from infection and death. Even China has ordered 100 million doses from Pfizer. That company is so far the only one green-lighted in America and Europe to distribute COVID vaccines.

            In comparison, Sinovac’s 50 percent is like “cara y cruz” or toss coin, a tweet spread. Senate Majority Leader Juan Miguel Zubiri, who has twice contracted COVID-19, remarked: “That means there’s a 50-50 chance of you getting COVID even after being vaccinated, (which is) a joke.”

Malacañang controversies over unlicensed COVID-19 vaccines

There’s a 50-50 chance of you getting COVID even after being vaccinated, (which is) a joke.

Sen. Juan Miguel Zubiri

Senate Majority Leader

Sinovac isn’t cheap either. Two doses, 28 days apart, will cost P3,629.50, Sen. Sonny Angara estimates. Double doses from AstraZeneca come to P610; Pfizer, P2,379; Moderna, P3,904 – P4,504. Other upcoming alternatives: Novavax, P366; Johnson & Johnson, P480; Gamaleya, P1,220; and COVAX facility with WHO, P854.

The government needs to maximize the number of vaccinees with its budget of P82.5 billion. Mass inoculation includes other costs, Angara says: training per vaccinator of 350 persons, P1,200; peripherals, including facemask, shield, alcohol, cotton balls per vaccinator, P962 per dose, or P1,924 for two doses.

 

* * *

 

            My latest book, “Gotcha: An Exposé on the Philippine Government”, is available as e-book and paperback. To order, simply click https://jariusbondoc.com/#subscribe

            Plus, get a FREE copy of “Chapter 1: Beijing’s Bullying and Duplicity” when you subscribe to my newsletter.

Got a comment? Or just want to check out what people are saying about this article, then…

Join the conversation

More related articles & posts (scroll down):

Venerating the Mother of the Child born today

Venerating the Mother of the Child born today

by | Dec 25, 2020 | Gotcha

GOTCHA

Venerating the Mother of the Child born today

Image by Vickie McCarty from Pixabay

The birth of any child exalts the mother

            The birth of any child exalts the mother. Christians hold Mary high for bringing forth Jesus, God the Son. Muslims call her the most pious of all women who mothered one of their great prophets.

            Not a goddess to be adored, Mary is venerated as a saint. Catholics revere her as Mediatrix to her Divine Son to avert grave misfortune. As Jesus “ascended” and was enthroned, Mary was “assumed” into and crowned Queen of Heaven. Yet she is not coequal of Christ, for she was human.

            Immaculately conceived, Mary was one of only five persons born without Original Sin, Catholic Mariology holds. The first two were Adam and Eve, whose Fall led to the marking of all men thence. Jesus was unblemished because the Son of God by miraculous virgin birth. John the Baptist was freed of Original Sin as soon as Mary acknowledged him in the womb of cousin Elizabeth during the Visitation. Mary was spared of Original Sin because God’s chosen handmaiden.

            Orthodox churches have gigantic icons of Mother Mary that dwarf the Holy Child. Orthodox Greeks and Russians mark as a special day her presentation at age 3 to the temple, the holiest of places, reserved only for males.

            As the Anglican and Roman churches patch up old rifts, joint restudies of Mary are being held. Henry VIII’s loyalists had seized and smashed statues of St. Mary, but a shrine recently was built in her honor in London. While it caused some murmurs among Anglicans, one bishop acknowledged the Marian apparitions that Catholics officially celebrate.

Mother Mariam is the only woman mentioned by name in the Muslim holy book.

Cihangir Arslan, PhD

Turkish interfaith scholar

The birth of any child exalts the mother

            Muslims regard Mary (Mariam) as most special. Islam teaches that only she and son Jesus were untouched by Satan before birth. Meryemana, the house where Mary lived in the care of the apostle John in Ephesus, Asia Minor (now part of Turkey), is administered by Catholic friars and nuns, but most visitors are Muslims.

            The Quran features Mary extensively. Excerpts from a lecture by Turkish interfaith scholar Cihangir Arslan, PhD:

  • Mother Mariam is the only woman mentioned by name in the Muslim holy book. Her name directly is stated or she is referred to in 35 verses in 12 chapters. Chapter 19 is named after Mother Mariam, and Chapter 3 is about the Family of ‘Imran, father of Mariam.
  • One verse (3:42) is equivalent to the Christians’ Annunciation: “And (in due time came the moment) when the angels said: ‘Mariam, God has chosen you and made you pure, and exalted you above all the women in the world.’”
  • “Allah’s Messenger said, ‘Many amongst men attained perfection but amongst women none attained perfection except Mariam, the daughter of ‘Imran, and Asiva, the wife of Fir’aun (Pharaoh).’” Note, the Messenger here is Archangel Jibrail, or Gabriel to Christians.
  • In Chapter 3, Al ‘Imran (The Family of ‘Imran), is a verse (3:33) that traces Mary’s special lineage: “They refuse faith in you and some of the Prophets because you did not appear among them, but Allah favors whomever He wishes with Messengership, and Allah made pure Adam and Noah and the House of Abraham and the House of ‘Imran, choosing them above all humankind.”
  • Two verses follow about the offering of Mariam by her mother to God: “Remember when the wife of ‘Imran entreated: ‘My Lord, I have dedicated that which is in my womb to Your exclusive service. Accept it, then, from me. Surely You are the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing.’” (3:35)
  • “When she delivered of it she said: ‘My Lord, I have given birth to a female.’ – Allah knew best of what she was delivered, so she did not need to be sorry, because the male child she expected could not be the same as the female child (whom We bestowed on her and would honor with great favor). – ‘I have named her Mariam and commend her and her offspring to You for protection from Satan eternally rejected from Allah’s mercy.’” (3:36)
  • And then the equivalent of the Christian dogma of the Birth of Mary’s Son without Original Sin: “The Prophet said, ‘When any human being is born, Satan touches him at both sides of the body with his two fingers, except Jesus, the son of Mariam, whom Satan tried to touch but failed, for he touched the placenta-cover instead.’”

Filipinos particularly are Marianists.

            Some historians theorize that Christianity and Islam picked up the Madonna concept from the Egyptians’ Isis and the Romans’ Diana. Others say “the female near-deity” draws from the fellow-Abrahamic religion, Judaism. To the ancient Hebrews the source of faith and will, acting as Mediatrix between God and man, was “wisdom,” with a female gender. Eventually it evolved as a human mother, the natural and total nurturer and protector.

            Filipinos particularly are Marianists. Dozens of images depict Mary in apparitions, mediations, and miraculous healings. Catholic bishops consecrated Filipinos to her as part of the 500th anniversary of Christianity in the Philippines in March 2021.

 

* * *

 

            Paperback orders can be made for my latest book, “Gotcha: An Exposé on the Philippine Government.” Just fill up the form at: https://bit.ly/2Ja571r.

The birth of any child exalts the mother/h2>

Got a comment? Or just want to check out what people are saying about this article, then…

Join the conversation

More related articles & posts (scroll down):

Pope Francis asked to revoke Luther’s excommunication

Pope Francis asked to revoke Luther’s excommunication

by | Dec 23, 2020 | Gotcha

GOTCHA

Pope Francis asked to revoke Luther’s excommunication

Photo source

Revocation of Luther’s excommunication

            Pope Francis is being asked to lift the excommunication of Martin Luther and thus seal Catholic-Lutheran reconciliation. Cleansing the legacy of the 16th-century reformer would remove a major block to Christian unity, influential ecumenical thinkers say. A papal initiative shall be reciprocated by Lutheran leaders. Other Protestant churches will be motivated into deeper talks for communion.

            Harsh words exchanged in the wake of Luther’s schism 500 years ago need to be taken back. That will cap 50 years of efforts at Catholic-Lutheran mending, the Altenberg Ecumenical Discussion Circle believes. The group of German-speaking Catholic and Protestant theologians has been gaining support since calling for Luther’s restoration last June. They were inspired by Pope Francis’ 2017 remark, on the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, that Luther’s intention “was to renew the Church, not divide her.”

            A date is suggested for the historic restoration: Jan. 3, 2021. It is also the Feast of the Epiphany, the manifestation of Christ.

            On that day five centuries ago Pope Leo X excommunicated Luther via the bull “Decet Romanum Pontificem”. Four years earlier the German monk had nailed his Ninety-Five Theses on the Wittenberg church door. Aided by newly invented printing, the schism spread fast across Christian Europe.

            By June 1520 Leo X issued a bull “condemning, reprobating, and rejecting completely” 41 of Luther’s theses. He called them “errors … either heretical, scandalous, false, offensive to pious ears or seductive of simple minds, and against Catholic truth.” Luther was given 60 days to recant or be expelled.

In 1999 the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics and 80 million Lutherans came closer to harmony.

Revocation of Luther’s excommunication

            Instead, Luther reaffirmed his declarations and added, “Whoever wrote that bull, he is Antichrist.” On deadline day, he and fellow-reformer Philip Melancthon burned a copy of the bull and other papal documents.

            Expulsion followed. In “Decet Romanum Pontificem” Leo X censured Luther as a “misguided”, “debased”, “depraved”, “damnable …heretic”. Persecutions and wars ensued as monarchs and nobles took sides.

            Rescinding the excommunication would delete such descriptions. The Altenberg Circle also urges the Lutheran World Federation to revoke Luther’s condemnation of the Pope as “Antichrist”. The Circle includes prominent Catholic theologians Johanna Rahner and Dorothea Sattler of the Universities of Tübingen and of Münster. It publishes studies and strides in Christian unification.

            In 1999 the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics and 80 million Lutherans came closer to harmony. Resolved was the fundamental rift on whether faith alone leads to salvation, which Lutherans uphold, or if good works are necessary, as Catholics aver. A Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification had this key message: “By grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping us and calling us to good works.” It came after decades of dialogue since 1966 between LWF and the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.

            The World Methodist Council endorsed the accord in 2006. The World Communion of Reformed Churches, which groups Congregational, Presbyterian, Reformed, United, Uniting, and Waldesian churches, followed suit in 2016.

            Pope Francis joined in 2016 the Lutherans’ kickoff in Sweden of a yearlong commemoration of 500 years of tradition. Beside LWF president Munib Younan, the Pontiff prayed, “The Holy Spirit help us to rejoice in the gifts that have come to the church through Reformation, prepare us to repent for the dividing walls that we, and our forebears, have built, and equip us for common witness and service in the world.”

            Francis has been reaching out to other Christian churches. “Finally!” he beamed, as he and Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill kissed thrice on the cheeks before their three-hour exchange. The meeting at the Havana Airport lounge in Feb. 2016 was the first in a thousand years between the Bishop of Rome and the Patriarch of Moscow.

            In Oct. 2016 Francis met twice in Rome with Anglican Archbishop Justin Welby. Their joint statement sought to overcome serious obstacles to full unity. Catholic-Anglican talks began in 1915. A century later it bogged down when some Anglican districts ordained women priests and a bishop in a same-sex marriage. Dialogue continues on complementary administering of sacraments.

Peter asks Jesus, “Lord, if another member of the church sins against me, how often should I forgive? As many as seven times?” Jesus replies, “Not seven times, but, I tell you, seventy-seven times.”

Matthew 18:21,22

            In Dec. 2017 Francis welcomed to the Vatican leaders of the World Evangelical Alliance. Discussions centered on closer cooperation against Christian suppression, violence, and human trafficking. WEA general secretary Efraim Tendero discussed cooperation in bible distribution. Bishop Efraim headed for two decades the Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches and the Philippine Relief and Development Services.

            A weaving thread in unification talks among Catholics and Protestants is the sacrifice of their martyrs for the faith.

            The coinage of “ecumenism” reflects deep desire among Christians to overcome divisions of history, rites, and teachings. Forgiveness is key. Often quoted in ecumenical gatherings is John 17, in which Jesus prays that His followers be one so that the world will believe. American Lutheran Rev. Christopher Olkiewicz suggests as well Matthew 18, where Peter asks Jesus, “Lord, if another member of the church sins against me, how often should I forgive? As many as seven times?” Jesus replies, “Not seven times, but, I tell you, seventy-seven times.” Anybody keeping count would have forgiven well before reaching that number.

 

* * *

 

            Paperback orders can be made for my latest book, “Gotcha: An Exposé on the Philippine Government.” Just fill up the form at: https://bit.ly/2Ja571r.

Revocation of Luther’s excommunication/h2>

Got a comment? Or just want to check out what people are saying about this article, then…

Join the conversation

More related articles & posts (scroll down):

A pattern in SSS punishing members for its mistakes

A pattern in SSS punishing members for its mistakes

by | Dec 18, 2020 | Gotcha

GOTCHA

A pattern in SSS punishing members for its mistakes

Image by Alexas_Fotos from Pixabay

SSS punishing members for its mistakes

            An isolated bureaucratic lapse is excusable. But a pattern of wrongs is alarming.

            Last Apr. 27 I featured the problem of Social Security System member Leo Querubin. SSS had sent through his present employer a collection notice. He supposedly owed SSS P60,619.15. It was for a salary loan balance of P11,250.73 from as far back as May 2001, plus interest of P12,487.50 and penalty of P36,880.92.

            Leo had a different employer in Makati then, which he left in 2002. He moved to a new employer a few blocks away, before joining his present one. The previous company has since closed.

            Leo no longer recalled the loan he supposedly took out 19 years ago, much less the details. He politely inquired with SSS:

            (1) In case a member with outstanding loan resigns, is it not SSS policy to require the employer to deduct the entire loan balance from the last salary and remit at once to SSS?

            (2) Assuming the old company did not do so, which means it was in breach of SSS rules, should not SSS have collected immediately through the subsequent employers, instead of 19 years later?

            Just pay up, SSS replied. Luzon was under strict pandemic lockdown that April, and government had a moratorium on all debt payments. In that column, “SSS Penalizing Member for Its and Employer’s Fault,” I alerted other members not to fall for scams.

Just pay up, SSS replied. Luzon was under strict pandemic lockdown that April, and government had a moratorium on all debt payments.

SSS punishing members for its mistakes

            Having read that, SSS member Howard Felicidario wrote this week: “I am aghast! I have an almost identical issue.” His letter to SSS is self-explanatory, excerpted below:

            “I am writing to complain about the unconscionable interest and penalty from a forgotten ten-year old loan which you may have overlooked due to technical inefficiency or bureaucratic neglect.

            “On Nov. 28, 2020, I was notified by Technology Elite, Inc., the company I currently work for in Clark Freeport, Pampanga, that I have a balance of P26,233.90 from a salary loan that I allegedly availed back in March 2010. On checking my SSS account online, I found out that there was a remaining unpaid balance of P10,000 that for 10 years, without my knowledge, has been accruing interests and penalties.  Now, the said interests and penalties have ballooned to P26,375.67 and growing.

            “My loan date supposedly was March 19, 2010, when I was still with Cutting Edge Productions, Inc., now closed.

            “For all I know, this has already been repaid since the balance of P10,000 should have been deducted from my final pay from Cutting Edge Productions, as standard operating procedure between SSS and employers.

            “I presumed regularity that SSS was doing its function so this loan should already have been paid in full, and that there is no more balance because for 10 years SSS did not bill any of my other previous employers nor received any information of my outstanding loan from any of them or you.

            “I do not renege on my obligations and I see to it that my debts are always paid in full and on time. This unconscionable accrued interest on loan left unchecked due to your inefficiency, neglect or incompetence has given me so much headache, disappointment, and indignation.

            “The SSS Mandate says: ‘To manage a sound and viable social security system which shall promote social justice and provide meaningful protection to members and their families against the hazards of disability, sickness, maternity, old age, death and other contingencies resulting in loss of income or financial burden.’

            “Leaving loans unchecked without notifying your members so that the interest and penalties accrue for years, even decades, without the members being aware and you gain double, triple, or quadruple the original loan amount is hardly promoting social justice. You should be notifying at least annually. Had I been notified before the interest ballooned in the past 10 years, I could have paid it before it reached this usurious level. There could be millions of us with similar situations.

            “I transferred to Riot Inc., a short walk from Cutting Edge Productions, both in Makati; my salary there had SSS deductions. Why did your system not detect that the balance of my loan from 2010 was left unpaid?

            “My current employer is prodding me to ‘settle’ the loan immediately. According to them, SSS will tag our company as delinquent due to my outstanding SSS loan. This will affect the eligibility of our other employees to get loans from SSS as well as the permits and operations of our company. Why penalize the whole organization for the issue of a member that the organization has nothing to do with? Have you taken a page from the mafia rulebook?”

 

* * *

 

            Hard-copy orders can now be made for my latest book, “Gotcha: An Exposé on the Philippine Government.” Just email: gotchabyjariusbondoc@gmail.com.

SSS punishing members for its mistakes

Got a comment? Or just want to check out what people are saying about this article, then…

Join the conversation

More related articles & posts (scroll down):

New MIA rehab plan needed after elimination of bidder

New MIA rehab plan needed after elimination of bidder

by | Dec 16, 2020 | Gotcha

GOTCHA

New MIA rehab plan needed after elimination of bidder

New rehab plans needed for Manila International Airport

            New rehab plans are needed for the Manila International Airport. This, after the MIA Authority eliminated the bidder that wants to refit and run the gateway for 25 years.

            The MIAA revoked the other week the original proponent status (OPS) of Megawide Construction Corp. It came after the administration’s top economic managers deemed Megawide’s capital and submissions deficient.

            Megawide executive director Louie Ferrer confirmed the rescinding on national radio Monday. “Ang balita namin mabilis din na-revoke ‘yung OPS namin (We heard that our OPS also swiftly was revoked),” he said in a DZBB interview. Formal notice is being awaited, he added.

            An OPS privileges a grantee as the sole party the government deals with for a major infrastructure work. It presupposes legal, technical, and financial compliance. Contenders may pose a Swiss challenge under the Build-Operate-Transfer Law. But the OPS holder can retain the project by simply matching any superior offer.

            With Megawide removed, government has two options, sources cite legal procedures. One, MIAA and its mother Dept. of Transport can evaluate the next in line of two other unsolicited proponents to rehab and operate the aged airport. This is not obligatory; under the B-O-T Law an agency can reject any or all unsolicited offers.

Revenue-rich MIAA can undertake the rehab by itself. It has P47 billion in assets as of end-2019, according to the Commission on Audit.

New rehab plans needed for Manila International Airport

            Two, revenue-rich MIAA can undertake the rehab by itself. Builders and suppliers will be selected via open public bidding. No more need to cede MIAA’s multibillion-peso annual income for decades to a private operator. No need too for five-fold increases of passenger terminal fees and other MIAA charges to recover the rehab costs. MIAA is financially equipped. It has P47 billion in assets as of end-2019, according to the Commission on Audit.

            Airport stakeholders prefer the latter, insiders say. Airside, cargo and passenger facilities and services direly need upgrade. MIA is often rated among the world’s worst gateways. Flights are delayed due to no space for additional runways. Forty-five million passengers per year crowd the terminals built for only 31 million.

            A super consortium of seven conglomerates initially held the OPS. It withdrew after DOTr rejected its plea for revised terms, considering low airport traffic due to pandemic. Days later DOTr endorsed Megawide under the softer terms the seven giants had sought.

            The MIAA Board — voting six-zero, and three abstentions — cancelled Megawide’s OPS last Dec. 4. Resolution No. 2020-067 took back the privilege granted last July. Taped deliberations dwelt on findings of the National Economic and Development Authority-Investment Coordinating Council. With the DOTr secretary as chairman and the MIAA general manager as vice, the Board consists of reps from the Office of the President; Departments of Justice, Finance, and Tourism; Civil Aviation Authority; and two from the private sector.

As NEDA-ICC co-chairs, Finance Sec. Carlos Dominguez and Economic Planning Sec. Karl Chua had declared that Megawide lacked capital. Its end-2019 equity of P18 billion was short of the 30 percent, or P32.3 billion, required for its P109-billion rehab plan. Future fund sources “are speculative and not guaranteed to materialize.” Returning Megawide’s proposal Nov. 19, they told endorser DOTr Sec. Arthur Tugade to ensure completeness of future submissions.

Megawide tried to solve the issue. Indian technical consultant GMR Infrastructure Ltd. was elevated to 40-percent partner. Megawide and GMR also operate the Mactan-Cebu International Airport terminal.

Last month the NBI charged Megawide and GMR execs with dummying in the Cebu project. The airport GM was charged with graft.

That further complicated Megawide’s plan in Manila. DOTr’s policy is to shun bidders with cases against the government.

A Megawide lawyer falsely accused me last week of misrepresenting and biased reporting in my column “Lawsuit in Cebu Airport Affects Rehab in Manila”, Dec. 4, 2020. Supposedly I did not get or present their side. Yet three paragraphs were about what executive director Ferrer and chairman Edgar Saavedra stated in our Zoom meeting.

Supposedly I did not explain the Anti-Dummying Law. Yet I devoted a paragraph on it and the constitutional limit of 40 percent on foreigners in public utilities like airports.

Supposedly I did not mention the date of the DOTr policy and its accompanying press release. Yet in my sixth paragraph, I wrote: “The Memorandum of June 26, 2018 ‘no longer allows prospective bidders with pending cases against the government to participate in all [DOTr] biddings’.”

New rehab plans needed for Manila International Airport

Unsolicited advice to Megawide: Change your lawyer. You’ll need a good one to defend you against the serious rap of dummying

Most preposterous, the lawyer claimed they are not covered by that policy since Megawide is not a bidder but an unsolicited proponent. In the eyes of government a proposal is a bid; no amount of hairsplitting can change that. The B-O-T Law governs unsolicited proposals and proponents. In that law and its implementing rules and regulations, the words are interchanged with bid and bidder 382 times.

Unsolicited advice to Megawide: Change your lawyer. You’ll need a good one to defend you against the serious rap of dummying, which can merit five to 15 years’ imprisonment and hefty fines.

 

* * *

 

My second compilation of selected columns is now available as e-book and print-on-demand. “Gotcha: An Exposé on the Philippine Government” zeroes in on corruption scandals and China’s sea aggression.

Get a FREE copy of “Chapter 1, Beijing’s Bullying and Duplicity”. Simply subscribe, also FREE, to my newsletter at https://jariusbondoc.com/

 

Got a comment? Or just want to check out what people are saying about this article, then…

Join the conversation

More related articles & posts (scroll down):

China navy disguises as civilian, while coast guard acts as military

China navy disguises as civilian, while coast guard acts as military

by | Dec 11, 2020 | Gotcha

GOTCHA

China navy disguises as civilian, while coast guard acts as military

Image by Achim Scholty from Pixabay

Chinese invasion of the Philippines

            Coastguards are supposedly civilian. But the China Coast Guard (CCG) leads incursions in the West Philippine Sea. Chinese fishermen also perform naval blockades. Behind all that is Beijing’s armed force, directing so-called low intensity “gray zone operations”.

            The CCG has more than 500 gunboats. At least 50 are equipped with missiles. Two are extra-large. At 12,000-ton displacement, they dwarf the 8,000-ton destroyers of neighbors’ navies.

            The duo each has on deck two combat helicopters, a 76-mm cannon, and several machine guns. Below are anti-submarine weapons.

            One of the two gigantic cutters is deployed in the East China Sea. There it circles Japan’s Senkaku Isles in bogus assertion of sovereignty. The other is in the South China Sea, trespassing Vietnam and Philippine exclusive economic zones. It has been spotted several times at Panganiban (Mischief) Reef. Beijing stole and fortified that Philippine sea feature in 1995. Panganiban is 120 miles off Palawan, well within the Philippines’ 200-mile EEZ but 800 miles outside China’s.

            (The Philippine Coast Guard has but a few dozen craft, mostly for near-shore rescue. For enhanced patrols, Filipino coastguards hitch rides on fast boats of the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources.)

            The world’s largest, the CCG is used to aggress. Nine CCG vessels led the occupation of Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal, 123 miles off Zambales, in 2012. Since then, CCG patrols have been driving away Filipino fishermen with machine guns and water cannons. The CCG also menaces Philippine exploration ships in Palawan’s oil- and gas-rich Recto (Reed) Bank. It assists the People’s Liberation Army-Navy in harassing Filipino sailors resupplying a Marine contingent in Ayungin (Second Thomas) Shoal.

The Chinese Coast Guard is now authorized to fire at or board foreign vessels in China’s falsely claimed territorial waters.

Chinese invasion of the Philippines

            In 2013 four Chinese civilian fisheries and maritime agencies were combined with the CCG. The CCG in turn was placed directly under the Chinese Communist Party’s Central Military Commission. The CMC also controls the People’s Liberation Army. It can be said that the “civilian” CCG is now an adjunct of China’s armed force, also the world’s largest.

            Last week Beijing’s new maritime law came into effect. The CCG is now authorized to fire at or board foreign vessels in China’s falsely claimed territorial waters. That encompasses the entire South China Sea, including the EEZs of Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam. The law ostensibly is against smuggling, drugs, and piracy. But it can be used as excuse to confront neighbors’ merchant and fishing fleets. Beijing claims the SCS via a baseless “nine-dash line”. It defies an international court’s 2016 outlawing of Beijing’s self-proclaimed sea boundary.

            Beijing is emboldening the CCG to escalate tensions. Clashes can occur in neighbors’ EEZs. Indonesia, for one, routinely confiscates and burns Chinese poaching trawlers in its Natuna Reefs. Boosted by Beijing law and firepower, the CCG can now defend the poachers whom it escorts.

            Meantime, the People’s Liberation Army-Navy employs fishermen for sea aggression. Maritime militia trawlers spearhead the poaching of endangered shark, sea turtles, giant clams, and fan corals in Panatag. Worse, they swarm around Pag-asa Island and Sandy Cay, in Palawan’s Kalayaan town. That blockade disrupts food deliveries to Pag-asa residents and prevents fishing in Sandy Cay.

            In Hainan island-province alone, the PLAN counts on 26,000 militia craft. The People’s Armed Force Maritime Militia has 84 vessels with reinforced steel hulls for ramming. In June 2019 one such launch deliberately battered an anchored Filipino wooden boat in Recto Bank, then abandoned the 26 fishermen thrown overboard. It wasn’t an isolated incident. The year before, a steel-hulled militia trawler also rammed a Vietnamese boat in the Paracels; it was repeated twice this year.

            The PLAN trains the militia in naval maneuvers, surveillance, and communications. It equips the trawlers with spyware and light weapons. Around Pag-asa the militia alerts the PLAN, stationed in nearby Subi Reef, about the approach of Philippine air and sealifts. They also maliciously blind Filipino patrol pilots with infrared lasers. US airmen have also been victimized. Subi is another Philippine reef grabbed by Beijing in 1988 and fortified starting 2014.

            In 2017 Vietnam withstood the combined might of the PLAN, CCG, and PAFMM. The PLAN attempted to plant an offshore oilrig in the Paracel archipelago. The CCG’s 12,000-ton cutter rammed and sank two Vietnamese coastguard vessels. PAFMM militia trawlers discarded pretenses at innocent fishing and participated in the weeks-long melee at sea. In the end the PLAN retreated with its oilrig to Hainan.

            Any peaceful country’s navy is for defense, and its coast guard for law enforcement. The military and civilian roles clearly are delineated. Not for Beijing.

            China’s sea aggression deprives Filipinos of food, fuel, and other resources from the West Philippine Sea.            

 

* * *

 

            Catch Sapol radio show, Saturdays, 8 to 10 a.m., DWIZ (882-AM).

 

            Gotcha archives: https://tinyurl.com/Gotcha-Archives

Chinese invasion of the Philippines

Got a comment? Or just want to check out what people are saying about this article, then…

Join the conversation

More related articles & posts (scroll down):

Site Terms & Conditions (scroll down for the buttons)

This site, jariusbondoc.com, is free for your use.

However, we do have some terms and conditions which you can find below. By continuing to use or to read from this site, that means you understand and agree to comply with the terms and conditions.

I. PRIVACY POLICY

This privacy policy (“policy”) will help you understand how jariusbondoc.com uses and protects the data you provide to us when you visit and use https://jariusbondoc.com/ (“website”, “service”).

We reserve the right to change this policy at any given time. If you want to make sure that you are up to date with the latest changes, we advise you to frequently visit this page.

 

What User Data We Collect

When you visit the website, we may collect the following data:

  • Your IP address
  • Your contact information and email address
  • Other information such as interests and preferences
  • Data profile regarding your online behavior on our website

 

Why We Collect Your Data

We are collecting your data for several reasons:

  • To better understand your needs
  • To improve our services and products
  • To send you promotional emails containing the information we think you will find interesting
  • To contact you to fill out surveys and participate in other types of market research
  • To customize our website according to your online behavior and personal preferences

 

Safeguarding and Securing the Data

jariusbondoc.com is committed to securing your data and keeping it confidential. jariusbondoc.com has done all in its power to prevent data theft, unauthorized access, and disclosure by implementing the latest technologies and software, which help us safeguard all the information we collect online.

 

Our Cookie Policy

Once you agree to allow our website to use cookies, you also agree to use the data it collects regarding your online behavior (analyze web traffic, web pages you spend the most time on, and websites you visit).

The data we collect by using cookies is used to customize our website to your needs. After we use the data for statistical analysis, the data is completely removed from our systems.

Please note that cookies don’t allow us to gain control of your computer in any way. They are strictly used to monitor which pages you find useful and which you do not so that we can provide a better experience for you.

If you want to disable cookies, you can do it by accessing the settings of your internet browser.

 

Links to Other Websites

Our website contains links that lead to other websites. If you click on these links jariusbondoc.com is not held responsible for your data and privacy protection. Visiting those websites is not governed by this privacy policy agreement. Make sure to read the privacy policy documentation of the website you go to from our website.

 

Restricting the Collection of your Personal Data

At some point, you might wish to restrict the use and collection of your personal data. You can achieve this by doing the following:

 

  • When you are filling the forms on the website, make sure to check if there is a box which you can leave unchecked, if you don’t want to disclose your personal information.
  • If you have already agreed to share your information with us, feel free to contact us via email and we will be more than happy to change this for you.

 

jariusbondoc.com will not lease, sell or distribute your personal information to any third parties, unless we have your permission. We might do so if the law forces us. Your personal information will be used when we need to send you promotional materials if you agree to this privacy policy.

 

II. COPYRIGHT NOTICE

All materials contained on this site are protected by the Republic of the Phlippines copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of jariusbondoc.com or in the case of third party materials, the owner of that content. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.

However, you may download material from jariusbondoc.com on the Web (one machine readable copy and one print copy per page) for your personal, noncommercial use only.

If you wish to use jariusbondoc.com content for commercial purposes, such as for content syndication etc., please contact us at jariusbondoconline@gmail.com.

Links to Websites other than those owned by jariusbondoc.com are offered as a service to readers. The editorial staff of jariusbondoc.com was not involved in their production and is not responsible for their content.

 

III. TERMS OF SERVICE

 

  1. GENERAL RULES AND DEFINITIONS

 

1.1 If you choose to use the jariusbondoc.com service (the “Service”), you will be agreeing to abide by all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement between you and jariusbondoc.com (“jariusbondoc.com “).

 

1.2 jariusbondoc.com may change, add or remove portions of this Agreement at any time, but if it does so, it will post such changes on the Service, or send them to you via e-mail. It is your responsibility to review this Agreement prior to each use of the Site and by continuing to use this Site, you agree to any changes.

 

1.3 If any of these rules or any future changes are unacceptable to you, you may cancel your membership by sending e-mail to jariusbondoconline.com (see section 10.1 regarding termination of service). Your continued use of the service now, or following the posting of notice of any changes in these operating rules, will indicate acceptance by you of such rules, changes, or modifications.

 

1.4 jariusbondoc.com may change, suspend or discontinue any aspect of the Service at any time, including the availability of any Service feature, database, or content. jariusbondoc.com may also impose limits on certain features and services or restrict your access to parts or all of the Service without notice or liability.

 

  1. JARIUSBONDOC.COM CONTENT AND MEMBER SUBMISSIONS

 

2.1 The contents of the jariusbondoc.com are intended for your personal, noncommercial use. All materials published on jariusbondoc.com (including, but not limited to news articles, photographs, images, illustrations, audio clips and video clips, also known as the “Content”) are protected by copyright, and owned or controlled by jariusbondoc.com or the party credited as the provider of the Content. You shall abide by all additional copyright notices, information, or restrictions contained in any Content accessed through the Service.

 

2.2 The Service and its Contents are protected by copyright pursuant to the Republic of the Philippines and international copyright laws. You may not modify, publish, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, reproduce (except as provided in Section 2.3 of this Agreement), create new works from, distribute, perform, display, or in any way exploit, any of the Content or the Service (including software) in whole or in part.

 

2.3 You may download or copy the Content and other downloadable items displayed on the Service for personal use only, provided that you maintain all copyright and other notices contained therein. Copying or storing of any Content for other than personal use is expressly prohibited without prior written permission from jariusbondoc.com or the copyright holder identified in the copyright notice contained in the Content.

 

  1. FORUMS, DISCUSSIONS AND USER GENERATED CONTENT

 

3.1 You shall not upload to, or distribute or otherwise publish on the message boards (the “Feedback Section”) any libelous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic, abusive, or otherwise illegal material.

 

3.2 (a)Be courteous. You agree that you will not threaten or verbally abuse jariusbondoc.com columnists and other jariusbondoc.com community Members, use defamatory language, or deliberately disrupt discussions with repetitive messages, meaningless messages or “spam.”

 

3.2 (b) Use respectful language. Like any community, the Feedback Sections will flourish only when our Members feel welcome and safe. You agree not to use language that abuses or discriminates on the basis of race, religion, nationality, gender, sexual preference, age, region, disability, etc. Hate speech of any kind is grounds for immediate and permanent suspension of access to all or part of the Service.

 

3.2 (c) Debate, but don’t attack. In a community full of opinions and preferences, people always disagree. jariusbondoc.com encourages active discussions and welcomes heated debate in our Feedback Sections. But personal attacks are a direct violation of this Agreement and are grounds for immediate and permanent suspension of access to all or part of the Service.

 

3.3 The Feedback Sections shall be used only in a noncommercial manner. You shall not, without the express approval of jariusbondoc.com, distribute or otherwise publish any material containing any solicitation of funds, advertising or solicitation for goods or services.

 

3.4 You are solely responsible for the content of your messages. However, while jariusbondoc.com does not and cannot review every message posted by you on the Forums and is not responsible for the content of these messages, jariusbondoc.com reserves the right to delete, move, or edit messages that it, in its sole discretion, deems abusive, defamatory, obscene, in violation of copyright or trademark laws, or otherwise unacceptable.

 

3.5 You acknowledge that any submissions you make to the Service (i.e., user-generated content including but not limited to: text, video, audio and photographs) (each, a “Submission”) may be edited, removed, modified, published, transmitted, and displayed by jariusbondoc.com and you waive any moral rights you may have in having the material altered or changed in a manner not agreeable to you. You grant jariusbondoc.com a perpetual, nonexclusive, world-wide, royalty free, sub-licensable license to the Submissions, which includes without limitation the right for jariusbondoc.com or any third party it designates, to use, copy, transmit, excerpt, publish, distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, create derivative works of, host, index, cache, tag, encode, modify and adapt (including without limitation the right to adapt to streaming, downloading, broadcast, mobile, digital, thumbnail, scanning or other technologies) in any form or media now known or hereinafter developed, any Submission posted by you on or to jariusbondoc.com or any other website owned by it, including any Submission posted on jariusbondoc.com through a third party.

 

3.6 By submitting an entry to jariusbondoc.com’s Readers’ Corner, you are consenting to its display on the site and for related online and offline promotional uses.

 

  1. ACCESS AND AVAILABILITY OF SERVICE AND LINKS

 

4.1 jariusbondoc.com contains links to other related World Wide Web Internet sites, resources, and sponsors of jariusbondoc.com. Since jariusbondoc.com is not responsible for the availability of these outside resources, or their contents, you should direct any concerns regarding any external link to the site administrator or Webmaster of such site.

 

  1. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES

 

5.1 You represent, warrant and covenant (a) that no materials of any kind submitted through your account will (i) violate, plagiarize, or infringe upon the rights of any third party, including copyright, trademark, privacy or other personal or proprietary rights; or (ii) contain libelous or otherwise unlawful material; and (b) that you are at least thirteen years old. You hereby indemnify, defend and hold harmless jariusbondoc.com, and all officers, directors, owners, agents, information providers, affiliates, licensors and licensees (collectively, the “Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all liability and costs, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by the Indemnified Parties in connection with any claim arising out of any breach by you or any user of your account of this Agreement or the foregoing representations, warranties and covenants. You shall cooperate as fully as reasonably required in the defense of any such claim. jariusbondoc.com reserves the right, at its own expense, to assume the exclusive defense and control of any matter subject to indemnification by you.

 

5.2 jariusbondoc.com does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any advice, opinion, statement, or other information displayed, uploaded, or distributed through the Service by any user, information provider or any other person or entity. You acknowledge that any reliance upon any such opinion, advice, statement, memorandum, or information shall be at your sole risk. THE SERVICE AND ALL DOWNLOADABLE SOFTWARE ARE DISTRIBUTED ON AN “AS IS” BASIS WITHOUT WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, WARRANTIES OF TITLE OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. YOU HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT USE OF THE SERVICE IS AT YOUR SOLE RISK.

 

  1. COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN JARIUSBONDOC.COM AND MEMBERS

 

6.1 If you indicate on your registration form that you want to receive such information, jariusbondoc.com, its owners and assigns, will allow certain third party vendors to provide you with information about products and services.

 

6.2 jariusbondoc.com reserves the right to send electronic mail to you for the purpose of informing you of changes or additions to the Service.

 

6.3 jariusbondoc.com reserves the right to disclose information about your usage and demographics, provided that it will not reveal your personal identity in connection with the disclosure of such information. Advertisers and/or Licensees on our Web site may collect and share information about you only if you indicate your acceptance. For more information please read the Privacy Policy of jariusbondoc.com.

 

6.4 jariusbondoc.com may contact you via e-mail regarding your participation in user surveys, asking for feedback on the Website and existing or prospective products and services. This information will be used to improve our Website and better understand our users, and any information we obtain in such surveys will not be shared with third parties, except in aggregate form.

 

  1. TERMINATION

 

 

7.1 jariusbondoc.com may, in its sole discretion, terminate or suspend your access to all or part of the Service for any reason, including, without limitation, breach or assignment of this Agreement.

 

  1. MISCELLANEOUS

 

8.1 This Agreement has been made in and shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the Republic of the Philippines law. Any action to enforce this agreement shall be brought in the courts located in Manila, Philippines.

 

8.2 Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, nothing in this Terms of Service will serve to preempt the promises made in jariusbondoc.com Privacy Policy.

 

8.3 Correspondence should be sent to jariusbondoconline.com.

 

8.4 You agree to report any copyright violations of the Terms of Service to jariusbondoc.com as soon as you become aware of them. In the event you have a claim of copyright infringement with respect to material that is contained in the jariusbondoc.com service, please notify jariusbondoconline.com. This Terms of Service was last updated on November 7, 2020.