Followup: Two Systems One Justice
This is a follow-up to previous post.
I’ll call your attention to the Philippine Star “Salonga, Tanda Ask CA to Bring Case to SC” Dec 19, 2006. I am assuming that Smith or his attorneys requested a bench trial instead of a trial by jury. The Philippines has a relative good justice system. They weaknesses are money, power and influence. In reviewing the facts of the case, the outcome would be the same either way. You do know the old saying: if you don’t have the facts, you argue the law. If you don’t have the law, you argue the facts. May I restate my comments to your post; this case is not about Smith vs. Nicole per se. It is about illicit international relation: Visiting Force Agreement between the United States government and the Philippines government and Philippines sovereignty. However, in the end, this situation will rectify itself through back channel maneuvering and deals making rest assure. Not to get off point, the U.S. attitude is, there is one law for us, and the rest of you can go to hell. The laws do not apply to them.
The world is getting smaller and more complex. The U.S. is one player even with it military and economic power. The U.S. power and influence can pressure the governments of other nations, but it has a very hard task of influencing or controlling the masses. This is illustrates by the situation in Iraq, Middle East and other third world countries, i.e. the Southern Hemisphere which is a hot bed of anti-American feeling.
Philippines Phil: You‘ve presented a persuasive argument. You are a conversationalist. When I have more time, I will read some of your other blogs.
I’ll call your attention to the Philippine Star “Salonga, Tanda Ask CA to Bring Case to SC” Dec 19, 2006. I am assuming that Smith or his attorneys requested a bench trial instead of a trial by jury. The Philippines has a relative good justice system. They weaknesses are money, power and influence. In reviewing the facts of the case, the outcome would be the same either way. You do know the old saying: if you don’t have the facts, you argue the law. If you don’t have the law, you argue the facts. May I restate my comments to your post; this case is not about Smith vs. Nicole per se. It is about illicit international relation: Visiting Force Agreement between the United States government and the Philippines government and Philippines sovereignty. However, in the end, this situation will rectify itself through back channel maneuvering and deals making rest assure. Not to get off point, the U.S. attitude is, there is one law for us, and the rest of you can go to hell. The laws do not apply to them.
The world is getting smaller and more complex. The U.S. is one player even with it military and economic power. The U.S. power and influence can pressure the governments of other nations, but it has a very hard task of influencing or controlling the masses. This is illustrates by the situation in Iraq, Middle East and other third world countries, i.e. the Southern Hemisphere which is a hot bed of anti-American feeling.
Philippines Phil: You‘ve presented a persuasive argument. You are a conversationalist. When I have more time, I will read some of your other blogs.
Comments