Pala-isip

In protest to the new Cybercrime Law that will take effect tomorrow, people are calling for the blackout of their profile photos to protest the bill. Here's a sample. Some have called for their status to be blacked out as well. Like this. ██████ ██████ ██ █████ ██████ ██████ █████████ ███████ █████ ██████████████ █████ ███████ ██████████████ ██████████ ███████ █████. [STATUS BLOCKED] (ʀᴀ ɴᴏ. 10175) this is how our status and comments will look like tomorrow once the cybercrime law takes effect... This law is affecting everyone online. Here is the person everyone is blaming for the insertion of libel in the Cybercrime Bill. And here are the others who supported the bill. Here's the real problem with the new Cybercrime Bill according to TG Guingona . So starting tomorrow, either stand up or watch out what you say online. I can and will be used against you in the court of law.

From We Support Anonymous Philipppines . FB 'likes', shares could be grounds for libel, says Sen. Guingona MANILA, Philippines - Sharing content, or even just clicking the 'Like' button on Facebook, may be grounds for libel under the recently enacted Cybercrime Prevention Act. But Senator Teofisto Guingona III said Thursday the law is so broad and vague it isn't clear who can or should be sued. “The law is very broad,” Guingona, who opposes the new law, said. “If you click like, you can be sued, and if you share, and continuously re-share information, you can also be sued. Saka sino ang liable? Hindi klaro eh. ‘Yung original na nag-post? ‘Yung nag-share? ‘Yung nag-tweet? Kahit nga ikaw, mag-post ka ng simpleng ‘hehehe’ di ba? Ibig sabihin nu’n, sangayon ka (And who is liable? It isn’t clear. The one who made the original post? The ones who share? The ones who tweet. Even you, if you post a simple, ‘hehehe,’ right? Does that mean you agree)? Are you liable? So...

The people of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo defended her from Fidel Ramos' demand that she come clean and declare her intention for 2010 saying that as much as "Fidel Ramos has the right to give his opinion, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo has the right to keep her plans private". Now, I know most people will say this is hogwash, that because Arroyo is the "President" and she is in public office that she has to declare her intentions publicly. I say let her keep silent. Why? What difference would it make if she says anything? We all know she can lie through her teeth anyway. She may declare she's not running next year, but decide to run anyway. Would her declaring anything make any difference? If history was any indication, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo will definitely do anything to cling to power. Be it by Con-Ass, Cha-cha, martial law or being the prime minister. She will do any and all things she can legally and illegally to stay in power. There's no surprise there.