Know Lies

10/05/2025

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐚𝐬𝐭-𝐌𝐢𝐧𝐮𝐭𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐚 𝐖𝐚𝐫: 𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐒𝐀𝐏𝐎𝐋 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐏𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐀𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐒𝐭𝐢𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐨𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐒𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐨𝐬

In the heart of General Santos City, just days before critical decisions are made at the ballot, a storm of black propaganda has begun to pour—and the fingerprints of political desperation are all over it.

Residents have begun noticing a peculiar pattern: printed materials from the SAPOL publication—once a local news source, now acting more like a political attack dog—are being discreetly dropped on doorsteps, inserted into car handles, and even folded together with a so-called “Social Contract” issued by the opposing camp, RCRI-AIM. This isn’t your usual campaign flyer; this is a full-fledged smear campaign designed to cast the incumbent administration in a harsh and manipulated light.

Sources confirm that funds have been funneled—yes, gagawas silag kwarta—for the mass printing and targeted distribution of this black paper propaganda. It’s a last-ditch attempt to sway public perception using sharp rhetoric and alarmist headlines, with the clear intent of dismantling the reputation of the administration. And let’s be clear: this isn’t mere political discourse—it’s character assassination by publication.

Here’s where the tea gets hotter.

The SAPOL publication—known to many as a previously reliable and credible source of city news—now finds itself in the middle of this political storm. Whether intentionally or not, its platform is currently being used to circulate highly partisan content that echoes the voice and agenda of a specific political camp. Has SAPOL been used? Is there a connection? I don’t claim to know for sure. Maybe I’m wrong, maybe I’m right. But the shift in tone is hard to miss—and the timing, even harder to ignore.

It doesn’t take a political analyst to see the bigger picture forming. Insiders and long-time observers of the city’s political scene have begun connecting the dots behind this orchestrated chaos. There’s growing talk pointing to familiar names—particularly veteran journalist Joseph Jubelag, who is said to have political and professional ties with Ernie Gabonada. Gabonada, in turn, is closely associated with Nuñez. Coincidence? Maybe. But the pattern is hard to ignore.

The “Social Contract” being stapled, folded, or slipped together with SAPOL’s latest issue isn’t just a logistical coincidence. It’s calculated. It’s psychological warfare, designed to reach voters at the most vulnerable level: their homes, their cars, their neighborhoods. The goal? Sow doubt. Stir unrest. Paint the current administration as incompetent and corrupt, using every inch of black-and-white space to do so.

But let’s talk facts. A closer look at the contents of that so-called “Social Contract” reveals a striking irony—all or almost all of the projects listed are completed or ongoing efforts under the leadership of the BIG 3 of PCM: Hon. Lorelie Pacquiao, Hon. Ton Acharon, and Hon. Odjoc Acharon. So what exactly is being promised here? Are we witnessing a bold rebranding of someone else’s work, dressed as a campaign promise?

In the end, the people of General Santos deserve clarity, not confusion. Truth, not theatrics. And most of all, leadership rooted in reality—not recycled narratives stapled to propaganda.

And all this, 𝒖𝒑 𝒕𝒐 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒚 𝒍𝒂𝒔𝒕 𝒎𝒊𝒏𝒖𝒕𝒆. The timing is telling. They’ve waited for the point when rebuttal is nearly impossible, when the noise is hardest to silence.

𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐠𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐩 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐟𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐩𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧? 𝐈𝐭 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐰𝐬 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐫𝐬. 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩 𝐝𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐮𝐩𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝 𝐢𝐟 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐬 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐭𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐜? General Santos deserves better than schemes and shadows. Leadership should be about service and truth, not theatrics and black propaganda.

This isn’t just politics—it’s manipulation. And the people of Gensan deserve better than to be pawns in a battle of egos and ambitions.

As always, receipts are ready, and so are the people who see through the smoke.
-
KNOW MANIPULATIONS, KNOW LIES.

09/05/2025

𝐒𝐦𝐨𝐤𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐌𝐢𝐫𝐫𝐨𝐫𝐬: 𝐁𝐥𝐨𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐄𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐲 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐏𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐇𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭, 𝐍𝐨𝐭 𝐕𝐨𝐭𝐞 𝐁𝐮𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠

As General Santos City braces for the upcoming May 12 elections, an incident in Barangay Katangawan has ignited online debates and political finger-pointing. What was initially billed by partisan actors as a “citizen’s arrest” exposing vote buying by the People’s Champ Movement (PCM) is now being unraveled as something far more troubling: a case of political harassment thinly veiled as public vigilance.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐥𝐨𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐒𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤𝐬

According to the official police blotter filed at Police Station 08, PCM was wrapping up a legitimate training and allowance distribution for their duly accredited poll watchers on May 8, when four individuals—claiming to be part of a group called “Bantay Boto”—forcibly entered the premises without a warrant, coordination, or legal authority.

These individuals proceeded to confiscate bags containing cash allowances, ID cards, ATM cards, and personal effects—items that were later turned over to the police. This act, recorded in the blotter and corroborated by eyewitnesses, points not to vigilantism, but to trespassing, intimidation, and potentially even robbery under Philippine criminal law.

The victims, PCM volunteers, were visibly traumatized. What should have been a routine campaign activity under the protections of the law became a hostile and fear-inducing encounter, leaving emotional scars and sowing distrust just days before the election.

𝐕𝐨𝐭𝐞 𝐁𝐮𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠? 𝐋𝐞𝐭’𝐬 𝐓𝐚𝐥𝐤 𝐋𝐚𝐰

The opposing camp has attempted to frame the incident as an exposure of vote buying. However, under COMELEC Resolution No. 11104, for an act to qualify as vote buying, it must meet these three clear elements:

1. Money or something of value must have been offered or given;
2. It must have been done personally or through another;
3. The intent must be to influence someone to vote for or against a candidate.

None of these elements are present in this case. The video circulated online shows only the distribution of allowances to accredited poll watchers—a legal and long-accepted practice during campaign periods. Notably, no actual sample ballots were recovered, no actual list of voters paired with money, and no verbal or written inducement to vote for a particular candidate was ever shown. The materials seized were campaign-related documents and volunteer logs—not evidence of corruption.

In light of these facts, it is evident that the incident in question does not meet the criteria for vote buying as defined by the COMELEC. The actions taken by the individuals involved raise concerns about the misuse of authority and the potential for political harassment under the guise of electoral vigilance.

𝐂𝐎𝐌𝐄𝐋𝐄𝐂 𝐖𝐞𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐬 𝐈𝐧

Perhaps most damning to the narrative pushed by PCM’s detractors is the statement of City Election Officer Atty. Sittie Sharmaine Garangan, who clarified that the group “Bantay Boto” is not a deputized citizen arm of the Commission on Elections. Only NAMFREL and PPCRV hold that authority.

Furthermore, COMELEC emphasized that only police and proper law enforcement agencies are authorized to conduct arrests—even under the guise of a “citizen’s arrest.” This makes the actions of the four individuals not just irregular, but unlawful.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐬 𝐁𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐮𝐫𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐞

One of the individuals involved in the raid was identified as Nicasio Cequiña Tutor, a resident of Barangay Dadiangas South—a barangay whose leadership is publicly anti-PCM and staunchly aligned with the rival political group. The tricycle used by the group even bore the “Bantay Boto” tarpaulins with a vehicle that also bore campaign posters of PCM’s opponent, Dean Dangane.

This connection strips away the illusion of impartiality and raises the obvious question: was this a spontaneous act of civic duty, or a calculated political maneuver?

Adding to the intrigue was a Facebook post by former
Congresswoman Shirlyn Bañas. In it, she echoed concerns about alleged vote buying but made no mention of the illegal entry, no condemnation of the unauthorized seizure of personal property, and no acknowledgment of COMELEC’s clarification. The tone of her post was cautious, even diplomatic—but also conspicuously selective.

This strategic silence on glaring legal violations raises further questions about whether this incident was less about justice, and more about optics.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐌𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐃𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞

While PCM has filed an official blotter and is cooperating fully with authorities, no formal complaint or sworn affidavit has been submitted by the accusers. If they truly believed they uncovered an electoral crime, why have they not pursued it through the proper legal channels?

It’s a striking imbalance: one side operating within legal processes, the other content with Facebook posts and viral content. One side submitting to scrutiny, the other playing to the gallery.

𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭’𝐬 𝐚𝐭 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞

Beyond the politics and posturing, the Katangawan incident lays bare a dangerous trend: weaponizing civic language to harass political opponents, distorting legal definitions to justify intrusion, and using social media virality as a substitute for truth.

As PCM rightly stated in its official release, “This is not merely an attack on PCM. This is an attack on democracy itself.”

In reality, the May 8 incident did not expose vote buying—it exposed a tactic: manufacture scandal, bypass legal protocol, post first, ask questions later.

But the people of General Santos City deserve better than trial by TikTok. They deserve leaders who respect the law, protect civil rights, and understand that the sanctity of the vote is not a political tool—it is a public trust.
-
PLEASE CHECK: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1HoENg9Hsq/
-
KNOW MANIPULATIONS, KNOW LIES.

09/05/2025

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐫: 𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐍𝐨𝐢𝐬𝐞 𝐈𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐁𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐀𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧

𝑩𝒚: 𝑲𝒏𝒐𝒘 𝒍𝒊𝒆𝒔

In the world of politics, some are loud in public but quiet where it truly matters—in official proceedings.

Case in point: Jose Edmar J. Yumang, the man behind the much-hyped graft complaint surrounding General Santos City’s proposed P2.3 billion “Mallengke” redevelopment project. He filed a complaint, made noise about alleged corruption, and positioned himself as a crusader for truth. But when it was time to respond formally to the counter-evidence submitted by the parties he accused—he said nothing.

Not a word. Not a paragraph. Not even a request for an extension that he actually followed through with.

Here’s what went down: the respondents submitted their Joint Counter-Affidavit on April 10, 2025. A copy was received by his own wife, whose signature is clearly affixed on the document. As per standard rules, Yumang was given ten full days to reply—an opportunity to defend his complaint, clarify his claims, and solidify his accusations.

But the deadline came and went. And what did Yumang file? Absolutely nothing.

He didn’t file a reply. He didn’t file for an extension. He didn’t lift a finger after the respondents submitted their side on April 10, 2025.

Nothing.

If you genuinely believed a P2.3 billion deal was tainted with corruption, wouldn’t you fight tooth and nail to prove it? Wouldn’t you at least file something to push your case forward?

But Yumang didn’t. Because it was never really about justice.

It’s becoming clear now: that complaint? It was just a stunt. A pre-election move designed to stain the name of the current administration—timed for maximum drama, but with zero follow-through. He dropped his so-called “bombshell,” then disappeared when it was time to back it up with facts.

And what does that say?

It says that while press releases and interviews might win airtime, they mean nothing in a legal process where actions matter. While one can cry corruption in front of cameras, the real fight is in the paperwork—and Yumang didn’t even show up.

So again, was this ever about truth? Or was it just another desperate act in the theater of politics?

Meanwhile, the respondents did their part. They answered. They submitted their counter. They followed the rules.

The ball was in Yumang’s court.

And he dropped it.

In the end, it’s easy to accuse. But if you can’t even file a reply—maybe you were never after justice.

Maybe you were just after votes.
-
KNOW MANIPULATIONS, KNOW LIES.

09/05/2025

BISAYA TRANSLATION OF THE ARTICLE IN THIS LINK: https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=122114969438828075&set=a.122096906594828075
-
𝐒𝐚 𝐋𝐢𝐤𝐨𝐝 𝐬𝐚 𝐑𝐚𝐢𝐝: 𝐏𝐮𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐤𝐚 𝐧𝐠𝐚 𝐍𝐚𝐚𝐲 𝐃𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐚𝐧 𝐧𝐠𝐚 𝐓𝐮𝐲𝐨

𝑵𝒊: 𝑲𝒏𝒐𝒘 𝑳𝒊𝒆𝒔

Ang nagsugod isip usa ka ligal ug naandan nga pagbansay sa eleksyon natapos sa gitawag karon sa kadaghanan nga usa ka dayag nga kaso sa politikanhong harasment - ug ang People's Champ Movement (PCM) wala magpakahilom.

Niadtong Mayo 08, 2025, ang PCM nag-organisar og lehitimong sesyon sa pagbansay-bansay alang sa ilang mga akreditado nga poll watchers, inubanan sa legal nga pag-apod-apod sa mga allowance - usa ka standard practice sa panahon sa kampanya, ug usa nga hingpit nga nagsunod sa mga regulasyon sa Commission on Elections (COMELEC). Hapsay ang dagan. Klaro ang tuyo. Ug ang legal nga basihan? Lig-on.

Apan sa dihang hapit na matapos ang kalihokan, usa ka grupo nga nagpailang “Bantay Boto” kalit nga misulod sa lugar. Wala’y koordinasyon. Wala’y legal nga katungdanan. Wala’y uwaw.

Matod sa mga testigo, ang grupo nag-angkon nga ilang gi-monitor ang aktibidad isip mga opisyal nga observer, uban pa gani nagpakaaron-ingnong pulis. Pero imbes nga motan-aw lang, ilang gikuha ang cash allowances ug mga election materials, pinugos nga misulod sa pribadong lugar ug gikuhaan og kabtangan nga walay warrant o due process.

Sumala sa mga legal expert, ang ilang gibuhat mahimong mahulog sa krimen nga pagpangawat, trespassing, ug pagpangilog sa awtoridad — tulo ka kalapasan nga seryoso ug posibleng ikasangkot sa kaso kriminal.

Unya mibutho ang twist: ang sakyanan nga gigamit sa grupo adunay mga campaign materials sa usa ka kontra nga kandidato — si Dean Dangane — nga klaro kaayong makita nga nakadikit sa sakyanan. Ang hulagway sa sakyanan misugod og katag online, ug daghang mga ning-apil sa kalihokan maoy nakaila sa van nga sagad gamiton sa kampo sa kontra.

Duda usab ang oras. Human lang sa nahitabo, usa ka nailhan nga social media propagandist — nga dugay na nga konektado sa mga pagpang-daot batok sa PCM — kalit lang nag-post og istorya bahin sa insidente nga daw gi-andam na daan. Para sa kadaghanan, klaro ang koordinasyon tali sa raid ug sa online narrative — mura’g plano gyud ug dili lang pagkahinabo.

Agig tubag, gikondena sa PCM ang insidente isip politikanhong harasment sa pinakabag-o nga porma niini, ug karon nagpadayon sa legal nga aksyon. Matod sa legal counsel sa grupo, giandam na ang mga kaso batok sa mga indibidwal nga nalambigit, apil na kadtong nagmisrepresenta sa ilang kaugalingon isip mga awtoridad ug pugson nga mikuha sa kabtangan.

“Dili lang kini atake batok sa PCM,” matud sa ilang opisyal nga pahayag, “kundili usa kini ka atake sa eleksyon nga proseso ug sa katungod sa katawhan nga maghiusa ug mokamot nga walay kahadlok.”

Sa pagkasulat niini, gi-awhag ang Commission on Elections ug uban pang ahensya nga imbestigahan ang panghitabo og hugot. Bisan ang mga civil society groups ug election watchdogs nakapansin na — ug ilang giingon nga kini nga kaso nagpakita og seryosong abuso sa gahum ug paggamit sa impluwensya alang sa political nga katuyoan.

Usa ka butang ang klaro: PCM ang target, apan ang tinuod nga biktima — demokrasya.

Ug para kadtong luyo sa raid? Nabutyag na ang istorya. Nagmatngon ang katawhan. Ug karon, wala nay dautang footage nga ilang matagoan.
-
KNOW MANIPULATIONS, KNOW LIES.

08/05/2025

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐮𝐝𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐲: 𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 “𝐖𝐚𝐭𝐜𝐡𝐝𝐨𝐠𝐬” 𝐂𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐢𝐧𝐞

𝑩𝒚: 𝑲𝒏𝒐𝒘 𝑳𝒊𝒆𝒔

What began as a lawful and routine election training ended in what many are now calling a blatant case of political harassment — and the People’s Champ Movement (PCM) isn’t staying silent.

On May 08, 2025, PCM organized a legitimate training session for their accredited poll watchers, coupled with the lawful distribution of allowances — a standard practice during campaign season, and one fully compliant with Commission on Elections (COMELEC) regulations. The atmosphere was orderly. The purpose was clear. The legal basis? Ironclad.

But just as the event was winding down, a group identifying themselves as “Bantay Boto” stormed the venue. No coordination. No legal mandate. No shame.

Witnesses say the group claimed to be conducting official oversight, with some even pretending to be police officers. But rather than observe, they confiscated cash allowances and election materials, forcibly entering a private venue and seizing property without warrant or due process.

Legal experts say the actions committed fall under robbery, trespassing, and usurpation of authority — a trifecta of violations that could lead to serious criminal charges.

Then came the twist: the vehicle used by the group bore campaign materials of a rival candidate, Dean Dangane — clearly displayed on its windows. Photos of the vehicle circulated online, and several attendees were quick to recognize the van as frequently used by the opposing camp.

The timing was also suspect. Mere moments after the incident, a known social media propagandist — long associated with politically motivated attacks against PCM — published a post framing the situation with suspicious speed. For many observers, the coordination between the raid and the online narrative seemed too seamless to be coincidence.

In response, PCM has condemned the incident as political harassment in its rawest form, and is now moving forward with legal action. According to the group’s legal counsel, cases are being prepared against the individuals involved, including those who misrepresented themselves as authorities and forcibly took property.

“This isn’t just an attack on PCM,” their official statement, “it’s an attack on the electoral process and the rights of citizens to organize and participate freely.” (https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1BG3pJibXm/)

As of this writing, the Commission on Elections and other relevant agencies are being urged to investigate the matter thoroughly. Civil society groups and election watchdogs have also taken interest, noting that the case raises serious concerns about the abuse of power and the weaponization of political influence.

One thing is clear: PCM may have been the target, but the real victim here is democracy itself.

And as for those behind the raid? The tea’s been spilled. The people are watching. And this time, there won’t be any corrupted footage to hide behind.
-
KNOW MANIPULATIONS, KNOW LIES.

06/05/2025

𝐄𝐗𝐏𝐎𝐒𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐓𝐑𝐔𝐓𝐇: 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐒𝐡𝐢𝐫𝐥𝐲𝐧 𝐁𝐚ñ𝐚𝐬 𝐖𝐨𝐧’𝐭 𝐓𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐀𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐚𝐛𝐮𝐡𝐚𝐲 𝐔𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐩𝐚𝐬𝐬

On the Alleged “Problematic Soil”

Former Congresswoman Bañas calls it “confusing” that DPWH now cites soil and water table conditions as reasons for the delay. You know what’s more confusing? 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐍𝐎 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐡𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐬𝐨𝐢𝐥 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐝𝐲 𝐝𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐮𝐬𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐚𝐧 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐩𝐚𝐬𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐚 𝐟𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐝-𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐚.

This project site sits on land known for waterlogging and proximity to a river. If a proper geotechnical investigation had been conducted before finalizing the design, DPWH wouldn’t be playing catch-up today, redesigning to prevent flooding disasters.

Let’s be clear: 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐨𝐢𝐥—𝐢𝐭’𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝.

And to be even clearer: 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐧𝐨 𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐬. The traffic problem was well-established, and the city needed a long-term solution. But what Bañas failed to do was match that solution with responsible planning and sound engineering.

𝐎𝐧 “𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭” 𝐂𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐦𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐨𝐥𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐌𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐀𝐧𝐠

Yes, we understand that roads that are national in nature and fall under DPWH jurisdiction. That’s clear. But if this was purely a national project with no local influence at all, 𝐰𝐡𝐲 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐚 𝐥𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐒𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐨𝐬, 𝐀𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐌𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐀𝐧𝐠, 𝐡𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐬 like fountains and LED walls??

That detail is telling.

If the project was strictly national in design, DPWH National Office would have likely commissioned its own design team. But the fact that a local architect was involved strongly suggests that someone 𝐥𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐢𝐧𝐟𝐥𝐮𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥 pushed for it — was that someone who appears to be 𝐁𝐚ñ𝐚𝐬 𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟??

You don’t get to say, “hands-off ko ani, DPWH ni tanan,” then turn around and be the 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧 that’s now being questioned. Her role may not have been technical, but it was 𝐢𝐧𝐟𝐥𝐮𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥 — especially in pushing for add-ons that go beyond standard infrastructure.

𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 — 𝐢𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐁𝐚ñ𝐚𝐬’𝐬 𝐚𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐜𝐲, 𝐛𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬.

𝒀𝒐𝒖 𝒄𝒂𝒏’𝒕 𝒈𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒐𝒓𝒊𝒛𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒉𝒆𝒍𝒍 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒅𝒊𝒔𝒐𝒘𝒏 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒄𝒓𝒂𝒄𝒌𝒔.

𝐎𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐚𝐥𝐬𝐞 𝐁𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐂𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐦𝐬 𝐯𝐬. 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐍𝐮𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐬

In her post, Former Congresswoman Bañas presented a grand-looking budget breakdown:

GAA 2021 (Package 1): Php 256,100,000.00
GAA 2022 (Package 2): Php 220,000,000.00
Proposed GAA 2023 (Package 3): Php 86,950,000.00
Proposed GAA 2024 (Package 4): Php 86,950,000.00
𝐓𝐎𝐓𝐀𝐋 (𝐚𝐬 𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐝): 𝐏𝐡𝐩 𝟔𝟓𝟎,𝟎𝟎𝟎,𝟎𝟎𝟎.𝟎𝟎

But here’s the 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐬 of the project based on the official data presented by DPWH Director Engr. Allan Borromeo before the Sangguniang Panlungsod:

𝐓𝐨𝐭𝐚𝐥 𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐛𝐮𝐫𝐬𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭: 𝐏𝐡𝐩 𝟑𝟕𝟏,𝟎𝟐𝟗,𝟓𝟏𝟎.𝟏𝟐
𝐏𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝟏: Php 244,646,630.41 (100% completed)
𝐏𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝟐: Php 114,911,933.09 (54.27% completed)
𝐏𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝟑: Php 11,470,946.62 (15% advance payment)
𝐏𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝟒: No funds released as of yet

𝐒𝐨 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐡𝐩 𝟔𝟓𝟎 𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐦𝐬?

The numbers 𝐝𝐨 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐥𝐢𝐞 — only 𝐏𝐡𝐩 𝟑𝟕𝟏 𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 has been disbursed so far.

What Bañas posted is a 𝐰𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐭, not an actual fund release. She conveniently fails to tell the public that 𝐚 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐚𝐬 𝐚𝐧 𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐫 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐛𝐮𝐫𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧𝐞. And that Package 4 — which she counts in full — has not even materialized in cash.

Worse, in her interview with Brigada, she escalated that number to “𝐚𝐥𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐏𝐡𝐩 𝟏 𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧” supposedly spent.

𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐥𝐲 𝐟𝐚𝐥𝐬𝐞.

What she’s doing is inflating the figures to deflect from the fact that nearly three years into the project, we still don’t have the access road done, and the underpass is still buried in delays.

𝐎𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐑𝐨𝐚𝐝 “𝐃𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧”

She expresses shock that the access road under Package 1 is already deteriorating. But that road, along with the bicycle lane, is part of the same project under DPWH’s watch — the same agency she says had full control.

So the question must be asked: 𝐈𝐟 𝐢𝐭’𝐬 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐥𝐲 𝐚 𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭, 𝐰𝐡𝐲 𝐩𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐥𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐆𝐔 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧? Or is she conveniently changing her tune to distance herself from accountability?

𝐎𝐧 𝐔𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐑𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐃𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐬

She claims the delay in relocating utility lines (SOCOTECO II, GSCWD) is “deeply concerning.” But these challenges are not new. If this was foreseen years ago — as she claims — 𝐰𝐡𝐲 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧’𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐯𝐞𝐝 𝐝𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦? She had time to help facilitate these arrangements.

𝐒𝐭𝐨𝐩 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐚𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝐎𝐰𝐧 𝐔𝐩 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐅𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐬.

Bañas can’t keep shifting blame and reshaping the narrative:

There’s no problem with the traffic study.
There IS a problem with the lack of soil and engineering studies.
There IS a problem with prioritizing design over durability.
There IS a problem with exaggerating how much money has been spent.

If she truly wants answers, she should 𝐝𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐃𝐏𝐖𝐇, not play politics with the media.

𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐚𝐧 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐡𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐬 — 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫-𝐩𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐰𝐫𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐏𝐑.
-
KNOW MANIPULATIONS, KNOW LIES.

03/05/2025

PUBLIC ADVISORY: Beware of Fake COMELEC Post – “No National ID, No Vote” Is Not True

A graphic has been circulating online falsely claiming that the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) now requires the presentation of the National ID in order to vote, with the message “No National ID, No Vote.” This is false, misleading, and not issued by COMELEC.

Under Philippine laws and COMELEC regulations, registered voters cannot be disqualified from voting simply for not possessing a National ID. Voters are only required to present any valid government-issued ID for identity verification during elections. The use of the National ID is not mandatory for voting, and the absence of it does not disenfranchise any voter.

Moreover, the circulating post shows clear signs of inauthenticity:

- It contains grammatical errors such as “Please informed your family ASAP.”
- It lacks proper formatting and branding used in official COMELEC advisories.
- It provides no verifiable source or link to COMELEC’s official platforms.

DO NOT CLICK ON ANY LINKS from that page or similar unverified sources. These may be phishing attempts designed to steal personal information—which can later be used for scams, identity theft, or other fraudulent activities. Protect your data by refraining from engaging with suspicious posts and pages.

To verify any election-related information, always consult COMELEC’s official website (www.comelec.gov.ph) or its verified social media accounts.

Let us stay vigilant, informed, and responsible. Misinformation threatens not only our democratic rights but also our personal security. Please help spread only accurate and verified information.
-
KNOW MANIPULATIONS, KNOW LIES.

02/05/2025

𝐒𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐡 𝐁𝐚𝐲: 𝐔𝐬𝐮𝐟𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐭 𝐖𝐚𝐬 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐔𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐅𝐨𝐫𝐠𝐨𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐧?

Once hailed as a future public hub near the shoreline of Barangay Dadiangas South, “𝑺𝒐𝒖𝒕𝒉 𝑩𝒂𝒚” is now under scrutiny after the 19th Sangguniang Panlungsod of General Santos City officially revoked not just one, but two key resolutions that allowed its development.

In the 𝟏𝟓𝐭𝐡 𝐑𝐞𝐠𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐫 𝐒𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐝 𝐨𝐧 𝐍𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫 𝟏𝟐, 𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟗, 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐍𝐨𝐬. 𝟔𝟖𝟎 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝟖𝟒𝟕, 𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟗, gave the green light for the former City Mayor Hon. Ronnel C. Rivera to enter into a Deed of Usufruct with Barangay South, represented by 𝐏𝐮𝐧𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐁𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐲 𝐑𝐨𝐜𝐤 𝐄𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐞𝐨 𝐆𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐲 (Rock Garay). The agreement covered 𝐋𝐨𝐭 𝐗 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐋𝐨𝐭 𝐘-𝟏-𝐁, both government-owned parcels of land, including the now-infamous “𝑸𝒖𝒆𝒆𝒏 𝑻𝒖𝒏𝒂 𝑷𝒂𝒓𝒌.”

But fast-forward to 2024: what was meant to be a space “𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒑𝒖𝒃𝒍𝒊𝒄 𝒖𝒔𝒆” turned into a legal and public image headache.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐝 𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠

The City Legal Office issued a 𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐯𝐨𝐤𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐮𝐬𝐮𝐟𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐬, pointing out that:

1. The City already has 𝐚 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐋𝐨𝐭 𝐘-𝟏-𝐁—but it can’t move forward unless the usufruct is extinguished.

2. The authority granted for Lot X was limited only to 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐮𝐬𝐞, yet the contract allowed 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠, which goes beyond the permitted scope.

3. These lands are public in nature, meaning they’re 𝐛𝐞𝐲𝐨𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐦𝐚𝐧—in short, they shouldn’t be treated like real estate open for business.

So, the SP acted accordingly: 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝟔𝟖𝟎 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝟖𝟒𝟕 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐯𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐝.

𝐅𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐏𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐤 𝐭𝐨 “𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐙𝐨𝐧𝐞”?

Here’s where the story gets interesting:

According to the usufruct contract itself, Barangay South could erect movable structures and even sublease spaces—for “economic enterprise.” However, any permanent structure must have the City’s approval. And guess what? There are whispers (and some documents) about a building constructed without a proper permit, just a few steps from the shore.

So the questions begin to pile up:

→ 𝑻𝒊𝒏𝒐𝒐𝒅 𝒃𝒂 𝒏𝒈𝒂 𝒘𝒂𝒍𝒂𝒚 𝒃𝒖𝒊𝒍𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒎𝒊𝒕?

→ 𝑮𝒊-𝒔𝒖𝒃𝒍𝒆𝒂𝒔𝒆 𝒃𝒂 𝒈𝒚𝒖𝒅 𝒏𝒊 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒎𝒆𝒓𝒄𝒊𝒂𝒍 𝒈𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒔 𝒏𝒈𝒂 𝒘𝒂𝒍𝒂𝒚 𝒌𝒍𝒂𝒓𝒐𝒏𝒈 𝒄𝒐𝒐𝒓𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒔𝒂 𝑪𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝑮𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕?

→ 𝑷𝒖𝒃𝒍𝒊𝒄 𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒌 𝒂𝒏𝒈 𝒔𝒂𝒂𝒅, 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒐 𝒏𝒈𝒂𝒏𝒐 𝒎𝒖𝒓𝒂𝒈 𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒎𝒆𝒓𝒄𝒊𝒂𝒍 𝒄𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒂𝒏𝒈 𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒖𝒍𝒕𝒂?

𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐒𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐡 𝐁𝐚𝐲 𝐇𝐚𝐬 𝐁𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞

If you ask around today, you’ll hear more than just waves.

Locals have noticed the rise of 𝐊𝐓𝐕 𝐛𝐚𝐫𝐬, 𝐥𝐢𝐪𝐮𝐨𝐫 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐬, and smoking areas. There are even alleged reports of 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧-𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐭𝐲 happening in or near the vicinity. Not quite the family-friendly public space many had hoped for.

South Bay is starting to sound like it’s not just a play on geography, but a reflection of blurred lines between public service and questionable ex*****on.

𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐍𝐨𝐰, 𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐚𝐧

Barangay South may have envisioned something positive—but 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲, 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 were clearly lacking. While PB Garay signed the contract with seemingly good intentions, the current situation invites us to question: 𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐝𝐢𝐝 𝐚 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐤 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐧 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐚 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐲 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐚 𝐟𝐞𝐰?

One thing’s for sure: 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐬𝐭. And if it’s misused—even under the guise of “development”—someone has to answer.
-
KNOW MANIPULATIONS, KNOW LIES.

30/04/2025

ADDITIONAL INFO on RA 12160 (Muslim Filipino Burial Practices Act):

A key provision of Republic Act No. 12160 is found in Section 4, which mandates that Muslim cadavers shall be released within 24 hours by any hospital, medical clinic, funeral parlor, morgue, or similar facility.

Importantly, the non-payment of hospital or medical bills shall in no case be a reason to delay the release or shipment of the deceased.

This provision is crucial because it upholds the religious and cultural right of Muslim Filipinos to observe immediate burial practices—a right that cannot be set aside due to financial or institutional constraints.

This is not just tradition—it’s now the law.

𝐏𝐚𝐠𝐭𝐮𝐤𝐢 𝐬𝐚 𝐁𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐨𝐝: 𝐏𝐚𝐠𝐭𝐚𝐡𝐨𝐝 𝐬𝐚 𝐓𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐲𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐚 𝐏𝐚𝐠𝐥𝐮𝐛𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐚 𝐦𝐠𝐚 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐦

Karong panahona, daghan ang diskusyon online kabahin sa balaod nga nagsiguro sa paglubong sa usa ka Muslim sulod sa 24 ka oras pagkahuman sa kamatayon. Ang uban nagaingon nga dugay na kini nga tradisyon ug wala man untay problema bisan walay balaod. Apan, kung atong tan-awon pag-ayo, importante ug makatabang gyud ang pormal nga pagpatuman niini pinaagi sa balaod.

𝐃𝐢𝐥𝐢 𝐒𝐮𝐟𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐲𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐠 𝐓𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐲𝐨𝐧 𝐋𝐚𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐠

Tinood nga sa kadugayan, ang tradisyon sa Islam nagmando nga ang patay ilubong sulod sa 24 ka oras. Apan sa realidad, daghang butang ang makababag niini — 𝐚𝐝𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐛𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬𝐨, 𝐛𝐚𝐲𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐚 𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐥, 𝐮𝐠 𝐮𝐛𝐚𝐧 𝐩𝐚. 𝐊𝐮𝐧𝐠 𝐰𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐲 𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐥 𝐧𝐠𝐚 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐤𝐬𝐲𝐨𝐧, 𝐚𝐧𝐠 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐚 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐲𝐨𝐧 𝐦𝐚𝐡𝐢𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐮𝐬𝐚 𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐠 𝐤𝐚 𝐨𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐨 "𝒌𝒖𝒏𝒈 𝒎𝒂𝒉𝒊𝒎𝒐."

Ang kultura ug relihiyoso nga mga tinuohan dili lang angay tahuron; kinahanglan kini protektahan sa porma sa usa ka balaod aron lig-on ug klaro ang obligasyon sa tanang institusyon.

𝑯𝒂𝒍𝒊𝒎𝒃𝒂𝒘𝒂: Kung walay balaod, usa ka ospital mahimong makadugay sa pagpagawas sa patay tungod kay wala pa nabayran ang bill. Pinaagi sa balaod, dili na sila mahimong mopugong pa niini.

𝐏𝐚𝐠𝐩𝐚𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐬𝐚 𝐊𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐦𝐛𝐚𝐬 𝐧𝐠𝐚 𝐏𝐚𝐠𝐭𝐚𝐡𝐨𝐝

Ang maong balaod nagpadayag nga ang gobyerno nag-ila sa relihiyosong katungod sa tanang
Pilipino, ilabi na sa mga Muslim nga gikinahanglan ang madali nga paglubong. Dili na kini nakasalig
lamang sa "pagpakiluoy" o "goodwill" sa mga institusyon. Usa kini ka pormal nga pagkilala nga
ang mga kultural ug relihiyoso nga tradisyon kinahanglan respetohon 𝐛𝐲 𝐥𝐚𝐰.

𝐔𝐬𝐚 𝐤𝐚 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐚𝐤𝐭𝐢𝐛𝐨 𝐮𝐠 𝐈𝐧𝐤𝐥𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐋𝐚𝐤𝐚𝐧𝐠

Kini nga balaod proaktibo:

• 𝐃𝐢𝐥𝐢 𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐚𝐧 𝐩𝐚 𝐡𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐧 𝐧𝐠𝐚 𝐚𝐝𝐮𝐧𝐚𝐲 𝐫𝐞𝐤𝐥𝐚𝐦𝐨 𝐨 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐞.
• 𝐆𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐮𝐫𝐨 𝐧𝐠𝐚 𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐦 𝐚𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐬𝐲𝐨𝐧 𝐧𝐠𝐚 𝐦𝐨-𝐚𝐤𝐬𝐲𝐨𝐧 𝐝𝐚𝐲𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐚 𝐡𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐩𝐚𝐚𝐠𝐢.

Sa panahon nga ang pamilya nag-antos pa sa kasakit sa pagkawala sa mahal sa kinabuhi, ang paspas nga serbisyo ug paghatag og respeto sa ilang tradisyon dako kaayo og kalipay ug pasalamat.

𝐊𝐨𝐧𝐤𝐥𝐮𝐬𝐲𝐨𝐧

Ang balaod nga nagpatuman sa 24 ka oras nga paglibing sa mga Muslim 𝐝𝐢𝐥𝐢 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐚𝐧𝐠, 𝐝𝐢𝐥𝐢 𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐧𝐭, 𝐮𝐠 𝐝𝐢𝐥𝐢 𝐬𝐨𝐛𝐫𝐚. Kini usa ka:

• Pagpalig-on sa katungod sa relihiyoso nga praktis,
• Pagtangtang sa mga posibleng babag o diskriminasyon,
• Pagpahayag sa pagpakabana sa gobyerno sa kalingkawasan ug dignidad sa tanang katawhan.
-
KNOW MANIPULATIONS, KNOW LIES.