Tag: Manny Almario

Manny Almario, Requiescat In Pace

Philippines

“When Poch (Suzara) says that reading the Bible makes one an atheist, I am a prime example.”
-Manny
………………………………………………

Manuel F

Manuel F Almario

I was so surprised and rather shocked to hear the passing of my good forum friend, Manny Almario.

He did mention previously that he was living on borrowed time as he had cancer. He mentioned this so matter of factly, as if it was nothing so most of the time we forgot and we exchange e-mails in our forum which sometimes can get really feisty; sparring with each other because mainly we discuss religion and politics, always an explosive combination.

I remember the last email that I read from him dated 12 October 2014. It was addressed to ex-Senator, Rene Saguisag. Manny wanted clarification from Rene if he was endorsing Robert Fariñas for the Senate. Farinas is, of course, had been widely reported for domestic violence against his late wife the adorable Maria Theresa ‘Si ako, si ikaw’ Carlsson, who later committed suicide.

I admired Manny for his trademark – forthright manner, which was, of course, his stock in trade from his background in journalism.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

I read a particularly interesting article that he wrote and I asked him if I can reblog it on my website. Manny was all kindness, he was that kind of man.

Hi Manny

Can I reblog your article above please on my website – globalgranary.life.

You do not happen to have a photo to go with it, do you?!!!

Thanks

Jean
~~~~~~~~~
Of course, Jean, you can reblog my article. I would consider it an honor. As for a photo, I am sorry, but I have not yet learned how to send my photo on the Net. I am perhaps too age-handicapped to master this technology. Regards,

Manny
………………………..
Manny was a lovely man, very erudite, we learned a lot from him but the forum is made up of extremely and highly intelligent Filipinos discussing oftentimes controversial topics. Manny did not escape the name callings, the insults, the one-up-manship which are characteristics of discussion forums. Manny gave as good as he got, we all did! LOL

The forum will miss him for a long, long time, he was a valued ‘friend’ in our circle.

I will remember him for his self-confessed atheism. He was very adamant in his belief/or non- belief?!!!

Wherever you may be, Manny, may you rest in peace.

Manny Almario, Requiescat In Pace

……………………………………………………………………………..

Journalist Maning Almario; 84

Philippine Daily Inquirer

5:55 am | Wednesday, October 22nd, 2014

MANILA, Philippines–Veteran journalist Manuel “Maning” F. Almario died on Oct. 21. He was 84.

Born on Nov. 19, 1930, in Masbate, Masbate, Almario attended Masbate Elementary School and Ilocos Norte High School.

He obtained an Associate in Arts degree from Far Eastern University in 1951, then took up Law at Lyceum of the Philippines. His journalism career started in 1949 when he became a reporter for the Philippines Herald. He was also editor of the Philippine News Service, Weekly Graphic magazine, Philippine Graphic and The Filipino Journalist, the official organ of the National Press Club.

Almario also worked in government, as a technical assistant in the House of Representatives and in the Senate.

He was detained during martial law from Sept. 27 to Dec. 4, 1972.

He was a regular contributor to the Opinion section of the Inquirer.

He is survived by his wife, Rosario Suguitan, and children Donnabelle, Joselito, Annabelle Eloriaga and Gloria Mae Tanya Regalado.

His remains will lie from 8 p.m. Wednesday at the Parish of the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, Daily Mirror Street, West Triangle, Quezon City.

Cremation is set on Oct. 24 at St. Peter Crematorium.

Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/646154/journalist-maning-almario-84#ixzz3Gzj25WzK
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

Napoles Guilt Over Pork Barrel Scandal

Corruption Laws and Policies Philippines Policing Crime

janet-napoles-5

The article below by Manny Almario, a retired journalist from the Philippines, is certainly thought-provoking.  I do agree that Janet Lim-Napoles is not the most guilty amongst her cohorts but at the same time I do not believe that she is less guilty.  GUILT IS GUILT!  No one is less guilty when one is guilty.

Janet Lim-Napoles embraced  criminality of the plunder  with so much gusto that she involved – from her side alone –   her families, friends, employees, colleagues and God knows who else!

Janet Lim-Napoles enjoyed all the trappings gained from the wanton plunder of public purse.

Janet Lim-Napoles was an active participant in the sorry saga of avarice, looting, robbing and fleecing of the National Treasury.  She was aiding and abetting the marauding criminals within the Philippine Government with her eyes, mouth, ears and waiting arms wide open.  She is not some innocent ninny that was taken advantage of.  She was  a grasping she-devil, an opportunist, waiting in the offing  to brandish her  slick and skilful sleight of hand to make monies disappear, and seem, “now you see it, now you don’t”.  She was on par with magicians in the highest order!

Janet Lim Napoles may not be the most guilty but she is equally guilty as anyone else involved in the plunder and she should be given a punishment appropriate to her crime.  This should involve confiscation of monies and properties she gained from her criminal act against the NATION!

Letting Janet Lim-Napoles sing like a canary for a free pass out of prison is a criminal act in itself.  Janet may sing beautifully but let us remember that the Pork Barrel Scandal is not about Philippines Got Talent or even The Voice.  Pork Barrel Scandal is about treason, treachery and betrayal of the sovereignty of the Filipino people and of the Philippine Government.

I say confiscate her properties and lock her up in jail and throw away the keys. Then go for her cohorts, I am sure there are enough materials and evidence to convict the rest of the Pork Barrel criminals.

JPJhermes, Nagpapatrol
……………………………………………………..
 
Napoles not ‘most guilty’
12:02 am | Wednesday, April 30th, 2014
 
It is disputable that Janet Lim-Napoles is the “most guilty” in the stupendous P10-billion pork barrel scam.  She is an ordinary citizen, without any official governmental power.  On the other hand, the legislators and other public officials who are her co-accused are cloaked with public authority. They were the custodians of public money. They had the sworn duty to preserve and spend public money for the public good. Instead, they allegedly plundered it.
 
Every public official is required by law to take an oath to “well and faithfully discharge to the best of his ability the duties of the office or position upon which he is about to enter; and (to declare) that he voluntarily assumes the obligation imposed by his oath of office, without mental reservation  or purpose of evasion” (Sec. 40, 1987 Administrative Code of the Philippines).
 
Napoles had taken no such oath, not having occupied a government position. But the public officials did.  Their oaths usually end with the phrase, “So help me God.” Therefore their crime, if proven, would be a “betrayal of the public trust,” for failing to “well and faithfully discharge” the duties of their office.  It would also be sacrilege for falsely invoking the name of God.
 
In his March 26, 2012, column (“Betrayal of public trust”), Fr. Joaquin J. Bernas,  former dean of the Ateneo Law School, quoted Constitutional Commissioner Ricardo Romulo as saying that “betrayal of the public trust,” one of the causes for impeachment of public officials, could “cover any violation of the oath of office.”
 
Commissioner Rustico de los Reyes, author of the amendment, added that “the term … includes betrayal of public interest, inexcusable negligence of duty  (italics supplied), tyrannical abuse of power, breach of official duty by malfeasance or misfeasance, cronyism, favoritism, etc. to the prejudice of public interest and which tend to bring the office into disrepute.”
 
Further, the crime of plunder, under Republic Act No. 7080, is primarily directed against “public officers” who acquire ill-gotten wealth or misappropriate public funds amounting to more than P50 million.  A private person who participates in the crime is also punished for the same offense, but he or she is not the principal accused.
Even if Napoles is the mastermind, which is unlikely, considering her being an outsider, Napoles cannot be the “most guilty” since she could not have committed the crime without the assent and participation of the public officials who have custody of and power to dispose of the funds.  These officials had the duty to “turn her in” or charge her for simply making an indecent or illegal proposition.
 
It is to the public interest that Napoles be made a state’s witness, if her testimony is assuredly necessary to convict the public officials concerned, in order to forewarn all incumbent and future officials to be faithful to their oath of office, under pain of punishment under the law.  An additional requirement of course would be for her to return to the state all the proceeds she may have enjoyed from the scam.
 
—MANUEL F. ALMARIO,
 
Spokesman,
Movement for Truth in History,
mfalmario@yahoo.com