Image courtesy of Instagram: ajabrenica
Thursday, February 20, 2014
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Goodbye to Their Friendship
Image courtesy of www.esol.britishcouncil.org
PP and TS used to be very close and vocal about their friendship. Outside of it, they also engage in some activities together like real buddies. They were allegedly so close that some followers have joked that there might be something more than meets the eye behind those innocent hugs and kisses.
But the people concerned - PP and TS - knew better to succumb to public perception. Deep in their hearts, they support each other because they knew that their friendship mattered most – or so it seemed.
But to their followers, it looks like PP and TS' alleged friendship is not that solid after all, as it crumbled so easily.
Reportedly, PP got hurt when TS turned down his invitation for a very important event that PP celebrated. TS made excuses like she was not feeling well. Then at another time, she also said she had no driver to bring her to the event. PP obviously didn’t take it kindly and misread TS' refusal as an affront. If indeed she had no driver, PP reportedly said that he could have sent his to pick her up.
Thus PP felt so slighted by TS' refusal, which led him to believe what had been circulating all along about TS' real feelings about their supposed friendship. That is why people have concluded that the recent celebration of TS where PP was a no-show was his way to retaliate and get even with TS.
Furthermore, PP allegedly felt that TS did not value his support for her for a long time. Being the bigger star, PP and his fans believed that he helped TS in more ways than one to make her relevant. In spite of PP's effort, TS's special someone SS would even question as to why she's being paired with PP. PP definitely didn't appreciate SS's derogatory remarks. That’s why TS' alleged "blunder" coupled with SS negative attitude put a big dent that stained TS and PP's friendship.
Isn’t it that true friendships need no explaining?
" One who forgives an affront fosters friendship, but one who dwells on disputes will alienate a friend. " ~ Unknown
Follow @FashionPulis on Twitter for the latest update. Please continue to send your juicy stories to michaelsylim@gmail.com. Thank you very much for loving Fashion PULIS!
Disclaimer: The comments of the readers do not reflect the views and opinions of Fashion PULIS.
Poll: Are You in Favor of the New Cybercrime Law?
Image courtesy of www.technology.inquirer.net
Source: www.gmanetwork.com
However, the high court, in a landmark ruling issued on Tuesday "partially granting" the 15 consolidated petitions against the law, clarified that only original authors of libelous material are covered by the cybercrime law, and not those who merely received or reacted to it.
“The high court... declared Section 4(c)(4), which penalized online libel, is not unconstitutional with respect to the original author of the post but unconstitutional only where it penalizes those who simply receive the post or react to it," said SC spokesman Theodore Te, who announced the ruling in a press briefing.
In a later text message to reporters, Te clarified that online contents posted prior to the issuance of the SC ruling, including the period of the temporary restraining order (TRO), are not yet covered by the law.
“There was a TRO so it didn't take effect at that time. There can be no retroactive application of penalties because of the prohibition against 'ex post facto' laws," he said.
President Benigno Aquino III signed the law in 2012 to stamp out cybercrimes such as fraud, identity theft, spamming and child pornography.
In October 2012, the high court put on hold the implementation of the law after it received 15 petitions questioning the constitutionality of some of its provisions, with various groups condemning it for purportedly threatening freedom of speech, increasing the penalties for libel, and making it easier for authorities to spy on citizens using electronic media.
The petitioners wanted the SC to strike down provisions contained in Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, and 19. Sections 4 and 5 tackle the various offenses covered under the law, including online libel, which the petitioners said violates the right to free speech.
Sections 6 and 7, meanwhile, impose a higher degree of punishment for people found guilty of libel while also allowing them to be charged separately under the Revised Penal Code for the same offense. The petitioners said this violated the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy.
The petitioners also questioned Section 19, which authorizes the DOJ to restrict or block access to data that would be found prima facie in violation of the cybercrime law.
In its ruling, the high court upheld the legality of Section 5, which penalizes anyone who aids or abets the commission of cybercrimes and anyone who attempts the commission of cybercrimes, if the crimes involved are:
illegal access
illegal interception
data interference
system interference
misuse of devices
cyber squatting
computer-related fraud
computer-related identity theft,
cybersex
As a result, the penalties set for crimes like online libel and commercial communications, as well as child pornography have been deemed unconstitutional.
Struck down
Meanwhile, among the portions declared as unconstitutional were:
Section 4(c)(3), which considers unsolicited commercial communication as a cybercrime offense
Section 12 on collection or recording of traffic data in real-time, associated with specified communication transmitted by means of a computer system
Section 19, which authorizes the DOJ to restrict or block access to data that would be found prima facie in violation of the cybercrime law
Section 7 on separate prosecutions under the Cybercrime Law and the Revised Penal Code.
The high court said Section 7 violated the prohibition on double jeopardy.
Associate Justice Roberto Abad penned the decision, while Associate Justices Presbetiro Velasco and Estela Perlas-Bernabe took no part in the voting.
Kabataan party-list Rep. Terry Ridon, meanwhile, said the whole cybercrime law should have been declared unconstitutional, as opposed to only a few provisions.
“We wanted to start from scratch so we can deliberate on a new cybercrime law without the unconstitutional provisions," he said in a chance interview.
Bayan Muna party-list Rep. Neri Colmenares, who was among those who challenged the law, said they may appeal the latest ruling.
"No one should go to prison just for expressing oneself, specially on the Internet, where people express their frustration with government," he said.
Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza, meanwhile, refused to comment on the ruling, only saying that it was "good" that most of the contested provisions were upheld.
"I will have to read it [but] if that is so [that most provisions were upheld] then that is good," Jardeleza told reporters while waiting for the start of oral arguments on the constitutionality of the Disbursement Acceleration Program.
The Office of the Solicitor General represents the government in cases.
Jardeleza said he could not comment yet because he was not able to "follow the gist of the ruling when it was announced because it was too quick."
"That was a summary but more important than the summary is what it really says. So you have to be patient," Jardeleza said.
Reactions: from 'major victory' to 'arena of fear'
Lawyer Harry Roque, one of those who petitioned against the law, hailed the decision striking down the powers to take down websites and monitor Internet traffic.
"This is indeed a major victory for privacy and the right of the people to be secure in their communications," he said in a statement.
But he said the fight to nullify the provisions on criminal libel would continue.
The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) blasted the decision, calling it "[a] half-inch forward but a century backward."
"By extending the reach of the antediluvian libel law into cyberspace, the Supreme Court has suddenly made a once infinite venue for expression into an arena of fear, a hunting ground for the petty and vindictive, the criminal and autocratic," it said.
If the SC remains "blind" to this, the NUJP statement added, "there can only be one response lest we be forced to surrender all our other rights—resistance."
Taking a more neutral tone, Malacañang said it will wait for the SC's full decision "to be able to understand its implications on public policy". "We hope that this decision will strengthen government’s position in fighting cybercrime and upholding the people’s welfare," Presidential Communications Operations Office Secretary Herminio Coloma, Jr. said in a statement.
Social media users expressed anger at the upholding of the libel provisions.
"Under Cybercrime Law, tweets, likes, shares, comments = crimes. Everyone under surveillance," said activist leader Vencer Crisostomo in a tweet.
Alex Cabagnot Traded to Global Port in Exchange of Sol Mercado
Alex Cabagnot traded with Sol Mercado
Bonbon Custodio traded with Rico Maierhofer
Leo Najorda and Jayson Deutchman to join Barako
Jonas Villanueva to join Air21
Images courtesy of www.solarsportsdesk.ph
Images courtesy of www.solarsportsdesk.ph
Spotted: Ai Ai delas Alas and James Yap's Girlfriend at the Game
Image courtesy of Fashion PULIS reader
Insta Scoop: Ellen Adarna Recognizes It's All Part of the Job
Image courtesy of Instagram: ellenmgadarna
Insta Scoop: Gov. Vilma Santos' SMS Message to Luis Manzano
Image courtesy of Instagram: luckymanzano
Blast from the Past: Maricel Soriano, Dawn Zulueta and Aiko Melendez
Image courtesy of Instagram: aikomelendez
Hottest of Them All: Rocco Nacino, Enzo Pineda and Steven Silva
Image courtesy of Instagram: iamstevensilva
Fairest of Them All: Bea Alonzo, Nikki Gil, Iya Villania and Shaina Magdayao
Image courtesy of Instagram: beaalonzo
.jpg)
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
Clearly Lusting for Another Triangle
Image courtesy of www.socialfirmsuk.co.uk
Well, it can really be a 'long hair day' everyday for this single again WG if someone like AT is smitten by her – his charm and mystique seem damn hot for a lot of women who swoon over him - a trophy boyfriend they say. AT's string of affairs lands on showbiz/gossip media, yet he remains undaunted by all the attention.
AT who is such an incurable skirt-chaser have for countless times failed the fidelity test. Looks like he gets bored at being a one-woman man, not his cup of tea obviously. Yet AT's women loved him for he always made them very special and is such a generous dreamboat. That is why for every break-up, it was always the women who have a harder time moving on.
On the other hand, WG and Ex-Hubby EH had been each other’s exes a long time ago. They are now reportedly in the process of annulment. EH who is likewise a looker himself is also very talented, and is definitely a shoo-in for AT anytime.
If AT's alleged flirting with WG continues, we all might be shocked ourselves if they end up to be the new couple. If that happens, observers say that AT is just being consistent with his taste - the femme fatale.
Do we hear another tear jerking tv interviews soon? Your guess is very awesome.
" Men don’t want anything they get too easy. But on the other hand, men lose interest quickly. " ~ Tennessee Williams
Follow @FashionPulis on Twitter for the latest update. Please continue to send your juicy stories to michaelsylim@gmail.com. Thank you very much for loving Fashion PULIS!
Disclaimer: The comments of the readers do not reflect the views and opinions of Fashion PULIS.
Spotted: Angel Locsin and Luis Manzano at Anne Curtis' Birthday Party
Image courtesy of Instagram: luckymanzano
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
