Former DILG Secretary Rafael Alunan III’s Facebook post has been making waves on social media after declaring that Senator Trillanes, according to him, looks like a Manchurian candidate.
Former DILG Sec. of Ramos administration, Raffy Alunan III.
So what is a Manchurian candidate? Alunan defined it as someone controlled by foreign or local principals to divide institutions and society, so that they can rule us.
In other words, the popular divide and rule tactic used by the Americans and the CIA.
Alunan’s FB post has since generated more than 4K shares, 6,116 reactions and 148 comments in less than 24 hours since it was published.
Senator Antonio Trillanes IV has been at the focus of attention after the Palace voided the amnesty granted to the senator by the ex-President Noy Aquino.
The term Manchurian Candidate was lifted from the novel by Richard Condon bearing the title, first published in 1959. It is a political thriller about the son of a prominent U.S. political family who is brainwashed into being an unwitting assassin for a Communist conspiracy. [Wikipedia]
Please read full text of Alunan’s post below.
HOW I SEE IT
Sen. Trillanes looks like a manchurian candidate to me, someone controlled by foreign and local principals to divide institutions and society, so that they can rule us.
We should be curious to find out for ourselves for whose bidding he did all that damage; for how much; and at what cost to the nation given all of his malicious machinations, misadventures and miscalculations.
From the days of Oakwood to Peninsula to the Senate, he’s placed himself in trouble from purely self-inflicted wounds. If he wasn’t some group’s puppet to protect or advance their selfish interests, he’d be a much better Filipino protecting and advancing the national interest.
His fellow cavaliers from PMA have spoken out against him. Except for a handful, my estimate is that the Senate and Lower House would have a low opinion of him as well. If a survey were mounted to determine how many % of society support him today, I’d venture the guess that he’d receive low marks too. He didn’t fool Stephen Sakur of BBC, that’s for sure, who unmasked him for what he really is – fraudulent, period.
Now comes the issue of amnesty. He insists he was amnestied. But was the process flawed to begin with and did he actually fulfill all of the requirements? Here’s someone whose shattered credibility and integrity as mutineer, backchannel and oppositionist, wants us to believe him one more time. Let’s see what the court says but methinks he’d be hoping against hope.
That’s my take from the sweep of time ever since he got into my radar. For me his days of undeserved freedom are numbered before real and impartial justice takes over and makes things right in the national interest.
Your thoughts?
