“You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars; you have a right to be here. And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.” A classic.

The 18 ‘ex-marines’ also identified the following individuals to whom they allegedly delivered cash during the Cayetano-led bloc Senate hearing: Former Rep. France Castro Rep. Leila de Lima Rep. Sandro Marcos Rep. Terry Ridon Rep. Gerville Luistro Former Rep. Arlene Brosas Rep. Benny Abante Rep. Zia Adiong Rep. Jose Alvarez Former Rep. Ace Barbers Rep. Joel Chua Former Rep. Dan Fernandez Rep. Janette Garin Former Rep. Raoul Manuel Former Rep. Stella Quimbo Fr. Flavie Villanueva Watch the live stream here: inqnews.net/SenateJune4 Follow our live updates here: inqnews.net/Senateupdates

CN stars in Toronto 🤩

Twisted facts. The motion on the floor was about whether the Marcoleta rule change should be taken up directly in plenary and bypass the committee hearing process. That procedural motion—not the substance of the proposed rule change itself—was what was being put to a vote when they walked out. The actual deliberations on the merits and substance of the Marcoleta proposal were supposed to happen only after the procedural issue has been resolved.

Congratulations to my kababayan, Francis Tolentino, for having been appointed as acting Secretary of the Department of Labor and Employment. Mapalad ka at lahat ng mga balimbing, unqualified at isinusuka ng taong-bayan ang ina-appoint ni Marcos, Jr. 😂😂😂😂😂😂

No wonder this man has never been seriously considered for Senate Presidency. Kudos to Speaker Pro Tempore Loren Legarda for standing her ground and restoring order in the plenary.

I dissent.

Trapos who were given decades to make a difference—but failed miserably—cannot shamelessly appoint themselves as the arbiter of the “right side of history”. History has already voted for their utter irrelevance. No amount of PR grandstanding can erase a legacy of mediocrity, incompetence and utter inutility.

The rise of the fruit that tastes like custard bbc.in/4dAkdqQ

The family of a missing Toronto girl hopes sharing a Global News interview with Esther from a year ago could help generate more tips in finding her. globalnews.ca/news/11862875/…

This ball bounced off his glove AND his cap 🤣 Trey Yesavage still made the play!

Poor, doggo. 🙁

😎 For the first time in 2026….

While Filipinos are busy with partisan bickering and glued to daily political drama, Marcos just signed away PH economic sovereignty. By committing the Philippines to the US-led “Pax Silica” initiative, he has essentially pledged another century of subservience to US interests. PH is rolling out the red carpet for them to set up a massive 4,000-acre industrial hub on lands that were only recently returned to PH custody. Under the guise of “AI innovation”, this Marcos govt has gladly reduced PH into a glorified raw materials depot—stripping PH lands of critical minerals and siphoning them off to feed American tech and military machinery. A new iteration of Bell Trade Act of 1946.

Someone obviously got triggered big time by my post 👇😅 x.com/UnderSecE/status/20588… And his reply, is unsurprisingly a pack of lies, some of them really funny ones. First: "we never said our goal was diplomatic immunity." Really? The WSJ piece reported this based on a source named... Jacob Helberg, which - as far as I understand - is YOU! Also when the BCDA chief said publicly "that's [the US's] request, but we did not agree," are you saying the Philippines government is lying? Second, you use TSMC as your example of why being in America's supply chain isn't subservience. Small problem: Taiwan is NOT a Pax Silica signatory due to its diplomatic status. And your own president keeps accusing Taiwan - and TSMC specifically - of "stealing" its chipmaking technology from the US (finance.yahoo.com/sectors/te…). Furthermore the U.S. has been running a years-long initiative to strong-arm TSMC into transferring some of its fabrication to the US (specifically to Arizona), using CHIPS Act subsidies and national security threats as leverage. Not because the free market demanded it, but because you believe that depending on a Taiwanese company for cutting-edge chips was a vulnerability to be eliminated Which all proves the exact contrary of what you're saying: when a "partner" has real capabilities, it's unbearable to you. You don't reward it, you call them "thieves" and try to take their industry away from them. So thanks for proving my point on that one. Lastly, and that's the really hilarious part. Calling Pax Silica a "capitalist project" is the height of irony: it's literally a government program that overrides market competition by telling sovereign countries which suppliers they're allowed to buy from and which competitors to ban - regardless of quality or price. Sorry but if Huawei offers a better AI chip at half the cost and you're contractually barred from buying it, that's not even remotely capitalism. Since you don't seem to be aware (understandable as someone, like you, who spent their entire career at the intersection of government power and corporate interests): capitalism, in its most basic form, means letting markets decide - you buy from whoever offers the best product/service at the best price. Pax Silica is the precise opposite, it's all about preventing this from happening.

This is pretty insane: the U.S. just tried to literally re-colonize part of the Philippines. They did so under the so-called "Pax Silica" initiative, the brainchild of - surprise, surprise - an ex-Palantir guy named Jacob Helberg who now runs U.S. economic "diplomacy" from the State Department. It's causing a big outcry in the Philippines, which is quite a feat given this is by far the most US-friendly country in Southeast Asia. If you're the US and you're getting the Marcos administration - of all governments - to push back on sovereignty, you've really overplayed your hand. What is the "Pax Silica" initiative? In a nutshell it's about the US getting other countries to commit to restructuring their AI tech infrastructure around a US-led stack. It's basically vendor lock-in: you hand over your critical minerals, align your export controls with Washington's, regulate AI the way America wants, and in return you get to be a US "trusted partner," whatever that means these days. In essence, let's not kid ourselves, it's all about China: this is the US's initiative to "win the AI race" by getting other countries to contractually commit to keeping China out of their tech supply chains. When you can't preserve your lead through innovation, you seek to lock countries in contractually. For instance as a country, this would mean telling Huawei they can't sell you AI chips, and telling Chinese firms they can't invest in your data centers - even if they're better and cheaper. It's not about choosing the best technology, it's about choosing the right flag. But in this instance, the US went much further still: they literally tried to carve out 4,000 acres of Philippine territory (in New Clark City, 60 miles north of Manila) to be governed under US common law with diplomatic immunity - the first arrangement of its kind anywhere in the modern world. This is according to the WSJ who ran the story last month (wsj.com/world/asia/u-s-to-cr…) as if it was a done deal (it wasn't). Heard about the "French concession" or "British concession" in China during the century of humiliation? Same thing: the US basically asked for an "American concession" in the Philippines. Unsurprisingly, there was quite a bit of backlash in the country with for instance the Peasant Movement of the Philippines (KMP) calling it a “massive sellout” of the country’s land, minerals, and sovereignty (punto.com.ph/us-led-pax-sili…). So much so that the Philippines' government - namely Joshua Bingcang, president and chief executive of the Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA) - issued a statement saying that the Philippines had rejected US proposals that would place the project beyond local jurisdiction (asianews.network/philippines…). Note, by the way, this delicious irony: the BCDA is the government agency that was created in 1992 specifically to convert former US military bases at Clark and Subic Bay after the Philippines spent decades negotiating their closure. New Clark City - where the Pax Silica's hub would go - is built on the old Clark Air Base. So the agency whose entire reason for existing is to turn former American colonial territory (i.e. US military bases) into sovereign Philippine land is the one now being asked to hand part of that very same land back under US jurisdiction (and, apparently, declined). Of course though, blocking this specific jurisdiction grab doesn't change the bigger picture. The Philippines is still a Pax Silica signatory, and Pax Silica itself is structurally neocolonial: you supply the cheap labor and raw materials, align your export controls and regulations with Washington's, cut yourself off from the world's rising technological powerhouse - and in exchange you get assembly jobs and the privilege of getting a pat on the head and being called a "trusted partner." They dropped the most cartoonishly colonial demand - governing Philippine soil under US law - but the underlying architecture is the same: you serve America's supply chain, on America's terms, and you relinquish your sovereign right to trade with whoever offers the best deal.