In a recent broadcast, a prominent political commentator Mentong Laurel returned to the airwaves after a health-related absence, delivering a wide-ranging monologue that touched on his personal medical condition, the plight of street children, and a nation he described as being in a state of legal and political decay under the administration of President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr.
Health Scare and a Renewed Resolve
The commentator disclosed that doctors had discovered a tumor on his pancreas. He was quick to reassure his audience, stating, “At lahat naman po ay magandang mga resulta. They found a tumor sa aking pancreas na benign.” He confirmed that cancer markers were negative, a result he described as “good news.”
However, he scheduled a follow-up MRI for November 4 to determine the exact nature of the tumor—whether it is an insulinoma or a neuroendocrine tumor. This health scare, he admitted, had weakened his spirit and caused fatigue, but the sight of street children during a drive through Mayflower Street reinvigorated his determination. He cited these images as a catalyst to continue his “fight for socialism and a new Philippines” with full force.
A System of “Law Vending” and American Influence
The core of the broadcast focused on a scathing critique of the current government. The host and his co-hands, including “Ka Joshua,” framed the national crisis as a collapse of the rule of law, which they derogatorily termed “law vending”—a system where laws are allegedly bent and sold for the benefit of the ruling class.
He asserted that the administration of President Marcos and its “American backers” are deliberately creating legal chaos. “Sinasadya po nila ito guluhin po ang ating batas,” he claimed.
This theme extended to a discussion of political instability within the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP). The host referenced warnings from officials like Gibo Teodoro and Brawner about a potential coup d’état, suggesting that the government is threatening retired military officers with the loss of their pensions to silence their criticism—a move he labeled as “illegal.”
Military Factions and “Withdrawal of Support”
A significant portion of the report delved into alleged discussions within the AFP. The host claimed to have knowledge of conversations between active officers, revealing at least two factions with differing visions for the country’s future.
One faction reportedly seeks a constitutional transition by installing the “official successor,” presumed to be Vice President Sara Duterte.
Another faction is debating the formation of a “transition government,” though its leadership remains unresolved.
Laurel endorsed the concept of a “withdrawal of support” by the military, arguing it is constitutional if it succeeds, framing it as the “people’s will.” He linked this idea to the 2001 EDSA Revolution, alleging that then-Secretary Angelo Reyes acted on orders from the US after a meeting with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. “The American factor is still the major factor,” he stated, claiming that the US remains the primary force behind the political scene in the Philippines.
Economic Grievances and the China Factor
The commentary also covered economic issues, praising China’s 15th Five-Year Plan and its role in promoting a “multipolar world” through organizations like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). He contrasted this with the Philippines’ struggling tourism sector, blaming local “American boy” politicians like Rufus Rodriguez for initially opposing the e-visa system for Chinese tourists, which he said cost the country millions of potential visitors.
He concluded that the root of the nation’s problems—corruption, injustice, and privatization—lies with the “ruling economic and financial class,” whom he accused of being complicit with corrupt politicians. He ended with a call for revolutionary action, suggesting that a segment of the military is aligned with this goal and is aware of the powerful business interests, such as the “Ayala” and “Sobel” groups, that allegedly employ retired generals to protect the status quo.
The broadcast serves as a stark reflection of the deep-seated political divisions and the narrative of systemic failure being promoted in certain online circles, positioning the current administration as illegitimate and beholden to foreign powers.#
