Malacañang naglabas ng paliwanag sa Hitler comment ni Duterte

By Den Macaranas October 01, 2016 - 11:06 AM

Abella2
Inquirer file photo

Kaagad na dumipensa ang Malacañang sa kaliwa’t kanang mga batikos laban kay Pangulong Rodrigo Duterte makaraan niyang ikumpara ang sarili kay Nazi leader Adolf Hitler.

Sinabi ni Presidential Spokesman Ernesto Abella na ipinaliwanag lamang ng pangulo ang kanyang maaring kampanya kontra sa iligal na droga sa bansa.

Nauna nang sinabi ni Duterte na hindi siya magdadalawang isip na pumatay ng tatlong milyong drug addicts sa bansa para lamang ipakita siya na seryoso ang pamahalaan sa pagsugpo sa droga.

“Hitler massacred three million Jews. Now there is three million drug addicts, there are. I’d be happy to slaughter them. At least if Germany had Hitler, the Philippines would have…,” ayon sa pangulo.

Sa Facebook page ng Presidential Communications Operations Office (PCO) ay lumabas ang pahayag ni Abella.

“We do not wish to diminish the profound loss of 6 million Jews in the Holocaust – that deep midnight of their story as a people.

The President’s reference to the slaughter was an oblique deflection of the way he has been pictured as a mass murderer, a Hitler, a label he rejects.

He likewise draws an oblique conclusion, that while the Holocaust was an attempt to exterminate the future generations of Jews, the so-called “extra-judicial killings”, wrongly attributed to him, will nevertheless result in the salvation of the next generation of Filipinos.

He was just addressing the negative comparison that people made between him and Hitler.

Hitler murdered 3 million innocent civilians whereas Duterte was referencing to his “willingness to kill” 3 million criminal drug dealers – to save the future of the next generation and the country”.

TAGS: abella, duterte, hitler, jews, pco, abella, duterte, hitler, jews, pco

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.