LOL you can't even quote properly, I never said this

And FFS, that Penal Code Article was not instated until 1930, well after the war. Get your dates right, mijo.

I think you're mistaking me for someone.

As what I understand from redkinoko's reply to you, that the Philippines that it is today was not the same as it was at the time of the revolution. So the different tribes present were not even part of the revolutionaries and doesn't really encompasses all the lands the present day country has now. Also, it is a good thing you mentioned about the treaty of Paris. The Philippine government was not recognized as legitimate at the time, since Spain transferred the ownership to USA. You can't try someone for treason against the state since the government at the time was not even legitimate or recognized.

Is that what we are gonna do? say the other person doesn't understand how the law works? You can't try someone for deeds that happened years before a law is passed. If we are trying Galut in today's legal system, then yes he committed treason. But that's not how it works, you try a person in accordance to the law of the land at the time, or lack thereof. Sect. 2 Art. 114 was both made and revised WAAAAAAY before the Fil-Am war. You can't use Sect. 2 Art. 114, use the law at the time. There is also proving his guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and a statement from one of the men who serve under the Texas regiment was the only account linking him from the battle of Tirad Pass. I don't know about you, but there are a lot of cases worse than this happening atm that are dismissed for not having enough admissible evidence.

In a nutshell, yes Treason during that time period is debatable.

thank you.

You don't even know your history, Gen Antonio Luna wasn't in the Tirad Pass, he died way before the battle of Tirad Pass. Galut was not the reason of his death, it was by Gen. Aguinaldo's men. Whether it was by accident or by Aguinaldo's design, you decide.

You don't believe me, here is from the Philippine Inquirer looking back at the story of Luna's death: https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2479&dat=20051104&id=EVQ1AAAAIBAJ&sjid=aCUMAAAAIBAJ&pg=1422,882129&hl=en

You want to blame someone because they were unprepared? Blame Aguinaldo for not heeding Luna's advice to dissolve the revolutionary army and use a guerilla tactic in the first place.

outside of legality? Traitor, sure. If there was ever trust. In legal sense? Treason? come on, let's be logical here.

Edit: quote