A FAUSTIAN DEAL?

It pays to wait--and also to have friends in high places apparently. That is the message I get from the successful evasion by Ping Lacson of his arrest while he awaited the quashal of the arrest warrant and the Information charging him for the Dacer-Corbito murders. All he needed to do was leave the country, cool his heels while there and then return as if nothing had happened.

In the meantime, a tectonic shift in perspective apparently had happened. The Secretary of Local Government, who is nominally (is Rico E. Puno still around?) in charge of the PNP, forgot who he was and became his de facto media liaison, even predicting that he would soon surface. The President even welcomed him back (as stated by his spokesperson), conveniently omitting to mention that Lacson had evaded arrest after congratulating new graduates of the PNPA (that's the POLICE academy--which we certainly hope is not the same academy in the four, or is that five, films) and exhorting them to avoid corruption.

Even before he can face a questioning and curious public, to whom he is accountable, he is eagerly welcomed by his Senate colleagues, not only by his mistah who knows a thing or two also about evading arrest (though not quite as successful as Ping) but even by those who never wore a uniform or a badge in their lives. The reason for the warm welcome? "We need all hands" in the senate trial of Merceditas Gutierrez.

More than the legal technicalities of a Senator and former PNP Chief successfully evading arrest for one year, what is more revealing in Lacson's successful evasion of arrest is the lie that he has put to the capacity of law enforcement agencies (PNP and NBI) to successfully locate and arrest suspects.

Lacson is not a nobody. He has run for President and his face has been plastered across the country before. He is instantly recognizable (even with his preferred disguise apparently, which is described as "a bonnet and dark shades") and short of a face transplant would not be mistaken for anyone else. He is quite the rake and I cannot imagine him dressing up in rags, even if just to conceal himself, and so a well-dressed, tall, fair-skinned, well-coiffed man looking like Ping Lacson would certainly, quite literally, sound the alarms.

There are two possible explanations why Lacson was able to evade arrest. I don't like both simply because if either or both are true, then we are in very, very deep doodoo indeed.

The first would be absolute incompetence. This would explain how, despite the police and NBI looking high and low, neither was able to find hide nor hair of him. If I presume regularity in the performance of their duties, then this explanation is the only one that makes sense.

The second would be corruption and connivance, which in this context would mean the same thing. For this, a presumption of good faith does not exist as this would be the only other explanation for how, despite the Secretary of Justice's pronouncement that the govermment would go all-out, he still remained hid. This might also explain how, despite a cancelled passport, he managed to enter the country.

I don't like the implications of either explanation. Unfortunately, the President appears to not be too disturbed by it as shown by his statements, made through his spokesman; and this saddens me the most.

The President was elected on the highest moral standard possible--a standard he himself set. Remember "tuwid na daan" and "kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap"? The "straight and narrow" road is a road that requires a lot of witnessing, i.e., walk your talk even when--or especially when--it is difficult and it is painful. That would also mean calling the attention of those on your team who do not walk their talk and holding them accountable.

Where was tuwid na daan in the Lacson evasion? Where was "walk the talk"?

What is disturbing about the warm welcome Lacson got from the President and the Senators, despite a clear and documented evasion by Lacson of a then-valid order of the court involving a very serious criminal charge, is the ethical ambiguity that their acts show. It is "the end justifies the means" reasoning--we need every senator willing to convict Merci, so we welcome him back and never mind that he actually did the very thing we would condemn if it were done by any other person.

It is a deal much like Faust's and it is a deal that I cannot live with and a deal I cannot accept.

When we become the very thing we hate in trying to stop that which we hate, what's left of us?

REVILLAME, ET AL.

Yes, Revillame is a hateful, insensitive, and crass man who simply does not belong in polite company let alone public television. I do not believe in censorship in any form, manner or circumstance but if I were to indulge a hypothetical, he (and one other) would be the best excuse for censorship.

He is not however the first and only one to "abuse" children or women on television for the sake of "entertainment" and of course for profit. Other shows on other networks also have done so through the years, though perhaps not to the same degree of crassness.

The formula of showing scantily-clad women gyrating their hips in unison for no discernible purpose didn't start with Revillame. That started a long time ago with another show.

The discovering of talented kids who would dress up like adults and would sing and dance like adults didn't start with Revillame. That started a long time ago also with that other show.

The only difference perhaps is that Revillame simply elevates crassness and insensitivity to a totally different level. If there were dementors for politeness and decency, Revillame would be the chief dementor; the five-star dementor as he simply sucks out all the decency in everything he touches.

Yes, Revillame is accountable for the utter insensitivity he showed to the 6-year old kid but also to his viewing public whom he continually insults with every word out of his mouth. But he is not the only one accountable. The parents of these children, the producers, the advertisers and the networks are also. Most importantly, so also the viewing public which does not switch channels or shut off the television.

File a case? Cancel the franchise? Boycott the show? Boycott the advertisers? All these are legitimate responses to Revillame's latest display. They, however, will not ensure that Revillame or others who wish to become like him will not do it again to yet another 6-year old or other scantily clad contestant on their inane segments.

You want to make sure something like this does not happen again? Change the way you view the people who view your shows. Do not pander to the least common denominator, instead raise that denominator. Put on shows that will raise awareness, educate, inform, provoke discussion (not revulsion) which are well-written, well-made, well-produced and are hip and fun enough to make sure that people do not switch channels. They may not earn as much money but they will earn you the gratitude and respect of your viewing publics. They may not rate as well as a show with scantily-clad gyrating women or kids forced to endure insults and taunts but they will certainly be remembered with great fondness and with much gratitude many years from now.

You do these? Then, Revillame et al. will have no choice but to find work in another solar system far, far away.

THE POVERTY OF WORDS

Listening to the public hearing called by the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee to investigate the toxic deal entered into by the Ombudsman and the Special Prosecutor with former AFP Comptroller Carlos F. Garcia, I realized the poverty of the English language in expressing the sense of anger, outrage, and disbelief that I felt while listening to Angelo Reyes, former AFP Chief of Staff and Secretary of Defense, and a former comptroller Jacinto Ligot publicly claiming convenient memory loss in relation to charges that Reyes and other AFP Chiefs of Staff received retirement money running to as high as Fifty Million Pesos and monthly stipends of about Five Million Pesos.

"Angry", "Enraged" and "Appalled" fail to scratch the surface in describing the emotions running through me as I listened to a public airing of dirty linen in the AFP hierarchy by its former budget director. There were no words then and there are none now, at least in the English language, to describe the anger, the rage, the utter sense of disbelief at the moral depravity of these "officers and gentlemen" in their cavalier treatment of people's funds.

Handing out the people's money to Generals to welcome them into the fold or send them off into yet another cushy job was apparently a way of life for them, and the monies that they handed out were not petty cash. These ran into the tens of millions, and not for one occasion but were given monthly! In what government manual these comptrollers saw the justification for being able to hand out money like that I will never know; I work for the government and I have yet to see a government manual that will allow me to hand out the people's money like it was a personal expense account.

Never mind that the money that was being handed out could have been used for soldiers' welfare; never mind that it could have gone to basic, minimum, and much needed protective gear and equipment like combat boots and field rations; never mind that it could have gone to housing, let alone better housing; never mind that it could have gone to better use for our soldiers in the field.

Mind only that the money lined the pockets of those few, those exalted, those influential, those connected enough to make it to the top tier of the AFP hierarchy; mind only that they think they are "entitled" to this money because they have stars on their epaulets while our soldiers gaze at the stars in open battle fields wondering when the wars will end; mind only that even as their pockets, wallets and bank accounts are filled to bursting with these amounts that they conveniently forget receiving such amounts.

The King's (or Queen's) English is such a beautiful language, yet on this occasion I find it so poor, so mendicant, so totally insufficient and inadequate to express what I, and I am certain many others, feel while listening to an account of plunder that would stir even the most jaded of hearts to anger.

Filipino is a much more beautiful language. It conveys feelings, emotions, passions and desires with greater profundity than English. Reflecting on how I felt, I thought that perhaps nakakagalit, nakakapoot, nakakapanlumo could better capture what was stirred in me by the revelations at the hearing yesterday.

I do not profess expertise in either English or Filipino and thus may correctly, under these circumstances, profess to be a "man of few words."

And so I sit here, trying to conjure up words like nakakagalit, nakakapoot, nakakapanlumo to express how I feel more profoundly than being "angry", "enraged" or "appalled"; and the realization strikes me that while these filipino words indeed scratch the surface, they nonetheless fail miserably at conveying the depth of anger of a soul reduced to simmering silence by the stark poverty of words.

How many !!! does James Cameron Use in a Sentence?

After watching Avatar, I imagine that he uses a lot of !!!!s in his sentences.

After a hibernation of 12 years, the creator of True Lies (the funniest Arnold movie) and the rejuvenator of Terminator (the most romantic Arnold movie) is back and how! Much has been written about Avatar and I won't repeat what they have said here. My personal review of the film consists of only three words: GO! WATCH! NOW!

NB. On a related point, the interruption of Avatar simply reinforces the need to thrash the MMFF, which simply no longer works--it no longer promotes or encourages the making of quality films simply because there is no incentive to make films that encourage thought (simply not possible if one of the criteria for best picture is the box office take for the first three days). I watched two of the entries and both sucked--Mano Po 6 (incomprehensible, unduly extended melodrama that could have been told in ten minutes) and Nobody, Nobody but Juan (incomprehensible tribute to Wowowee involving Dolphy at his absolute worst and G Toengi channelling Ruffa Gutierrez badly). The absence of a Mark Meilly film was evident.

Strategic Dismembering

It is as if someone took a really dull knife and starting hacking away at parts of one's body--not to kill but to maim, perhaps temporarily but hopefully permanently. That is how I feel when I read and hear the news stories about the way that institutions in this country are being dismembered.

The kennel (este the House of Representatives) came first. The coup d'etat that replaced Jose De Venecia Jr. with Prospero Nograles. Then the Court of Appeals with the Sabio-Roxas-Villarama scandal involving Meralco and GSIS; this resulted in the suspension of Sabio, the dismissal of Roxas and the lid being blown off what was previously only an open secret within the trade, este the profession of lawyering. Then the Senate coup d'etat, replacing Manny Villar with Juan Ponce Enrile. Then the PDEA and DOJ bribery issue, with Gloria taking the side of PDEA and ordering preventive suspensions for one Undersecretary (looks guilty), the Chief State Prosecutor (looks innocent but clueless), several state prosecutors and once again, the lid being blown off what was previously only an open secret within the trade of lawyering--that if you're resourceful enough, you can get the decision you really want. Now, the Supreme Court, with the threat of impeaching the Chief Justice and the reality that Gloria will get to appoint seven Justices before 2010.

All through it all, the people are too numb to scream in pain as parts of this body, especially parts that insure accountability now and in the future (especially after Gloria leaves Malacanang) are strategically dismembered, discredited or simply disregarded.

The greatest danger now is not that Gloria still remains in power, it is that she might remain in power by proxy even after she leaves Malacanang.

Thanks, but no thanks.

1. Gloria throws out EO 464. Thanks, but no thanks.

There was nothing to throw out, as the Supreme Court had already removed practically everything there was to this putrid issuance from the dictator's arsenal. It should have been a non-issue except that, as dictators and their henchmen/women go, it was a convenient excuse to hide behind.

2. Supreme Court offers a compromise deal to Senate. Thanks, but no thanks.

After nine hours of orals, the Supreme Court Chief Justice offers a compromise--perceived by Malacanang to be "solomonic", which should already put you on guard--to the Senate: 1. Neri will testify at the Senate, 2. he will not be arrested anymore, 3. but the three questions he had invoked "executive privilege" against will not be asked anymore and will be considered asked, and 4. each and every time he invokes executive privilege, the issue will be tossed back to the Court.

My first reaction was that it was a "cop out" by the Court, after strong decisions on press freedom and showing strong resolve against EJK and ED with amparo and habeas data. Later on, after speaking with very reliable sources, it made sense--though I still didn't agree with the compromise; my sources told me that the CJ and Justice Carpio felt outvoted by the Gloria people in the Court and feared a loss had they insisted on a decision--so to avoid a loss, the CJ offered the compromise. One step backward, two steps forward--was it Lenin who said this, or Tommy Manotoc? Yes, it made sense but it still left me with a bad taste in the mouth.

If the Senate approved the deal, Gloria wins, hands down and the Senate loses, big time. The power of the Senate to summon witnesses would be severely impaired and the dictator gets away with silence on the three questions that directly place the ZTE deal at her doorstep.

I am glad that the Senate FINALLY acquired a collective spine (did that include you, Joker?) and some collective sense of identity and history and said, "thanks, but no thanks." I hope the SC addresses this issue and, despite the lifting of E0 464, rules that its invocation under those circumstances was not proper and that Neri SHOULD answer those 3 questions.

3. Let's resume our lives now that EO 464 is gone. THANKS, BUT NO THANKS.

The Bishops of my church should come out now with a stronger statement; clearly, the truth is being held hostage here and instead of setting us free, it is, instead, rendered an instrument of keeping us in bondage. Now that 464 is gone, what now? Perhaps, the answer should be, Gloria, gone.

Deleting history

Seen on a shirt: "Itanong mo sa akin ano ang maganda sa Pilipinas?" (front) "Gloria, resign!" (back)
---------------
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo says now that there is no reason to celebrate EDSA Dos and orders that no celebrations be held because she wants to heal the hurts. Just like that. EDSA Dos officially enters the dustbin of history.

Never mind that it was actually the first successful coup d'etat in Philippine history.

Never mind that when it was happening, Gloria and her minions asked the people to flex their power to support her.

Never mind that it was because of EDSA Dos that she was catapulted to power.

Never mind all that, mind only that she now says it shouldn't be celebrated or remembered.

It is as if by saying that, she can delete history and make us forget.

But, no, we will not forget how Gloria came to power, on the wings of a coup; and, no, we will not forget how Gloria maintained power, on the wings of fraud.

Though you delete history, we will not forget and we will not let you forget.

Half and Half doesn't mean a whole lot of anything

Rufus Rodriguez, the spokesperson of Erap, shoots his mouth off about Erap seeking the Presidency and says that he (Erap) is contemplating a term-sharing scheme with whoever it is who will be his Vice President. The premise is that Erap lost three (3) years of his original term and therefore he is only trying to get back his lost three (3) years--if you believe that, I have a bridge (two actually) that I want to sell you.

What do you think Erap is? Stupid? Ok, ok, don't answer all at the same time.

Once he gets back to the Presidency (assuming he can run again legally and is not restrained by the Court), he's not going to share the term with anyone else. And assuming he does agree to the harebrained scheme of sharing his term, he is going to choose someone so unambitious and so scared of the office that s/he would not even contemplate going after the half-term.

What Rufus Rodriguez has brought out is not a novel issue, it is downright cheap. It is to cheapen the Office of the President even more than Gloria has cheapened it--with EDSA 2 and with Hello Garci. It is the ultimate trapo solution to anything--since you can't agree on anything, halve whatever it is you're trying to get.

The Office of the President is not bibingka which you can half. Besides half and half doesn't mean a whole lot of anything. It is precisely what the people will get--half of one and half of another, which put together is totally less than the sum of the whole.

Rufus has gotten his fifteen minutes of fame and his above the fold headline now; he should just shut up now.

Is there no one else?

Erap contemplates running for President again in 2010; to this, the FVR side says, if Erap runs, FVR will be "asked" to run again.

I have nothing against old people; I am on record that Jovito R. Salonga is the best President we never had and he's an old man. But, is there really no one else?

Are we so bereft of talented and gifted and committed leaders that we have to have these two old men run again?

And please, no drafts for Gloria, JDV, Jojo Binay, Ping, Dick, Edong, Mar and Manny and ANY other person currently or in the last eight years in the Senate or the House.

What this country needs is fresh wind, not old farts.

The blood of brothers

I have written on this before and it gives no pleasure to write again on this. But another son, brother, person, human being has been killed by a fraternity: Chris Mendez by Sigma Rho. Never mind that there is no official acknowledgement by Sigma Rho; its silence on this matter speaks more eloquently than any official confession.

I have been reading many of my students' blogs on this latest episode of fraternity violence, this time inflicted on one it would call their own, and almost all have asked the question, "why?" There is no answer there that can be found other than to say that it is perhaps a mindless adherence to an outdated tradition of compelling loyalty by means of blood-letting and blood sharing.

Yet, we live in times that we would consider civilized, how then explain the almost morbid fascination of fraternities (and I generalize here to include ALL Fraternities; it is their burden to prove me wrong) with exacting loyalty and commitment by means of physical violence?

I am not a frat man and I am not a barbarian, they are the barbarians, for how else explain the ritualistic blood-letting that must accompany every entry into these greek-lettered societies?

I have never considered physical violence to be a measure of anything other than the shallowness of a person's capacity to reason and the absence of a person's capacity to inspire. Commitment and true brotherhood may be exacted by reason and inspiration, blind loyalty by beatings. That is the difference between humans and horses; you can inspire a person to follow you into the gates of hell but you will have to beat that into a horse.

Yet, these fraternities pride themselves to be the best that there is to offer; Sigma Rho, in its posters extolling alumni (some of whom have publicly distanced themselves from the violence but without resigning), call themselves "gentlemen warriors." If you truly are the best, gentlemen, you do not need to beat commitment into your neophytes; if the gospel you preach is truly the good news, then the ultimate act of hate has no place in it.

I am not a frat man but I am part of a brotherhood--a brotherhood that preaches the good news that, yes, everyone is entitled to respect. My brothers are committed to me and I, to them, not because we were beaten up but because we share the same principles, the same way of living, the same faith and the same experience of love and being loved. So, even if I am not a frat man, I do know of whence I speak when I speak of being a brother to another.

In Genesis 4:9, ". . .the Lord said to Cain, 'Where is Abel, your brother?' He said, 'I do not know, am I my brother's keeper?'"

Cris Mendez was hazed so that he could be a brother; ultimately, his blood was spilled by those who would call him, yet not keep him, as brother. The greater tragedy is not that he was killed in the name of brotherhood, but that the brotherhood to which he aspired would even wash his blood off their hands by simply asking, "am I (Cris's) keeper?"

To those who killed Cris Mendez, let me say this:

Yes, you are your brother's keeper and his blood is on your hands--not only by you who lifted your hand against him to beat him, to maul him, to spill his blood, but also by you who would stand mute and lift no voice of condemnation for those among your brothers who killed Cris.

Yes, you are your brother's keeper and, if you would cherish his memory, you would not stand mute in the face of the grief and bereavement of his family and his friends but rather break your silence to let the truth out.

Yes, you are your brother's keeper for, ultimately, as Donne puts it "any man's death diminishes me because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee."

Nellie Banaag. Leticia Ramos.

Remember those two names: Nellie Banaag. Leticia Ramos.

They died because some coward out there considers life so cheap that he/she would hire equally cowardly goons (show your face, why hide behind bonnets) to deliberately put gas in a school building and burn down the place including Banaag and Ramos.

They died because people like Abalos of COMELEC--yes, he who is famous for looking the other way and blaming everyone else but himself--have absolutely no control over these elections and those who are armed and are out there.

They died so that trapos like Loren Legarda, MIke Defensor, Joker Arroyo and everyone else in GO and TU and even some independents like Gringo and Kiko could have their fifteen minutes of fame.

Let the sacrifice of Nellie Banaag, school teacher, and Leticia Ramos, volunteer pollwatcher, not be in vain.

Remember these two names: Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos.

Remember them, pray for them and those they have left behind--that they may find some measure of peace at this time.

Remember them but let us also do right by them.

To those who ordered the murder of Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos--there are no words to describe the evil of this act that you have done, none at all. When your time comes, may there be words to describe you and how you lived your life because right now, there are none. "Cowardly" and "Evil" are too kind.

To those who murdered Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos by burning them--may God, the merciful and the just, be precisely that: merciful but just.

To those who sit silent in the face of your knowledge of who murdered Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos--may God give you the grace to do what is right, not what is easy; what is just, not what is convenient.

Nellie Banaag and Leticia Ramos: you will not be forgotten. The hearts of a grateful nation go out to you and your families; may God's angels sing you to your deserved rest in Heaven.

Desaparecidos

"They Dance Alone" (Gueca Solo)
(Sting,* 1987; from "Nothing Like the Sun")

Why are these women here, dancing on their own?
Why is there this sadness in their eyes?
Why are the soldiers here, their faces fixed like stone?
I can't see what it is that they despise.

They're dancing with the missing.
They're dancing with the dead.
They dance with the invisible ones.
Their anguish is unsaid.
They're dancing with their fathers.
They're dancing with their sons.
They're dancing with their husbands.
They dance alone; they dance alone.

It's the only form of protest they're allowed.
I've seen their silent faces scream so loud.
If they were to speak these words, they'd go missing too.
Another woman on a torture table, what else can they do?

They're dancing with the missing.
They're dancing with the dead.
They dance with the invisible ones.
Their anguish is unsaid.
They're dancing with their fathers.
They're dancing with their sons.
They're dancing with their husbands.
They dance alone; they dance alone.

One day we'll dance on their graves;
One day we'll sing our freedom.
One day we'll laugh in our joy;
And we'll dance.

One day we'll dance on their graves;
One day we'll sing our freedom.
One day we'll laugh in our joy;
And we'll dance.

Ellas danzan con los desaparecidos;
Ellas danzan con los muertos;
Ellas danzan con amores invisibles;
Ellas danzan con silenciosa angustia;
Danzan con sus padres;
Danzan con sus hijos;
Danzan con sus esposos;
Ellas danzan solas; danzan solas.

Hey Mr. Pinochet, you've sown a bitter crop.
It's foreign money that supports you;
One day the money's going to stop.
No wages for your torturers;
No budget for your guns.
Can you think of your own mother,
dancin' with her invisible son?

They're dancing with the missing.
They're dancing with the dead.
They dance with the invisible ones.
Their anguish is unsaid.
They're dancing with their fathers.
They're dancing with their sons.
They're dancing with their husbands.
They dance alone; they dance alone.

This is one of those songs that don't chart or don't become hits but nonetheless stir up in you rage, passion, compassion, empathy, and anger--all at the same time.

Sting wrote this in 1987 but he might as well have written this last week when Edith Burgos, tragically, brought to the country's attention to those who are involuntarily disappeared.

When Sting wrote and performed this in 1987, people had been disappearing long before that in many dictatorships around the world--Pinochet's Chile and Marcos's Philippines among them; now, in 2007, in this country, people are disappearing again and Jay Jay Burgos is just the most recent and perhaps the "most famous" in recent memory because he carries Joe Burgos's name. Yet, there are so many nameless and faceless desaparecidos.

To those who have made Jay Jay and many like him (like SherlynCadapan and Karen Empeno) disappear, "can you think of your own mother, dancin' with her invisible son?"

To Edith Burgos and the mothers of Sherlyn Cadapan and Karen Empeno and many others who have been made to disappear, I have no words at my disposal to give you comfort save those that I now lift up in prayer to God who is merciful and just.


---------------------------
*Sting wrote this after he saw a brief news story about women dancing in the streets of Chile torn apart by the Pinochet regime. The women were dancing in the streets with pictures of their husbands, fathers, brothers or sons pinned to their clothes or they were holding the pictures and dancing with them.

The Cause for and the Costs of Remembering

Indeed. How many times must the Burgos family pay the price so that we may be able to remain free? (picture lifted from Malaya online)

___________________________________________

I reprint a Statement I drafted for FLAG three (3) years ago on Human Rights Day, December 10, 2004; this became the guest Editorial of the late, lamented Today newspaper on December 10, 2004.

One of the people I was thinking of when I was writing this was the late Joe Burgos, publisher of Ang Pahayagang Malaya and WE Forum--back when writing about the truth was really detrimental to one's health and, in fact, one's continued existence on earth.

He was one among many people I admired back then because he had principles and stood by them--at the great personal prejudice. When freedom came in February 1986, he remained, to my delight and great admiration, consistent and true to his principles---unlike many of his contemporaries during that time, whom I also looked up to then, who turned out to have feet of clay (one of them is running as Senator under Gloria's party, guess who? Sorry, bad ako.)

Although not so titled, this statement could very well have been written yesterday and could have been subtitled--For Joe Burgos.

THE CAUSE FOR AND COSTS OF REMEMBERING

One day every year, we remember.

We remember years of infamy and days of darkness: when law was perverted to suit the needs of one man, his family and his minions; when freedom was but a myth and a mantra; when human rights and social justice were but beautiful words that stared us in our faces and mocked us.

But we remember also very many shining moments of courage, of inspiration, of unity, of selflessness, of martyrdom: when freedom was no longer a myth but our muse—to spur on struggles for greater freedoms; when human rights and social justice became beautiful words that allowed courageous men and women to stand fast and mock the tormentors of freedom.

One day every year on December 10, International Human Rights Day, we remember for we have cause to remember. Yet we should stop not at just remembering one day every year for the cause for remembering brings with it costs of remembering.

Remembering our freedom and how we regained it carries with it the costs of keeping that freedom:

Vigilance. Constant learning.

Commitment to the cause of freedom, social justice and human rights and all that that commitment entails. Selflessness, courage, inspiration and a love for country that transcends the love for self.

The costs of remembering.

In the face of already grinding poverty, the reality of rising prices of water, fuel, electricity, food and transportation threaten to bring new days of darkness. A bankcrupt culture of corruption and patronage politics threatens to resurrect years of infamy. Every day, the news brings little comfort: more and more of the poor become poorer and more powerless even as more and more of the rich and powerful become richer and more powerful.

On its 30^th year and on the occasion of Human Rights Day 2004, the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) renews its commitment to the Filipino people even as we remember the many causes for and the costs of our freedom.

As the days of darkness once again threaten, we have cause to remember the shining moments of courage, of inspiration, of unity, of selflessness, of martyrdom—when freedom, this time from economic and social shackles, may become once again our muse and when human rights and social justice once again become beautiful words that allow courageous Filipinos to stand fast and mock the enemies of our freedom.

30 years ago, FLAG committed itself to the cause of human rights in the Philippines and the ASEAN region. This year, we remember and we stand fast by that commitment for the next 30 years, if need be: “to struggle for justice in time but under the aspect of eternity.”

----------------------------------------------

Ka Joe.

I remember. I am grateful. I will not forget.

The Emperor and The Watchdog

The problem with politicizing the Ombudsman is that everything she does is suspect.

Mercy Gutierrez has labored under the large shadow of Mike Arroyo since her appointment as Ombudsman; whatever she does--short of sending Gloria, both Jose Pidals and the original Jose Pidals's first born, to jail--she will never convince people she is the independent watchdog that the Ombudsman is supposed to be.

And it doesn't help that she allows herself to be used. . . so obviously.

The preventive suspension slapped on Jejomar Binay, Emperor of Makati (have you noticed that the decal for Makati is a stylized "B", which obviously is not a letter found in "Makati" but in "Binay" or "Bayan ni Binay"--but I digress), is just the latest example of how the Ombudsman allows herself to be used, so obviously, by Gloria.

Not even those who will not vote for Binay will dispute that the suspension coming one week before the election is politically-motivated. Moreso, because the one serving it is the Undersecretary of Interior and Local Government and the one "suspending" the suspension's effectivity is Gloria herself. At the very least, the Ombudsman, the DILG and Gloria should be reading from the same script.

No subtlety, no finesse, no class.

The tragedy of this all is that Emperor Binay (and his successors in waiting: his wife, his son and his daughter; if Teddy Boy Locsin didn't still have one term left, Binay's other daughter might have run for the 2d congressional seat) now milks his "underdog" status for all that it is worth and any real issue of corruption against Binay is now swept under the rug, so to speak--waiting to be resurrected during the next election.

D.O.M., M.C.P.

What do you do with someone like Raul Gonzales?

Even as filipinos reeled from the realization that an American, who had come to love the country more than its own citizens, had been killed brutally and senselessly, this Raul Gonzales, desperate for a sound bite, blames Julia Campbell for allowing herself to get into a tight situation. He comes out in media saying that it was her fault for going to Batad alone; that's like saying that a woman who is raped asked for it--that's how bad his statement is, and coming from the Justice Secretary, it becomes much much worse.

Much as I believe in a God who is the perfect creator, the Raul Gonzaleses of this world make you want to ask God, "did you somehow miss a step here?"

But, there really is a rhyme to God's reason. The Raul Gonzaleses of this world are placed here to make us realize that we can--and should--be better persons than he; he is placed here to remind us that there are many other good people, in contrast to him; the likes of him are placed on this earth to remind us of that most difficult of commands, "love one another as I have loved you."

Indeed, if one can love a Raul Gonzales, then you would have taken on the Face of God already.

In the meantime, answering my question at the start of this post--first, make him apologize to Julia Campbells' family, all those poor people she worked with and for, all the women whom Raul Gonzales insulted by his callously chauvinistic remark, all the senior citizens of which he is one of the worst poster boys, all the filipinos, of which he is certainly among the worst examples; and then, after all these, FIRE HIM, now na!

No Joke.

Ang daming bad sa administration ngayon pero ba't di sila lagot kay Joker? Ang tahimik nga niya e. Baka naman joke lang yung kay Joker, na "pag bad ka, lagot ka."

Pero, ito hindi joke: pag di pa nagsalita si Joker tungkol sa militarisasyon at paggamit ng pondo ng gobyerno sa kampanya at di siya tumiwalag sa TU (make up your own meaning for this acronym), wala na siyang mukhang pwedeng iharap sa taong bayan.

Ako, di ko siya iboboto at hinihingi ko na huwag na rin ninyo siyang iboto. No joke.

How quickly we forget . . .

On December 7, 2000, a distinguished member of the House of Representatives stood up in the Halls of the Philippine Senate and declared that "we cannot have a country run by a thief." That member of the House was Joker Arroyo, who later rode his participation as a prosecutor in the impeachment trial of Joseph Ejercito Estrada to a Senate seat in the elections of 2001.

Yesterday, Joker P. Arroyo filed his certificate of candidacy as senator under the administration ticket of Gloria Arroyo, who is widely suspected of stealing, if not money directly, then at least the elections of 2004.

Sir, seven years ago, you said this: "We cannot have a country run by a thief."

How quickly we forget.

Why is MVP not smiling?

For possibly the same reason I'm ranting.

We waited for this?

After what seemed like an eternity in this basketball-crazed country, the “leaders” of the governing bodies of basketball in the Philippines tell us that they finally have unity and they call themselves by the very original name --"BAP-SBP." And all the usual suspects are still onboard---Lim, Alentajan, Tan—the very same ones who threw a spanner in the works by their selfish, boorish, arrogant, and totally un-Filipino (what am I talking about, Graham Lim isn’t Filipino) machinations; plus a few more—Villafuerte (remember Con-Ass?), Cagas (remember Con-Ass?)—now if they had gotten Lagman and Jaraula on board, they could have sung “hail, hail, the gang’s all here!” But I digress, this is basketball, not politics--although sometimes you can't tell the difference anymore.

What is going on?

After the so-called Basketball Association of the Philippines (BAP), through its self-proclaimed “leaders” Lim, Alentajan and Tan, manage to pull off one of the most cruel stunts anyone could ever think of in this basketball-crazy country—getting us suspended from international competition—the SBP led by Manny V. Pangilinan agree on “unity” with this group. And they’re happy about it?

I don’t know about you—but it’s no longer only in Denmark that something figuratively stinks. Right here, right now, this stinks—it stinks big time.

What, the BAP is not even going to be held accountable for costing the country its best shot at an Olympic berth? What, the BAP is not even going to be taken to task for throwing back the calendar for ASEAN supremacy (alright, second place supremacy after China, which is light years away from where we are)? What, Alentajan and Lim are not going to be even "slapped on the wrist" for causing us all this trouble and this expense just so that we can play basketball internationally? What, we’re just going to allow this sell-out and even allow the BAP first billing in this “new” federation?

Can the saner voices in Philippine basketball do something please? Chino Trinidad? Joe Lipa? Please don’t allow this sell-out to take place.

Sure, let's unite but let's unite all those who have a legitimate stake in basketball--Alentajan and Lim have none, they're only looking to advance their own personal interests. Unity, yes definitely, but not at all costs. Not at this cost.

I am this close to switching to another sport—perhaps cricket might make more sense (despite all its weird rules)—than basketball under this "new" BAP-SPB alliance.

Lethal Weapon

Manny Pacquiao needs 20 guns to protect himself and his family. That is what the COMELEC says by granting him an exemption to carry firearms during the election period—not just one or two but 20 firearms. (What do you expect from the very same agency that spawned Garci?)

He’s being threatened? And needs to protect himself by carrying 20 firearms?

Never mind that he is a professional boxer—defined as someone who gets paid handsomely to maul another human being. Never mind that, ranged against the ordinary person, Pacquiao is legitimately classified as a dangerous man simply by the way he has been trained to use his fists. Mind only that Pacquiao is now, more than at any other time, a lethal weapon.

If Pacquiao feels that he is being threatened, here’s what he should do: keep a low profile. Buy himself a retreat in some not so well-known place, like maybe Siberia or Anchorage, Alaska. Or perhaps, just get rid off his many hangers-on—the two floral-shirt wearing sycophants in Manila, being the most prominent.

He fears that his family might be kidnapped? Then he should stop buying luxury cars like they were going out of style. Inviting scrutiny by his lifestyle is the best way to invite kidnappers. The worst threat to his family's well-being is not potential kidnappers, it is Pacquiao's brazen --almost bacchanalian--lifestyle.

Everyone wants peace of mind and Pacquiao should be no exception. Then, perhaps he should contemplate a change in careers, maybe become a professional sudoku player.

Clowns

Driving home last night close to midnight, I was listening to the late night newscast over the radio; the news bit I caught was about the expulsion case before the House Ethics Committee (an oxymoron, if I ever heard one; apologies to my ethical friends in Congress, you know who you are) filed by Jose Miguel "Mike" Arroyo, otherwise known as the First Gentleman, against Alan Peter Cayetano, Representative from Taguig-Pateros.

Two exchanges caught my attention.

The first involved both Mike Arroyo and Cayetano exchanging barbs about how their alma mater, the Ateneo de Manila (Arroyo and Cayetano both finished law at the Ateneo, something that I can be proud of--that they did not finish law in U.P.; unfortunately, Tinex Jaraula did, but that's another blog altogether), was ashamed of them. Arroyo brought it up first by belittling what Cayetano was asking and how he was asking them by saying that Ateneo was ashamed to be associated with him (Cayetano); never one to let a barb go by without a riposte, the Congressman retorted with a similar comment.

I’m from the Ateneo (not de Manila, Cagayan de Oro more popularly known as Xavier University, not the Xavier in Greenhills but the one in Mindanao) and may I add my Jesuit-trained two bits to this one: as an Atenean, may I confirm that I am absolutely ashamed to be associated with either of you. So, there.

The second exchange involved another Arroyo with Cayetano: Iggy, the hapless younger brother of Mike, who appears perpetually drunk, dazed, bewildered or something much more intoxicating or all four at the same time. Yes, Iggy—Jose Pidal himself.

When quizzed by Cayetano about relatives using aliases, Mike Arroyo promptly denied any such thing, never mind that right beside him was Iggy, who had publicly and several times under oath admitted that he had used the pseudonym (or alias, if you will), Jose Pidal, in connection with election-related spendings. So when asked by Cayetano, Iggy gave an answer out of the Imelda Marcos (vide “the black hole” in the cosmic plan of thing etc. etc.) and Melanie Marquez (remember "Don't judge my brother, he's not a book"?) school of witticisms —something to the effect that he is not yet the First Gentleman, maybe next year.

In the car, I had to figuratively and almost literally pull over as my jaw had dropped and was in danger of hitting the steering wheel and I was laughing so hard I could barely see; you could hear the “thunk” of collective jaws dropping in the hearing room, the muffled snickers even from Arroyo’s most rabid and asinine (and there are a lot of them; soundtrack to this: Patty Page’s “How much is that doggy in the window?”) sycophants. Such was the inanity of the answer.

Of course, Cayetano, being who he is, would not let Iggy off the hook that easily; quickly he inserted the question, “why, is Gloria Arroyo not going to be the President anymore next year?” Mercifully, I reached home before my jaw could drop any lower from any answer that Iggy would give. (NB. I’m not a fan of Cayetano—never have been, never will be. But with the way that Gloria, Mike, Iggy and Mikey, all surnamed Arroyo, have been going at him, hammer and tongs, and with Cayetano’s typical glibness and occasionally inspired witticisms against a totally inept and inarticulate trio of Arroyos, the possibility is that Cayetano might just end up in the Senate--inspite of Cayetano's efforts.)

I felt like I was listening and watching to a totally surreal and twisted episode of The Three Stooges (take your pick who Curly, Larry, Moe and Shemp are from the Congressman from Taguig, the First Gentleman, Jose Pidal and the 4th-rate "actor" who makes Manny Pacquiao look like Oscar-material), except that I wasn't and didn't feel like laughing.

Moral of this not-so-fictional fable: You put enough clowns in the room, you’ll definitely get one heck of a farce.