 |
 |
| ON THE OTHER HAND |
| EDSA at 20 By Antonio C. Abaya Written Feb. 21, 2006 For the Standard Today, February 23 issue The consistent pattern in the yearly celebrations of EDSA Uno has been the decreasing number of people who ventured annually to celebrate what was arguably the most glorious event in the modern history of this country. After the failed coups against President Cory Aquino in August 1987 and December 1989, by RAM military reformists (or adventurers) led by Gringo Honasan, the yearly celebrants went their separate ways. The civilian Corystas this way, the military rightists the other way, and never the twains did meet again. And the civilian Corystas became fewer and fewer as public disenchantment with the Cory government grew, while the military rightists sulked in their corner for having been pushed out of the power circle that they believed was rightfully theirs. In my article "People Power Goes Pfffft" (Mar. 12, 2003), I wrote that ?it was the middle class who instigated and fleshed out the People Power uprising of 1986. The upper classes were/are more concerned with preserving and enjoying their wealth than with anything else, while the underclasses were/are too embroiled in the daily struggle for survival to give any serious thought to how society should be organized and how its resources should be distributed. "It is the middle class who have the intellectual angst and the leisure time to explore the possible parameters of social change. It is the middle class who have the sense of right and wrong that is offended and outraged by execrable governance and willful acts of injustice. It is the middle class who have the intestinal fortitude to voice their anger and their despair over the parlous state of this country and, if need, it is the middle class who will stand up to be counted again, assuming they find a leader or leaders whom they can believe in, to right the many wrongs. "That only 500 people - outnumbered by 600 security policemen - showed up for the celebration last February 25 (2003), is eloquent proof that the middle class have finally and totally lost faith in People Power and the trapos who have become associated with it..." The "celebration" in 2005 was even more sparsely attended, if that was at all possible. In my article "The Incredible Shrinking EDSA Crowd" (Mar. 01, 2005), I wrote that ?In the Feb 26 (2005) issue of the Manila Standard, there is no picture at all of the crowd that went to EDSA the previous day, nor is there an estimate in the news story of the number of people who showed up.... "In the front page of the Feb. 26 issue of Today, there is neither a photo of the crowd or of the VIPs who attended, nor an educated guess on how many showed up. The focus of the sparse 10-inch story on EDSA was the inability or reluctance, supposedly due to poor health, of Cardinal Sin to get up from his car to address the 'crowd,' the first time in 19 years that the Cardinal, one of the key players in the original EDSA, had failed to do so "Perhaps Cardinal Sin felt it was demeaning to him to be addressing the 1,500 security policemen assigned to the non-event, and practically nobody else. "In its Feb. 26 issue, the Philippine Daily Inquirer also had no estimate or pictures of the crowd. The only photo is that of President Arroyo, with former Presidents Ramos and Aquino and a bishop, releasing a giant Filipino flag made up of balloons. "But it is a low-angle shot, meaning it was taken from about waist-high and looking up, so nothing can been seen in the background except the top of the EDSA monument, no glimpse of the crowd if there was one. "One does not have to be a rocket scientist to conclude that media was inveigled, or allowed itself to be inveigled, by the Malacanang spin masters not to run any pictures of the crowd (because there was none), and not to come up with estimates on how many showed up (because they were so few). All the news that?s fit to print, in a thimble. ?So what newspaper readers saw on their front pages on Feb. 26 (2005) was a poorly choreographed Potemkin EDSA, with the principal participants unable even to force a smile to convince anyone that they were celebrating anything but their own political demise. Cardinal Sin was correct in declining to get up from his car..." So now we reach EDSA at 20. Will things turn out any better? I hope so. But the early signs are not auspicious. In the Feb. 13 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer, former President Ramos complained that ?it is deplorable that with just 10 days to go, there are no announced official government plans for the celebration of the 20th anniversary of EDSA Uno." But there are official plans, counters presidential chief-of-staff Mike Defensor. President Arroyo will attend a wreath-laying ceremony at the Libingan ng mga Bayani early Feb. 25, but then she will be out-of-town for the rest of the day. And, oh yes, President Arroyo does not intend to be on the same stage with former President Cory Aquino, who has joined the chorus asking her, PGMA, to resign. So now the incredibly shrinking EDSA crowd has been further divided. Not only have the civilian Corystas and the military putschists gone their separate ways since 1990, the civilians are now further split into those who support GMA and those who want her to resign. No wonder President Arroyo does not want to be around for the bulk of the EDSA celebration, if there is one. Would President Jacques Chirac snub the celebrations of Bastille Day just because his Interior Minister (and presidential wannabe) Nicholas Sarkozy was unable to stop the spread of the riots last November? Would President George W. Bush storm out of Washington DC in a huff on July 4th just because his vice-president, Uncle Dick, accidentally shot someone while hunting ducks? It turned out that President Arroyo was planning to spend Feb. 25 in, or on her way to, Washington DC, ostensibly to address the American Press Club. Again I ask, would President Chirac abjure Bastille Day just to be able to address, say, the Katmandu Press Club? Or President Bush the Fourth of July just to be able to read "My Pet Goat" to a Fifth Grade class in Florida? Where is the sense of proportion in Malacanang? But all is well that ends well. President Arroyo will NOT address the American Press Club, after all. That has been cancelled. But why was it planned at all, in the first place? My interpretation is that Malacanang paid its American lobbyists (they do not do anything for free) to wangle an invitation for President Arroyo to address the prestigious National Press Club, failing which they settled for its poorer and less well-known cousin, the American Press Club. The logic behind the move is that since she will be in Washington DC, it would be easy to secure an invitation from the White House for a meeting and photo op with President Bush, to boost her sagging popularity at home. When the White House declined to invite, the American Press Club speaking engagement was scratched. EDSA at 20 finds this country more fractious than ever before despite the spate of good news in recent months: victory at the Southeast Asian Games, Manny Pacquiao, a robust peso (which actually does not favor OFW families, exporters and tourism-related sectors), more and more call centers, rising exports, booming stock market, record highs in gross international reserves, exports, tourist arrivals, etc. for which President Arroyo has not been given adequate credit. What seems to be lacking now, more than in 1986 or 2001, is moral leadership whom the people, especially the middle class, can rally around and believe in and love. President Arroyo has unfortunately failed to provide that moral leadership. So did Joseph Estrada during his watch; he was merely entertaining in his buffoonery, to those whose idea of entertainment is no higher than their IQs. It is also difficult to discern that moral leadership among the predatory trapos eagerly salivating at the prospect of soon feeding at the presidential (or parliamentary) trough. One likes to believe in the idealism of young military officers eager to do their bit to reform society, until one hears of their silly and self-destructive alliance with the communists to achieve their goal. Sacrificing principles for the sake of perceived temporary gain is not a sign of high moral leadership, and that goes for both the communists and the junior officers, as well as for those among the burgis who are stupid and ignorant enough to think that allying themselves with the communists against President Arroyo serves the cause of bourgeois democracy.. EDSA at 20 still awaits the Champion who will provide that moral leadership.***** Reactions to [email protected]. Other articles in www.tapatt.org. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO |
| Reactions to �EDSA at 20� It is disgusting to hear some people saying the middle class is tired of people power. No, we are not!!!! Provided in our judgment, the causes are right and good for the country. This is the reason why I, a veteran of Makati rallies and Edsa PP I & 2 stayed away from the recent rallies led by Cory and company. In my heart I know that replacing GMA will not set us to the road that will be better for the country. Warts and all, I will take GMA anytime rather that Noli, Drilon, Susan Roces (heaven forbid!),etc. The likes of Angara and Escudero should be lined up and shot. They started all these gulo with the moronic idea of putting up FPJ for president. How could these people claim love of country? Is FPJ the best they can offer to the country they supposedly love? More of love of self to me, kasi a totally incompetent FPJ would be totally dependent on them. GMA is definitely lesser evil than an FPJ, or Noli, or a comeback ERAP presidency. In the end, as a Christian I am supposed to choose the lesser evil when confronted only with pure evil around me. Rosario Billano, [email protected] Feb. 24, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww This is it! Martial law cloaked in the mantle called state of emergency. Who do they think they are fooling? That alleged explosion in the palace where no one was hurt - that was scripted to make it appear that something is in the offing. No, there was no ambush on the Defense Secretary's car this time. That would have been a bad imitation. That knee-jerk Defensor fumbled again. Without thinking, he declared immediately that the explosion was the work of the opposition. He had to eat his words later. How can he be so stupid in making such an unfounded conclusion? Quoting a Tom Clancy book title, he declared that there is still "clear and present danger." Yes there is, I agree. But a clear and ever present danger of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo losing her grip on power and eventually being deposed like her predecessor. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's danger is the nation's security. Her resignation or ouster is the country redemption. Time is running out. She has cast the die. She has to pay her due. May God have mercy on my country and its people and save them from this imperious harridan. More than ever, we, all peace-loving and patriotic Filipinos should stand side by side and help the nation get rid of this woman.This cannot go on forever and someday she will fall, the sooner the better. Ramon Mayuga, [email protected] Essen, Germany, Feb. 24, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, Ha, Ha, Ha! Nauna ka writing about EDSA celebration of 20th Anniversary. But I am going to wait for your article as the dust settles after Prolamation 1017, Ang bilis ng mga pangyayari nitong Biernes! Si Randy David ang gwapo ng cellphone nya! parang PDA. Si Atty. Guevarra always mouthing those motherhood statements, alam naman niyang uupakan sila nila GMA. FLAG is going to question the proclamation and I am sure the Supreme Court will echo the same thing as what it said then on Marcos 1081. The state has the right to defend itself. Ano sila, hilo? So we have Proclamation 1017. Yari sila kay GMA!!! Ang galing ni girl scout! Kaya lang, will she use the 1017 to industrialize the Philippines so that we can manufacture our own trains, flush out those punyetas in the government who are always fornicating our coffers!!! BTW, I got hold of a documentary on Fidel Castro, mukhang objective naman ang presentation. Eto palang si Fidel inuna niyang i-land reform ang kanilang hasyenda. Kaya ang Nanay niya galit na galit sa kanya. Talagang rebolusyon ang nangyari sa Cuba! AL Jose Leonidas, fprailways@yahoo Feb. 24, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww The Legacy of EDSA: Every Person Is Worth Dying For By Jose Aranas, Baguio City, Feb. 15, 2006 Twenty years had passed when the world saluted the Filipinos for their non-violent way of resolving a political problem in the last days of the Marcos regime. The media almost all over the world focused on this phenomenon which was called by many names like, People Power Revolution, Revolution of Flowers, Prayer Power and Marian Revolution. It was a heartwarming historical event, seeing nuns kneeling before tanks, children giving flowers to soldiers, and civilians sharing food with military men. In the time of cold war between the empires of Russia and Uncle Sam, a seemingly weak and powerless nation has demonstrated to the world the power of non-violence in resolving a political tension which might turn into a greater civil war. Personalities were put in the limelight like the shy and diminutive Cory Aquino, housewife of the late Senator Benigno Aquino Jr. who was assassinated in August 21, 1983. His death was one of the reasons for the massive demonstrations that happened in the streets of Manila from 1983 to 1986. The public protests ended with a peaceful transition of power from military rule to the civil government of Cory Aquino. Guided by the wisdom and inspired intuitions by the late Archbishop of Manila, the late Cardinal Jaime Sin, the protests were colored by a religious significance which turned out as one of the most inspiring revolutions in the history of mankind without any shedding of blood during those four days and three nights of stand off in the Edsa highway. Today, questions which intrigue historians, political analysts and ordinary Filipinos are coming out in the open as they criticize the effects of this historical event: Is this revolution for real? Did it really bring change to Philippine Society or was it just an enthusiasm of the moment which faded in time. One criticism compares this bloodless revolution to other bloody revolutions which have effected change in society like that of Mao, of the Bolshevik and French Revolutions. It seems that the EDSA revolution is very far from these revolutions because its effects are less felt in the present political and economic situation of the Philippines. They say that this revolution did not really uproot the causes of massive corruption and lawlessness in society. Twenty years had passed and it seems that there is not even an air of festivity to commemorate its 20th anniversary. Can we say that Edsa has just become a legend like that of Camelot which is worth retelling to enchant the imagination of little children? Or it has become a fairy tale without the ending that they live happily ever after? I , personally, am nostalgic of this marvelous and magical event in the history of my people. Not that I long for the accolades that the world has given to us last twenty years ago even hailing Mrs. Cory Aquino, as the Woman of the Year of Time Magazine. What I am nostalgic of was the generosity and altruism of the Filipino people during those three days in the highway of Edsa. The Spirit of Benigno Aquino Jr. that of �every Filipino is worth dying for� was so strong during those days of February 1986. I believe that our readiness to die for one another was a very helpful factor for the success of this event. It was this principle and attitude that made possible this very extraordinary event starting from the sacrifice of Benigno �Ninoy� Aquino Jr... The ideals and principles behind this bloodless revolution are worth extolling but what we need at present is the concretization of its principles in everyday living. Edsa will never become a successful revolution if we will not work out and discipline ourselves. Ninoy�s words � The Filipino is worth dying for� means caring for every one, the street vendors, the jeepney drivers, the street children but also for the rich people. It is not simply a nationalistic principle but a concern for the good of every person especially for the Filipinos whom Ninoy saw as a people oppressed , with no courage and confidence to break the chains of injustice. EDSA was the sacrifice of the poor and rich united together, of the powerless and powerful, and of the strong and the weak. If only we will unite again even not in street protests but in living the same ideal of being ready to die for one another, I can imagine what force we could generate to bring back life and order to our degenerating society. Just take, for example, a simple jeepney driver giving way for a rich land cruiser driver in the complicated streets of Manila or a poor young girl returning a lost wallet of a rich matron. Edsa was the time when the rich and the poor worked together without thinking of their social positions in life. Why can we not return to this reality of those four days in February 1986 when the good of the nation was more important than any other else? Edsa as what Cardinal Sin say is this: �Edsa was not only an act of courage. It is an act of love. Bravery is admirable but love is indispensable. Bravery impresses but only love redeems.� Love is the essence of EDSA. Love translated in everyday living. When you see a poor vendor selling honestly to rich persons, there is the EDSA spirit. When you see a middle class teacher doing her best to teach values to a tycoon�s daughter, there is the EDSA spirit. When you see a sincere generous smile of policemen to rich young men in luxurious cars and to simple jeepney drivers, there is the EDSA spirit. When you see a rich lady volunteering to help the poor children in remote barrios, there is the EDSA spirit. When you hear Filipino Overseas Workers respecting cultural values of other nations, there is the EDSA spirit for as Ninoy said, �Every Filipino is worth dying for,� or put it simply, every person is worth dying for, no matter who he or she is� With this principle lived, I can imagine what a change it will bring to our society in these days and for the days ahead. ***** wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww While our senses have been assaulted and insulted repeatedly by these worn out lines such as "loyalty to the Constitution", "loyalty to the Commander in Chief", "loyalty to our institution", "adherence to the chain of command", etc., there has been a deafening silence on the loyalty of our military and police forces to their sworn duty as protectors and defenders of the Filipino people. Loyalty to duty is dead and buried because it does not put food on the table, pay the house and car rent/mortgage, finance the education of the children, provide security of tenure and assure a generous retirement package. I am sick and tired of hearing a soldier and a policeman use the inutile, morally bankrupt excuse "I was just following orders from the higher up." Is it not ironic that the very people whom they ought to defend are the same people who selflessly try to protect the very few righteous among them? What is even more pathetic is that many of these career abscessed soldiers and policemen (whose integrity has been wounded in their obsessive pursuit of promotion, reward and hefty retirement pay) willfully, many even arrogantly prevented honest patriots (those who have no hidden personal agenda) from expressing their indignation at an apparent injustice committed on these few brave exceptions within their own organization. I also deplore the blatant insolence in the statement that the problem is strictly internal and therefore the relief and suspension of the vocal officers are the concerns solely of the Marine Corps. Had they performed their duties honorably in the esteemed Marine tradition, people would not have even wandered into their territory, much less gathered outside the headquarters of this tough bunch of highly disciplined soldiers. When the conduct of some Marines during the last Presidential elections became suspect, the entire Philippine Marine Corps suffered. Be wary of persons who try to influence or coerce you into doing something against the law because they are in fact insulting you. This affront to Marine integrity came when the order was given to allow the presence of perceived manipulators with known bias inside the canvassing area secured by the Marines. It was my first time to witness a dutiful, patient and silent Marine, a General no less, break his code of silence and yank the chain of command from its lethargic, lap dog state. He admitted, lamented and protested his actions based on orders from high command and his subsequent relief and suspension by the same group who gave him those orders. I have the highest respect for the Philippine Marines among all others in the uniformed service. However, I believe the Corps' spirit and reputation had been damaged so much that healing would require more than internal treatment. Self healing is possible only when wounds are superficial. Real and complete healing may begin only with a humble admission of guilt and a sincere repentance for this rare breach of public trust in the 2004 Presidential elections (not a reluctant regret over its officers' candid exposure of election irregularities). Only then may they rightfully vow to always be solid and united, never again to kowtow to politicians at the people's expense and never again be divided. No other President has ever meddled in the affairs of the Philippine Marine Corps as much as the present. None has curtailed our freedoms of speech and assembly as much without the declaration of martial rule. It is the right and duty of everyone to speak the truth always. Truth sets people free. Lies and cover ups have an eerie way of chaining commanders and obliging followers alike to drag them down to the pit. Loyalty to God, country, family and duty should precede loyalty to any political, business or even religious personality. According to Acts 4:19,20 of the Holy Bible, when the apostles Peter and John were commanded by the Sadducees and Sanhedrin not to speak or teach in Jesus' name, they answered "Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge. For we cannot but speak the things we have seen and heard." I pray for God's grace and the light of the Holy Spirit that we may all be guided by these biblical verses to ponder whether or not our allegiance is misplaced and if our loyalty has strayed from where it should be. Antonio Nantes Guevara, [email protected] Sta. Rosa City, Laguna, February 27, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww (Copy furnished) What is it with us Filipinos? If we cannot express logic or reason out or win in a debate, we go to the personal. It is either our enemy is ugly, our opponent is pandak, the person we do not like has a nose like a carabao's - traits that you nor I have totally no control over. Surely we can rise above targetting the personal traits of a person because it is irrelevant to the argument. Surely we can act more mature than this? Such pettiness should not sweep itself in into intelligent discussions, if it ever was, that is. As for those who wants the likes of a Marcos back into Philippine politics - I would rather have the village idiot of Bulabog manage the affairs of the state. And just exactly who do we have in mind to run this country when there is not one I can think of that has integrity, old world values and statesmanship? Erap? Fernando Poe? Susan Roces? Well maybe we deserve personalities like these guys because it seems we the masa are living more inside our television sets and cinemas than having our feet firmly on the ground and our brains atop our shoulders. Although at the present it is more like vice versa. If you ask me - I think this People Power has gone to our heads and that we think everytime we do not like the face of a leader we can go to the streets and demand he/she steps down. I think we should not belittle the achievements of a generation that took out the Marcoses through their courage, steadfastness and selflessness by overusing this power because too much of a good thing is not a good thing at all. In fact it is becoming detrimental to the progress and growth of our nation. Our problem is that all we do is criticize instead of help. We love to sit on the fence and point fingers. We might as well accept GMA for all her warts, farts and mole because if you ask me, she is all we have got at the moment and we might as well stop all these negativity and start thinking of what we can do to contribute to this country's development instead. And we should start looking for someone now who is going to take over the seat of the president when GMA steps down. And let us not set our sights on basketball players, porno stars, movie personalities, local goons, feudal warlords nor those present inept and incompetent members of our law making body. Encourage our young people to go into politics. If you have a schoolmate in the university who you think has potentials - encourage him to join politics. Put up an organization now that will hunt for the best and brightest before the presidential term is up. Rome was not built in a day, so too we should not catapult a nincompoop into the political arena just because he is well known even if we know he/she is brainless and clueless on how to handle such a complex office. Even being a CEO you need a huge backing of education, experience, skills, abilities. So instead of going to the streets, be a talent scout instead - look for those brainy selfless people who have no money to run for office but have a ton of brains and a fiery passion that will bring our country to glory and prosperity. Raving and ranting in the streets with ridiculous banners will not get us to where we want to go, believe that. So ENOUGH already. Tina Peralta, [email protected] March 13, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww This article from The Weekend Standard was forwarded to us: Where has the hope gone? By A. Lin Neumann February 18, 2006 On the 20th anniversary of People Power in the Philippines, A. Lin Neumann remembers the optimism that he and a nation felt first hand and continues to ponder why so little has come of that flashpoint It is hard to recall the hope sometimes because the Philippines is such a mess. Birth rates are among the highest in the world, a third of the workforce is either unemployed or underemployed. The country is kept afloat financially by remittances from its chief export, Filipinos who labor as maids in Hong Kong, cooks in Saudi Arabia and doctors and nurses in the United States. Remittances from millions of overseas workers reached a record US$10.35 billion (HK$80.73 billion) last year, equal to a quarter of total export revenues from all other sources. The country's president is accused of stealing the last election in 2004. Communist insurgents are growing again after years of decline, their numbers rising inexorably in remote areas; clashes with the military are a daily occurrence. Assassinations of journalists and political activists are commonplace and seldom punished. The place seems weary of itself and its best minds and strongest backs look abroad for a future. "Why stay? It is sad, but I am leaving next month," a young doctor, a graduate of the best university in the country, told me in December on the island of Mindoro. She had already taken board exams to practice in the US and was leaving for good. "There is nothing here for me." But 20 years ago, on February 25, 1986, the country seemed to have a new future. At about 11pm, two hours after Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos fled the Presidential Palace in Manila, I was standing in the inner sanctum of the couple and believed, along with people worldwide, that a better day had come. The dictator had been chased from his lair, few shots had been fired, a dignified and kind woman, Corazon Cojuangco Aquino, was now in power and it seemed like something of a political miracle. In the presidential bedrooms of Malacanang Palace, I can still recall the sweet odor rising from the flagons of Chanel No.5 and Joy perfume left behind in the rush to pack the jewels and other valuables stashed on the American helicopters that took the couple away from the country they had ruled for more than 20 years. In her bedroom, there was a ouija board on a side table, mystic insignia on the headboard of the canopied bed and numerous glass display cases emptied of their treasures. In his bedroom was an oxygen tank, a hospital bed and official papers strewn on the floor. It was quiet, weirdly so. I had expected the place to be thoroughly looted once the soldiers fled and the angry crowd massed at the main gate of the palace gained entry to the grounds. The mob never made it to the bedrooms, however, and those few who did penetrate the chambers seemed as awed by the experience as the handful of reporters wandering the halls. Outside there was rejoicing. Emerging from the palace sometime later, it was impossible not to be moved by the site of an impromptu shrine erected to the Virgin Mary on the grounds. People were kneeling, praying the rosary, lighting candles, adorning the statue with the yellow ribbons that were the symbol of the widow Aquino's drive to oust from power the man her supporters held responsible for her husband's murder. Sparked by a succession of complex events - a fraudulent snap election, a failed bid by military rebels to seize power, Roman Catholic leaders calling on people to join a mass protest against Marcos - a peaceful four-day revolt had toppled a dictatorship that once seemed impregnable. It can be difficult now, with the Philippines mired in political decay and economic stagnation, to remember that "People Power" was an immensely hopeful event with global reverberations. It was felt a year later when a largely peaceful uprising toppled a dictator in South Korea. Its echoes were in Tiananmen Square in June 1989 and in the collapse of the Soviet Empire. The "Orange Revolution" in the Ukraine in 2004 was often compared to the revolt Filipinos named the EDSA Revolution, after a highway running past the military camps where rebel soldiers holed up on February 21, 1986, after their plot to overthrow the regime was uncovered. ! After the soldiers broke ranks, that highway filled with hundreds, then tens of thousands then hundreds of thousands of people. The expected counterattack by Marcos never came. Armored vehicles really were stopped by people kneeling before the treads in prayer. I remember diving into a ditch for cover inside one of the camps on Day Two of the revolt as a flight of helicopters flew overhead in what seemed to be attack formation. Then a yellow flag fluttered out of an open door and the choppers landed to announce their refusal to attack. Soldiers wept and hugged each other. The Marcos government was a staggeringly corrupt regime. I know a businessman who routinely carried a briefcase of cash into the palace just to secure an appointment with one of Marcos's cabinet ministers. His job was to build badly needed power plants financed by the World Bank. Infrastructure projects and entire industries - coconuts, sugar, mining, media - fell under the sway of cronies of the president, especially in the years following his 1972 declaration of Martial Law. Billions of dollars were siphoned abroad. Little has been recovered. The night Marcos and family escaped the wrath of some one million people who had massed in various parts of the city was the culmination of a political drama that was almost Shakespearean. Cory Aquino's ambitious and charismatic husband, Benigno, known as Ninoy, had been a thorn in Marcos' side going back to their days as senators in the early 1960s. Ninoy had even dated Imelda for a time before he married Cory, the proper convent-bred daughter of one of the country's wealthiest families. Imprisoned under Martial Law, Ninoy was allowed by Marcos to go to the US for medical treatment in the early 80s. Determined to regain his political stature despite the threat of arrest and further imprisonment, he returned on August 21, 1983. That was the day I got caught up in the drama. As a rookie freelance reporter, I was at the airport when Ninoy was escorted from a China Airlines plane down to the tarmac and into an assassin's bullet. I was in the family home later that day, along with a mob of reporters. I witnessed his amazing funeral procession, the largest demonstration ever seen in Manila. Soon his widow, a decent woman but a reluctant reformer at best, became the center of aspirations for change. I grew to like her very much. Meanwhile, the economy went into free-fall, Ninoy's assassination remained unsolved (as it is today, with some soldiers jailed but no mastermind ever brought to justice), communist rebellion was on the rise and even the US was slowly withdrawing its support. So Marcos, frail and ill, called for a snap election on February 7, 1986. The widow against the dictator. It was a match made in media heaven. The official election results gave the decision to Marcos, but fraud charges were everywhere and an array of domestic and foreign observers complained of abuses. It took two weeks for the end game to begin. The coup plotters, led by Marcos's long-time henchman and Defense Secretary Juan Ponce Enrile, whose motives are unclear to this day, and the No2 man in command of the armed forces, General Fidel Ramos, were getting ready to move. Cory Aquino was drawing huge crowds at mass rallies. Stephen Bosworth, the enormously influential American ambassador in those days when the former US colony still hosted the massive military bases that were withdrawn in 1992, quietly shifted his country's support to Aquino. Businessmen were in a panic and Catholic nuns were gathering to protect ballot boxes and hold all-night vigils insisting on a recount. Just two days before the revolt began on February 22, when it was unclear what might happen and reporters were trolling for clues and conspiracies, the regime's disarray was captured in one indelible moment for me. Jose! "Jolly" Benitez, a close protege of the former First Lady, was sitting late at night in the ornate lobby bar of the Manila Hotel, Imelda's favorite haunt. "What happened? How did you guys lose control?" I remember asking him. A very powerful man in those days, Benitez was visibly drunk and slurred his words. "Nuns. How could we know those f***ing nuns were going to sit on the ballot boxes?" he said before launching into a crude string of epithets. He took another gulp of his scotch and added there was no way out for Marcos. "We don't know what to do," he said before lurching off into the night. But in 20 years the country never dug itself ! out from the abyss that began under Marcos. In the mid-1960s, during a time when China was hopeless and Thailand, Korea and Singapore were just beginning their ascent, Manila was one of the finest cities in Asia and the Philippines a place where the region's elites came for medical treatment and foreign students flocked to study at the universities. For decades now, Filipinos have been asking what went wrong with the country, its politics, themselves. The tragedy is that People Power, for all its patina of bravery and honor, did little to reverse the trend begun under Marcos. On what should be a grand anniversary, it is difficult to find much to rejoice in. Mired in her own escalating series of crises, President Gloria Macapagal- Arroyo, another daughter of the super- elite whose father was president before Marcos, is herself accused of vote-rigging while her husband is in semi- exile in the US because of his tarnished reputation as an alleged gambling overlord. It is almost as if the entire country has given a collective shrug to the current political mess because the details become numbing. She was secretly taped apparently discussing the 2004 presidential election's vote count with an election official on the telephone. The tapes were made public under mysterious circumstances. Arroyo ascended to power in 2001 in an ill-conceived uprising cooked up by business elites, the Catholic Church and military leaders fed up with the corrupt antics of the former actor and hero of the poor, President Joseph Estrada. People Power 2, as they called it, was a sad replay of the first revolt because those behind it were unwilling to wait for a constitutional process to unfold. Now the country waits, in vain apparently, for People Power 3 to get rid of Arroyo. "I don't have the energy to overthrow another president," a friend of mine said last year when the Arroyo scandal began, and it seems that weariness, rather than any lingering credibility, is what will keep Arroyo in office. The heroes of 1986, Cory Aquino and former President Fidel Ramos, who succeeded her in 1992, have both called on Arroyo to step down. She has no intention of doing so and her administration is downplaying the 20th anniversary of People Power, perhaps wary of reminding people of what they could do if they decided to act. A Congressional probe into her actions stalled because she had more votes than anybody else. It is doubtful anything will come of any investigation into Arroyo's alleged misdeeds or anything else, for that matter. You see, no one ever gets to the bottom of anything in the Philippines. I think about this a lot, probably more than a reporter should. It is not my country, of course, but I spent almost a decade there and I return frequently. I think of it as my second home, it was my best story and I was filled with as much hope as anyone 20 years ago when those candles flickering in the night marked the removal of Marcos. Sadly, though, People Power was not even close to being a revolution. It didn't even mark a significant period of genuine structural reform. Other than restoring civil liberties and giving rise to a vibrant and free press, it is hard to see how the country has changed. The problems began early. Marcos was never summoned home for trial, perhaps because Aquino never trusted her hold on power; he died in exile in Hawaii and his body is still mouldering in a glass tomb in his hometown as his heirs demand he be buried in the national heroes' cemetery in Manila. The moneyed elites that have always run the country for their own benefit, some of whom had run afoul of Marcos, returned with a vengeance. Through legislative sleight of hand in 1987, a long-promised land reform exempted the vast sugar holdings of Aquino's own Cojuangco clan in Central Luzon. Others returned to reestablish business empires that had been seized by Marcos. Most of the holdings of Marcos's cronies also were returned by the courts after being sequestered by the government. It was business as usual. At the time, ordinary Filipinos waited for Aquino to call on them to do something, to volunteer, to go to the villages to help, to continue what they had begun. But Aquino was no populist rabble rouser, and the call never came. Back-door deal-making returned in the Congress, political alliances realigned. No major Marcos official ever went to jail and his former allies quickly found homes in the political parties of the new rulers. His son became a provincial governor and his daughter is a rising power in Congress. In 1998 Imelda Marcos's conviction on corruption charges was reversed by the Supreme Court after a 12 year legal battle. The elderly former beauty queen, still finely lacquered and manicured, is a fixture on the social scene. Other factors also prevented the country from moving forward. Emboldened by its role in putting both Aquino and Arroyo in power, the military never returned to the non- political role it had in the past. A succession of coups nearly toppled Aquino but the plotters were largely forgiven and the main culprit, Gregorio Honasan, served three terms in the senate; his patron, Enrile, is still a powerful political figure. Another mini-coup, 2003's shopping mall putsch aimed by young officers at Arroyo was yet another reminder of the restive military. "I assure the world that this event does not in any way injure our national security and political stability," Arroyo absurdly asserted following that event. Some of those detained in that uprising recently escaped from prison. The other pillar of the country, the Catholic Church, was also returned to power in 1986. Since then, the government largely has been unable and unwilling to mount any serious population control program. The church won't stand for it and as both Marcos and Estrada learned, any political leader who runs afoul of the church risks his position. I was idly thinking about all of this the last time I arrived in Manila a few weeks ago. The plane from Hong Kong taxied past a new but never used airport terminal that has been mothballed since 2003. The victim of interminable squabbling, corruption, legal battles and finger pointing, the facility has been awarded to the government by the courts but the company that built the badly needed terminal was also granted compensation. The government refuses to pay so instead visitors taxi toward the tattered old terminal at Ninoy Aquino International Airport. It still looks the same, grey and down at heel, just as it did on the day he was martyred. From the window I can see Gate 8 where he was shot. I always look for it reflexively when I arrive, a familiar touchstone of sadness. Peter Wallace, an Australian business consultant who has been in the country for more than 25 years, wrote recently: "I think it's no exaggeration to say that the terminal, standing there almost finished, needed, unpaid for, unused is seen as a symbol of what's wrong with the Philippines today." He's right. It is as good a symbol as any.***** wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww (The following article from the London Times Online was forwarded to us) The Philippines: exhausted by coups and protest by Sam Knight London Times Online February 24, 2006 Twenty years ago this week, the world watched as the Philippines removed Ferdinand Marcos, a dictator of brutality and legendary excess, in an eye-catching, peaceful revolt. Nuns kneeled before tanks on the EDSA Highway, a main road through the east of Manila, Ronald Reagan told his ally to "cut and cut cleanly" and the phrase "people power" was born. Fifteen years and several attempted coups later, on the same redolent spot, the current President, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, a charming, internationally-respected economist, was swept to power by demonstrations against Joseph Estrada, her democratically elected predecessor who had outraged the country with cronyism and corruption. But even as Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary-General, hailed "EDSA II", as it became known, as "a victory for democracy", political analysts in the Philippines questioned whether a taste for drama was threatening to overwhelm the institutions of a poor country that has always struggled to administer its 7,000 islands and 84 million inhabitants. Over the last five years, more crises, including a military coup in 2003 and the exile of Mrs Arroyo's husband, Jose Miguel, who was threatened with corruption charges, have only perpetuated the cycle of unrest. So last summer, a new phrase, "people power fatigue", was coined as Filipino journalists struggled to describe the strange listlessness that accompanied serious charges against Mrs Arroyo, who was caught on the tape discussing plans to rig the country's general elections. Despite calls from the hugely influential Catholic Church and Corazon Aquino, the one-time heroine of Mrs Arroyo who succeeded Marcos as President in 1986, mass protests failed to catch. Three attempts to impeach Mrs Arroyo also stumbled in Congress, where representatives from her Lakas party overruled them on a technicality. Rumours of a military coup were widespread, however, but even they seemed to crumble in December, when a retired general launched an abortive putsch in a social club. The result, analysts say, is a country confused and exhausted by drama. Today's protests and the Government's claim to have dismantled yet another coup has left many questioning whether Mrs Arroyo has exaggerated the threat to secure her position and keep the streets safe at a time of year when Manila is prone to disorder. "The Government is overreacting," said Earl Parreno of the Institute of Political and Electoral Reform, as Filipinos watched soldiers fortify the presidential palace with sandbags, shipping containers and tanks. "In a nutshell, today is more theatre than threat," said Erin Prelypchan, a political analyst at Pacific Strategies Assessment. "The supposed coup that the Government has foiled was not a coup. The people who were planning to break ranks with the military were just in the planning stages, there was no set date," she said. "The Government basically timed it to say that no one is going to try anything today." Ms Prelypchan said that even today's protests, an attempt to reignite "people power", did not have widespread support. "The level of cynicism is pretty deep," she explained. "Twenty years after the first 'people power', what has changed? People in the Philippines see the same traditional oligarchy in power, the same few families, and they say: what on earth would another people power protest bring? At the same time, they doubt an election would bring any change." "The truth is that there is no obvious alternative to Arroyo, there isn't anything coming round the bend. So a lot of people are just staying at home today, turning off their televisions." wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww (The following article was emailed to us) Dissecting "The Da Vinci Code" Interview with Apologist Mark Shea February 23, 2006 SEATTLE, Washington, FEB. 23, 2006 (Zenit.org).- Millions have read "The Da Vinci Code" and many are expected to see the movie version when it is released May 19. That is why Mark Shea and Ted Sri -- an apologist and theology professor, respectively -- have co-authored "The Da Vinci Deception" (<>Ascension), a guide that reveals the fact and fiction behind "The Da Vinci Code." Shea shared with ZENIT the main inaccuracies in the "Code" book, and why they threaten the faith of Christians. Q: What compelled the writing of this book? Shea: The short answer is that tens of millions of people have read "The Da Vinci Code" and many have had their faith in Christ and the Catholic Church shaken. This blasphemous book has become a major cultural phenomenon, largely by attacking the very person and mission of Jesus Christ. It must be addressed. The longer answer is that "The Da Vinci Code" has become the source for what I call "pseudo-knowledge" about the Christian faith. Pseudo-knowledge is that stuff "everybody knows," such as the "fact" that Humphrey Bogart said "Play it again, Sam" -- except he didn't. Pseudo-knowledge doesn't matter much when the issue is the script of "Casablanca." It matters greatly when it adversely affects the most sacred beliefs of a billion people, and when it levels the charge that the Catholic Church is essentially a vast "Murder Incorporated" network founded on maintaining the lie of Jesus' divinity and resurrection. When that happens, very nasty genies get let out of bottles, as when the lies recorded by 19th-century czarist secret police forgers in the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" became the basis for what "everybody knew" about the Jews in the terrible anti-Semitic persecutions of the 20th century. "The Da Vinci Code" has sold close to 30 million copies. In May, it will appear as a major film and will acquire even more unquestioned authority among millions of historically and theologically illiterate viewers -- unless Christians state the facts and help viewers recognize just how badly they've been had. The Da Vinci Outreach initiative, led by Catholic Exchange and Ascension Press, will equip Catholics and all people of good will with resources to help them respond to this movie. Those who say, "It's just a story," simply do not understand that this deception is part of the book's power. People often receive through fiction what they would be on guard against in reasoned debate. And this is particularly true as Dan Brown, the author of "The Da Vinci Code," has actually stated he would not change any of his basic assertions if he were writing nonfiction. Brown means for us to understand that his claims about the origins are Christianity are true. Q: What are the main inaccuracies found in the "The Da Vinci Code"? Shea: Let me count the ways. Blunders include factual errors and outright lies, large and small, about practically every subject Brown addresses in art, history and theology. He purports that bogus documents that even his questionable sources repudiate are factual. He claims Leonardo Da Vinci doesn't give Jesus a chalice in his painting "The Last Supper" in order to hint that Mary Magdalene is the true chalice who held the "blood of Jesus" -- i.e., his child -- despite the fact there are 13 cups in the painting. He chatters about the meaning of an Aramaic word in the Gnostic gospel of Philip, oblivious to the fact it's written in Coptic. He calls Mary Magdalene the victim of a Catholic smear campaign without pausing to wonder why she's a Catholic saint. He blames "the Vatican" for various plots and conspiracies that are alleged to have taken place centuries before there was any Vatican to plot them. And, of course, in the biggest lie of them all, he declares that nobody before the year A.D. 325 thought of Jesus as anything other than a "mortal prophet" until Constantine muscled the Council of Nicaea into declaring him God "by a relatively close vote." Of course, he does not stop to ask why, if Jesus was just a "mortal prophet," he bothered founding a Church at all -- nor what the Church was about for the first 300 years if nobody was worshipping Jesus as God. Q: How do these inaccuracies challenge the Church, her teachings and the person of Jesus Christ? Shea: Brown is attempting to establish a neo-pagan feminist creation myth. The basic myth is: Jesus was actually a feminist, agog for neo-paganism. The Church supposedly covered up all this with lies about his divinity. Brown's point here is: Let's get back to goddess worship as Jesus intended. This laughably baseless claim is, of course, utterly contrary to the facts about Jesus. But many in our overly credulous and historically illiterate culture believe it. So Catholics must undertake to catechize not just themselves but their families, friends and neighbors, or they can expect this dangerous myth to continue spreading. Q: Why is there a concern about Catholics -- and everyone else, for that matter -- viewing "The Da Vinci Code" movie without a discerning eye and solid background information? Shea: Because it's written with the express intention of destroying faith in Jesus Christ and replacing it with neo-pagan goddess worship. The problem is the average reader does not know "The Da Vinci Code" actually makes you more stupid about art, history, theology and comparative religion. "The Da Vinci Deception" and Da Vinci Outreach are there to educate readers on the quite deliberate falsehoods -- as well as ignorant blunders -- that fill the story. We are also including a resource aimed at educating high school students and helping them to tune their "bunk detectors" to Brown's wavelength. Q: The recent backlash by Muslims against cartoons on Mohammed seems to signal rising tensions between religion and society. What do you think of the timing of this movie? Shea: Undoubtedly, the promoters of the movie will attempt to characterize Catholic complaints about "The Da Vinci Code's" assassination of the facts as identical to radical Islamist threats to free speech. The problem with this claim, of course, is that the Church does not condone burning down buildings or threatening people with death, even when they lie about Christ. We simply and politely request that the creators of "The Da Vinci Code" to not palm off scurrilous lies as fact. Western manufacturers of culture are always braver about smearing the Church than in confronting radical Islam because, as they know perfectly well, the Vatican does not issue "fatwas" or death threats. Q: How do you hope this book informs those who plan on going to the film "The Da Vinci Code"? Shea: "The Da Vinci Deception" breaks down in simple terms the basic pattern of lies Brown deploys in "The Da Vinci Code" so that the reader can clearly see the clockwork going on behind this novel. The book is broken into 100 questions -- as was our previous book, "A Guide to the Passion" -- that walk the reader through the skillful weave of Brown's very artful falsehoods and show you why it's such a scam. Once you understand Brown's game, you start to realize that it is Brown -- not the Catholic faith -- that is taking people for a ride. We are confident enough in our book that we would, in fact, urge people to go to the film after having read it -- the better to help deluded family members, friends and neighbors see through the scam. Q: Why are people taking Dan Brown's novels so seriously? In Rome there are even guided tours retracing the places covered in his book "Angels and Demons." Shea: "The Da Vinci Code" is yet another manifestation of what I call "the latest Real Jesus"; every generation tends to discover the latest Real Jesus. A hundred years ago, Albert Schweitzer discovered that the Real Jesus was a Social Gospel Protestant. In the booming 1920s, people found that Jesus was actually a poster boy for salesmanship. In the 1930s, the Nazis discovered a Real Jesus who was Aryan, not Jewish, while the Communists discovered a Jesus who was actually the first Marxist. In the 1960s, the Real Jesus was found to be a flower child in "Godspell" and a devotee of hallucinogenic mushrooms -- which explains all the visions and miracles nicely. In the 1970s, the Real Jesus was found to be a "superstar" as per the diktats of rock culture. In the 1980s, he appeared on the scene to promise health and wealth and to heal your inner child -- that's when he wasn't suffering existential crises, grappling with his libido and riddled by self-doubt, rather like a self-absorbed baby boomer, in "The Last Temptation of Christ." In the 1990s, he was suddenly discovered to be an enthusiastic homosexual in the blasphemous play "Corpus Christi." Today, we live in a culture obsessed with the sex lives of the rich and famous, credulous about vast conspiracy theories, brimming with half-baked notions about paganism and feminism, and hostile to traditional notions of both reason and authority. By some unfathomable coincidence, Dan Brown has discovered a Real Jesus who perfectly reflects this broad cultural mood. And when people believe things based on such a mood, particularly evil things, this is dangerous to their faith. "The Da Vinci Deception" is designed precisely to help people stop taking "The Da Vinci Code" so seriously. Happily, Dan Brown and company have made things easy for us in that department. His book is so laughably bad, its claims so easily and demonstrably false, the whole thing so silly, that debunking takes on a rather gleeful quality -- which is, I think, only fitting. The best cure for "The Da Vinci Code" is, in the end, hearty gales of well-informed laughter. ***** OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO |