My column for today is It’s how you play the game. You can refer to the following related stories: SC justice admits playing golf with Neri, but won’t inhibit self, and SC justice won’t inhibit from NBN case, and Drilon urges Corona to inhibit from Neri case, and 5 named to list for Supreme Court justice. as well as New SC justice could be swing vote for Arroyo in Neri case.
In response to Solita Monsod’s selective use of the transcripts, Atty. Edwin Lacierda wrote a response, published today as Lozada counsel takes exception to Monsod’s column.
Incidentally, the debate over what Lozada said, brings up the difficulty of accessing information, including records -and that means, transcripts, too- paid for with taxpayer money and which ought to be freely-accessible. Please read the Team RP Petition for a Freedom of Access to Information Law and sign up if you agree with their advocacy. For example, as I’ve repeatedly pointed out, it is easier to figure out who was what in previous administrations, as well as surveying presidential activities and official documents, than it is under the present or recent dispensations.
Another case in point is that the transcripts of Senate hearings are only available on paper, for a fee, and I’ve heard it suggested that this is done so as to provide an income stream to government clerks. The result is that besides having to pay for hard copy, any group or individual that wants to refer to the testimony has to encode the transcripts, which can only compound whatever errors already exist, and which serves as a deterrent to the widespread discussion and study of the conduct and contents of those hearings.
I have appended the exchange at the end of this entry.
In other news, RP draws from regional emergency rice reserve.
Overseas, two interesting stories in the Asia Sentinel website. First, Malaysia’s Political Earthquake: The ruling national coalition takes its biggest beating since independence , with this interesting description of recent political dynamics:
Although Abdullah Badawi took office in 2002 as a reformer succeeding Mahathir, he has yet to deliver on the promise of change to the extent that voters wanted. Although the stock market is up 60 percent since he took office and to some extent cronyism has been discouraged and some of Mahathir’s more grandiose projects have been put on hold, there has been widespread disgust over surging crime rates, increasingly tense race relations, spiralling inflation and a perception of corruption, particularly at the top of UMNO, due to a long series of highly public scandals.
The coalition sought to counter public anger by offering a wide range of official projects to win voters, from scholarships for rural and poor families to increased infrastructure spending to an offer to train thousand of new policemen. Nonetheless, the coalition’s ability to mobilize voters by using the levers of power didn’t work. The MCA in particular was riven with factionalism, with the party reeling over a sex scandal that drove Chua Soi Lek, one of Malaysia’s most powerful Chinese politicians, from office in January. Publication of a videotape of the episode was widely believed to have been made by rivals within the party. UMNO also suffered from infighting as Abdullah Badawi dropped several old party members from the election rolls only to have them fight back against newer, cleaner figures.
(Check out Malaysian blogger-turned-MP Jeff Ooi’s blog, Screenshots, for an interesting snapshot in how he and fellow oppositionists are preparing for the political transition in the state they won).
And second, Singapore Reels over a Missing Fugitive: The Island Republic’s fugitive terrorist runs circles around authorities, which has been an ongoing story of a city-state unused to failure and worse, criticism:
But the most common sentiment appears to be not that lives are in danger because a dangerous terrorist has escaped and may yet manage to blow up Singaporean buildings. It is growing derision at the sheer apparent incompetence of authorities usually so keen to praise their own efficiency, particularly in matters of security…
Whatever else can be said about Singapore, its government has long regarded itself as the most grimly efficient and accomplished in Asia, and it does not brook any nonsense. Kastari’s escape and the subsequent inability of authorities to find him have called that into question.
Singapore’s most prized asset is competence and the willingness to pay for it with taxpayer funds. Ministers and civil servants, already by far the highest-paid public servants in the world, received a round of pay raises starting on January 1 ranging from 4 percent to 21 percent, driving Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s salary to S$3.7 million (US$2.55 million), more than six times that of US President George W. Bush. Cabinet ministers, including Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng, apologizing while under intense fire for Kastari’s escape, receive S$1.9 million (US$1.37 million).
Its civil servants are among the highest paid in the world. The government has long taken the stance that public officials should receive pay commensurate with the top of the country’s business elite, both to attract top talent and to forestall any temptation toward corruption.
Thus the ability of a crippled ethnic Malay to walk away from the most securely guarded prison on an island of only 700 square kilometers, and to remain on the loose since February 27, has not only generated a huge amount of controversy, but a growing amount of ridicule of the government, which is being recycled endlessly in cyberspace, often in the form of jokes. This is not something a government as humorless as Singapore’s is finding funny.
Incidentally, the article ends by saying the escape is a Black Swan Event, a concept developed in a book I’m currently reading (and enjoying!), “The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable” (Nassim Nicholas Taleb)
Also, in relation to the story on Malaysia, see this news item: RP warned FDIs shunning it. The article says,
Michael Clancy, chairman of the Philippine Business Leaders’ Forum, said the Philippines is no longer attracting foreign direct investments due to a wide range of corruption and Manila’s overdependence on “bad” loans from China….
In an internal survey of the members of the PBLF composed of 40 companies from Europe, United States and Australia, there was a shared belief that at least 50 percent of the project costs in doing business goes to “commissions” and only 10 per cent of the total investment is being used for facilitation, and the remainder for implementation.
Among the 40 companies surveyed, nobody aired plans to pour in additional investments.
“Those who invested here already, they’re committed to staying and not pulling out. But in terms of asset management mode, they’re not looking to expand because it’s too hard… everywhere you turn [in the government system] somebody got his hand [on] money, everybody wants something under the table,” Clancy lamented.
He said foreign companies that have invested in China are seeking back-up investments in the region “but they are not looking at the Philippines as they would prefer Malaysia, Thailand and Australia.”…
…Meanwhile, he stressed that Manila’s overdependence on China also sends wrong signal to Western investors.
“We were involved in European investment delegation here two years ago to look at investment prospects, but government officials [whom we’ve met] told us, ‘we don’t need your money anymore, we have China now, we can get all money we need from China,'” said Clancy.
Yesterday’s Inquirer editorial, Most corrupt, points out the limitations, but still serious implications, of yet another survey of foreign businessmen in the region. But it points to impressions that affect business, as also indicated by the article quoted above.
But even as Arroyo ‘thrilled’ for passing US firm’s anti-corruption test, there are those who disagree. In Ex-Cabinet members: GMA ‘at the center’ of corruption in NBN-ZTE deal and Former gov’t finance officials: Economy ‘not gaining momentum’ , you can read about the views of former government officials who contest the present government’s policies:
1. There is growing concern among experts about glaring and unprecedented inconsistencies in official statistics on growth, income and poverty that raise doubts about the reliability of the economic growth data.
2. Even recent official poverty statistics affirm that whatever economic growth was achieved in the past five years has benefited only a few.
3. This “growth” had even swelled the ranks of the poor by almost four million additional Filipinos. Poverty has risen not only in absolute numbers, but in relative terms as well, with the proportion of poor families rising from 24 percent to 27 percent between 2003 and 2006.
“Our economy cannot gain momentum when its actual growth is much lower than its reported numbers, when whatever growth occurred benefited only a few, when more Filipinos slide into poverty despite this growth,” they said.
Here’s their statement: fighting_corruption.pdf which you can compare to the ADB report, critical-dev-constraints.pdf” title=”critical-dev-constraints.pdf”>critical-dev-constraints.pdf
See: The world’s 50 most powerful blogs.
Here is the unexpurgated transcript of the controversial exchange between Senator Joker Arroyo and Jun Lozada:Lozada-Senate Transcript.pdf (I have italicized the portions Solita Monsod chose to quote, in the overall extract below; you can also compare her account of the TV interview with this one in Alaverde 33, of course Monsod does not mention Abaya’s story changing)
***
May I now recognize Senator arroyo.
SEN. ARROYO, Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My preliminary statement should not be deducted from my time because here is the crux of my thesis. Mr. Lozada, your family filed a petition for Habeas Corpus in the Supreme Court and a petition for a Writ of Amparo before the Supreme Court. That case would be heard by direction of the Supreme Court which I inquired this morning will be heard by the Court of Appeals on February 14, Thursday.
Now, I would address this now to the Committee. The same questions which we discussed for 7 hours will be the same issue that will be discussed in the Supreme Court — in the Court of Appeals. So, I ask the question addressed to the Committee, not to the resource persons. Since this is a Writ of Habeas Corpus and a Writ of Amparo, the decision will come in very fast. It’s a lighting decision. Supposing the decision of the Court of Appeals which was directed by the Supreme Court is different from our findings, what do we do?
You have here a case of the same subject matter, the same parties; Cusi, Lina, Atutubo, Razon, all of them are also respondents in the court. Now, that’s what’s going to be heard by the Court of Appeals, so we spent time here discussing what will be heard in the Court of Appeals. So what do we do ?
So I ask now this question. Mr. Lozada, you filed the Petition for the Writ of Habeas Corpus at 1 o’clock on Wednesday when you were already free, you were no longer under restraint. And the Petition for the Writ of Amparo at 4 o’clock on Wednesday, February 6. Now, I ask you, why did you not sign the petitions when you could have signed it and instead asked your wife to sign the petition and Arthur Lozada who is your brother, to sign the petition. Now, why is it like that? Meaning, when you ask for a Writ of Habeas Corpus and Writ of Amparo, well, you are the petitioner, why you asked your wife, you asked your brother. Why did you have to do that? I don’t mean to ask you because you’re not a lawyer but if Atty. Bautista can answer for you as an honest lawyer for him, fine.
THE CHAIRMAN (SEN. CAYETANO, A.). Well, sir, if you want the lawyers to answer, I think the lawyers who filed the cases are behind you.
SEN. ARROYO. Yes. I think that the Ateneo Human Rights Center must be required by the Committee to answer that because he was already free. He could sign it but he still asked Mrs. Lozada. So, the other one is the one for Arthur Lozada, the brother of Mr. Lozada had a different set of lawyers so we can ask Mr. Lozada and for him to require to sign, because this is forum shopping which is condemned by the Supreme Court. You cannot go to — the same subject matter, the same issue, you go to two different forums? Supposing that the decisions of the two forums, the Senate and the Supreme Court would be different, what do we do? So I raised that question as an administrative matter, Mr. Chairman.
Second, I want to ask Mr. Lozada, your ticket when you went abroad, how were you ticketed? What’s the itinerary?
MR. LOZADA, Hanggang Hong Kong lamang po.
SEN. ARROYO. Your travel order was supposed to be to London to attend a conference yet you got a ticket yourself — somebody here said it was a credit card, I don’t know who. Now, if you were going to London because you were going to attend an environmental conference, and that was the travel authority that you solicited from the head of office, that is Secretary Atienza, does that not smack of bad faith that you never really intended to go to London as you represented, but only up to Hong Kong? I mean, these are the matters. I am putting this all for you, you can answer me later because I don’t want to lose sight of this.
Now the other one is this. I noticed in the previous testimony that when you departed, I don’t know what date, ABS-CBN asked permission to cover it. I mean, there is something here on testimony, I don’t know who. Now who knew about your departure, Mr. Lozada?
MR. LOZADA. Should I answer now?
SEN. ARROYO. Sure go ahead.
MR. LOZADA. Secretary Neri. A lot of people, sir, knew about my departure.
SEN. ARROYO. All right. So, in other words, never mind that ABS-CBN because — now the other one is that you mentioned about the North Rail. Are you aware of the fact that the Senate investigated the North Rail? This is a bigger issue than the ZTE. Or you’re not aware of that?
MR. LOZADA. Not, not…
SEN. ARROYO. But the Senate did not make a committee report. Investigated it but did not make a committee report. I want that on record.
MR. LOZADA. I did not know that.
SEN. ARROYO. Yes. My questions are brief because it’s really for the committee report.
I want to ask Secretary Mike. You mentioned Maritess Vitug whom I know, you know and many of us. Did you clear your statements with her?
MR. DEFENSOR. Yes, Your Honor.
SEN. ARROYO. You quoted her freely.
MR. DEFENSOR. Your Honor, noon pong unang lumabas ‘yong mga statements, hindi pa po ako nagsasalita. Then I called her up. Sabi ko, “Maritess, I’m asking clearance from you. Maaari bang pag nagsalita ako, particularly in the Senate, can you give me clearance?” Sabi n’ya, “Pertaining to What?” Sabi ko, “Pertaining to all the discussions we’ve had, kasi the timeline, I’m trying to fix it.” And sabi n’ya, “Sige, basta as long Mike, malinaw. I was asking you as a journalist and you were responding.” Sabi ko, “Yes, Maritess. In fact
SEN. ARROYO. In other words, she knew — and whatever you said — if she will be asked even in writing so that we don’t bother her, she will confirm it?
MR. DEFENSOR. Yes, Your Honor.
SEN. ARROYO. Now, Secretary Atienza, there was a naughty question of Senator Escudero about insinuations, which I really want to find out because …
Senator Lacson said that way back in December, he was already talking to you.
MR. LOZADA. Yes.
SEN. ARROYO. That’s what he said. I don’t know whether I was quoted wrong, but way back in December he was talking to you?
MR. ATIENZA. Sino po ba ang tinutukoy, Mr. Chairman, ako po ba o …?
SEN. ARROYO. Si Mr. Lozada. All right, Now if that is true that you were talking to Senator Lacson, now you have not talked to any one? Who were other senators that you were talking to way back in December?
MR..LOZADA. Wala pa pong iba nuong December.
SEN. ARROYO. Wala? Only Senator Lacson?
MR..LOZADA. Opo.
SEN. ARROYO. All right.
So Secretary Atienza, your insinuation that senators are involved here is not correct.
MR. ATIENZA. Ang sabi ko po kanina, isa sa mga nakagawa ng malaking intriga dito sa usaping ito’y parang maraming nakakaalam ng intensyon ni Mr. Lozada ay maraming nakakaalam ng movement n’ya at may nakakausap s’yang mga senator. Sapagkat akala ko all the time sa akin lang siya nakasandal kaya all out naman ang tulong ko sa kanya on matters of security.
SEN. ARROYO. I raised that question, Secretary Atienza, because the question of good faith, bad faith arises. That in the case of Mr. Lozada, I would have wished — in fact, I cannot be so hard on him because it turns out Bicolano pala ito. Taga-Ligao eh. All right, now, anyway.
So it’s much of bad faith because you’re talking to some but you are not talking to us. In fact, yesterday — or when was this when ABS-CBN came here and visited you and you were interviewed? What day was that, here in the Senate? Is that Saturday or Sunday?
MR. LOZADA. Sunday po ata ako pinuntahan.
SEN. ARROYO. No, no, no. Only the weekend.
MR. LOZADA. Saturday po si Carandang, tapos Sunday po ata si Korina.
SEN. ARROYO. All right, what I’m saying is this. Every time you discriminate on media is not fair. You favor one station, others aren’t.
Wait, wait, wait. You favor some Senators, you don’t favor others. I raised those points because this is a question of good faith. So having said that, now will you please answer my …
SEN. LACSON. Mr. Chairman, since my name was mentioned — Mr. Chairman?
THE CHAIRMAN (SEN. CAYETANO, A). Yes, Senator Lacson.
SEN. LACSON. Ang masasabi ko lang po eh, baka mas masipag ako kaysa doon sa iba.
MR. LOZADA. May I answer na ho, isa-isa?
THE CHAIRMAN (SEN. CAYETANO, A). Okay, Mr. Lozada.
SEN. ARROYO. And don’t be afraid, just say what you think is the answer.
MR. LOZADA. Opo.
Number one po, yung mga writ-writ na ‘yon, hindi po ako kasama pa roon dahil po noong panahon na ‘yon ang umaabugado pa sa akin si Atty. Bautista. Hindi ako kasali pa roon.
SEN. ARROYO. You mean, you have been the lawyer, Atty. Bautista, since December?
MR. LOZADA. Hindi po, ‘yong writ. Eto, ‘yong writ of habeas corpus, ‘yong wala po akong kasali po roon. Kasi nga po inasaynan nila ako ng — basta dinala lng nila ako Atty. Bautista eh. So ‘yon pong panahon na ‘yon, siya pa ‘yong lumalabas na abugado ko.
SEN. ARROYO. Well, I ask him.
MR. BAUTISTA. Your Honor, Mr. Chairman.
MR. LOZADA. Puwede pong tapusin ko na? Puwede ko pong matapos?
SEN. ARROYO. Okey, go ahead.
MR. LOZADA. Tapos po hindi nga ako kasali roon. Noong Wednesday na ‘yon, kinuha nga po ako nina Colonel Mascariñas, dinala n’ya ako kina Atty. Bautista. Hindi ko alam kung saan ako dadalhin. Tinatanong ako ng asawa ko, “Saan ka dadalhin?” Sabi ko, “Hindi ko Alam.” So sila naman po para malalaman nila kung saan ako dinadala, siguro they decided with my brother, kasi ho I’m not free to ‘yong, sir, kanina, I was free to move — hindi ako free to move. Kinukuha nila ako sa La Salle…
SEN. ARROYO. What I’m trying to say is that, don’t tell me that Bro. Felipe would not allow you to sign a document when you had visitors, the family was with you. In fact, you had many visitors, the nuns and the sisters saw you.
MR. LOZADA. Pero po…
SEN. ARROYO. No, no, the question is, I’m talking about — because you are talking about human rights, and I have been involved in human rights.
MR. LOZADA. Yes, Mr. Senator.
SEN. ARROYO. So those who were saying that you haven’t sacrificed human rights…
MR. LOZADA. Opo, So I will continue na po?
SEN. ARROYO. Now the point is this. You don’t trifle with the writ of habeas corpus and the writ of amparo because those are what you call the great writ of liberty, extraordinary remedies. Now we cannot misuse them because pag binastos natin ‘yan mawawalan nang value. That is the only reason why I’m very careful about this. Don’t cheapen it, that’s why I would just wondering why. You were deposited midnight of Tuesday, then Wednesday they filed it one o’clock, another four o’clock, two in a row. So how come?
MR. LOZADA, Iyong nga po, Mr. Senator. Number one po, hindi po ako aware noon. So, kasi po ang umaabugado pa ho sa akin noon si Atty. Bautista. At si Atty. Bautista nga po busy siya kape-prepare noong aking affidavit. So hindi po ako ‘yong nag-ano noon, hindi ako ‘yong gumawa noon. Ginawa ho ata nila ‘yon noong tinatanong nila ako na kinuha nga ako ni Colonel Mascariñas, “Saan ka nila dadalhin?” Sabi ko, “Hindi ko alam.” So independent po ‘yong aksyon na ‘yon sa akin. Noon po ay nasa — kinukuha — dinadala nila ako — kung nasaan ako. Ano po? So I was not free as you would like to — akala n’yo lang po puwede akong umalis kung kalian — hindi po ako puwedeng gumanoon-ganoon. Under po ako sa kustodiya nina Colonel Mascariñas. Sila ang nagsasabi kung saan nila ako dadalhin.
SEN. ARROYO. Okay, you have said your piece of mind. The only thing I want to say is this ‘no. That you don’t trifle with the writ of habeas corpus and amparo because those are the great writs of liberty.
Now, Atty. Bautista, it seems that — although your name does not appear in either of the two petitions…
MR.BAUTISTA. Your, Honor, Mr. Chairman, I asked him about this. What is this petition for habeas corpus, amparo or about …? He said, “Wala akong alam diyan. It is my brother, my wife.” Ganoon, ganoon. And that is Wednesday. And the odd thing about this, it’s Wednesday, 1 o’clock while we were having lunch I called up Atty. Quimbo. Sabi ko, “We will surrender Lozada.” In fact, that is why I went to La Salle, Wednesday night, to arrange for his surrender in the morning without drama. But I think he wanted to surrender with drama. That is what happened.
SEN. ARROYO. You are very permissive about the two writs.
MR. BAUTISTA. I did not know about them. He denied having to do with them.
SEN. ARROYO. Because what we have here I am sure the Court of Appeals will ask the transcription about the proceedings here to find out just what happened.
MR. BAUTISTA. Well yesterday, I met his lawyer Melencio Sta. Maria who filed the habeas corpus. He said, “You are making waves filing these things?”
Hindi na, moot na yan,” sabi niya. I do not know what he meant by that.
MR. LOZADA. So pwede na po akong…
THE CHAIRMAN (SEN. CAYETANO, A). Yes, Mr. Lozada, please, We will not interrupt you.
MR. LOZADA. So, ‘yon nga po noong panahon na ‘yon it was very obvious na wala — hindi ko na-exercise ‘yong aking free will. Hindi ho ako malaya noong panahon na ‘yon. So, binigyan ako ng gobyerno ng abogado na ‘yong abogado ‘yong gumawa ng affidavit na sabi ko nga may reservation ako. Ang ginawa ng pamilya ko since hindi nila nalalaman kung saan ako dinadala nina Colonel Mascariñas siguro ho para maging malaya ang aking paggagalaw, nagfile na po sila. So, ‘yon po ang aking ano diyan. So, I have no intention of cheapening a very precious law. Wala po ako noon. I guess — tapos po ‘yong trip sa Hong Kong na ‘yon you said that it was smacks of bad faith on me. Hindi naman ho talaga ako pupuntang London. Sinabi ko naman po sa kanila ‘yon. Sabi nila, “Hindi, umalis ka na muna.”
SEN. ARROYO. Kanino mo sinabi ‘yon?
MR. LOZADA. Kina Manny po. Kina Atty. Gaite at saka kay Secretary Atienza.
SEN. ARROYO. You mean to say all of them are in conspiracy that a travel order was issued for London yet the destination is only Hong Kong. We want that clear.
MR. LOZADA. Sir, I am not — hindi ko alam ang — pasensiya na po kayo kung ano kasi puro kayo mga legal ano. Hindi ko alam kung ano ‘yong legal anong ng conspiracy. Ang sinasabi ko sa inyo, alam nila na hindi talaga ako pupunta ng London.
MR. ATIENZA. Mr. Chairman…
MR. LOZADA. So, pwede ko nang ituloy ko na po kasi po baka makalimutan ko na ‘yong mga tanong sa akin ni Senator Arroyo.
THE CHAIRMAN (SEN. CAYETANO, A). Let Mr. Lozada continue then Secretary Atienza. Okay.
MR. LOZADA. Tapos ho ‘yong pag-alis kong ‘yon sa — marami pong nakakaalam. Nagpaalam ako kay Secretary Neri. Marami akong pinagpaalaman. Kung paano po ako nakuha ng ABS-CBN hindi ko po alam. So, ‘yong pong sa North Rail na ‘yon hindi ko po rin alam ‘yon. Nabanggit ko lang ‘yon dahil nga ‘yong ZTE, ‘yong Instik pasensiya na kayo ‘yong Chinese ano, rep. noong ZTE…
SEN. ARROYO. You are not supposed to answer North Rail because you said you don’t know about North Rail. But I think Secretary Atienza he says that you…
MR. LOZASDA. Pwede ko na hong ituloy, Senator, para hindi ko makalimutan ‘yong ano ninyo. Tapos sabi ninyo po ‘yong good faith at saka bad faith na huwag akong maging selective sa mga kinakausap ko. ‘Yong ginawa ninyong example ‘yong ABS-CBN, si Mike Enriquez po kinausap ko rin noong Sabado, so patas lang po ‘yon. Tapos po kung and sabi ninyo na bad faith ‘yong kinausap ko si Senator Lacson, nakausap ko rin ‘yong asawa sa bahay ninyo. Dinala po ako doon ni Tony Abaya. So patas. Opo. Pinatawag ninyo po ako roon sa bahay ninyo.
SEN. ARROYO. Who called you?
MR. LOZADA, Ewan ko. Pina — Meet niya po ako sa asawa ninyo. Basta po doon sa inyo, pagpasok dito sa parang gate ng tao, kumaliwa kami nang kaunti, pasok po kami doon sa pintuan, mayroong maliit na parang hallway na ganoon pagpasok ninyo parang atrium type nandito ‘yong napakagandang library ninyo sa gilid. Pinag wine and cheese po ako roon.
SEN. ARROYO. I don’t want you to talk about my wife before I ask her.
MR. LOZADA. Opo, pasensiya na po kayo.
SEN. ARROYO. Because otherwise you have been besmirching the names of everyone. Don’t try — don’t mess around with my wife.
MR. LOZADA. Hindi po. Sabi pinupunto ko lang po ‘yong good faith, bad faith na hindi po ako selective sa kinakausap ko na on both sides po may mga taong gusto sa aking kumausap sino naman po ako para tumanggi. So, pasensiya na po kayo. Hindi ho ano. Eh, kasi po parang sabi ninyo sa akin…
SEN. ARROYO. At the rate you are going and at the rate you are implicating every Tom, Dick and Harry here, I mean, how is this?
MR. LOZADA. Paano po ang magagawa ko. Kayo po ang nagbring up na huwag akong – I was just — pinapakita ko lang po sabi ninyo na para hindi good faith, bad faith dapat hindi ako selective. Gusto ko lang pong ipaalam na kung kinakausap – ayaw ko kasing masali-sali sa pulitika. Kaya nga…
SEN. ARROYO. Mr. Chairman, can I have the answer of Secretary Atienza because.
SEN. LACSON. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman.
to Duckvader: but in fairness, I know that I have seen a blogsite whose community seems to be in favor of your year-zero. I don’t remember the URL but you can google to find it. What I remember is there strong support for Trillanes and for much more active military involvement to extricate the country from this cycle.
And here are words from a reasonably successful works-hard-and-parties-hard-person and who knows how to handle money:
You say you got a real solution
Well you know
We’d all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well you know
We’re doing what we can
But when you want money for people with minds that hate
All I can tell you is brother you have to wait
Don’t you know it’s gonna be alright
Alright Alright
You say you’ll change the constitution
Well you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it’s the institution
Well you know
You better free your mind instead
He started with:
“Still its very rare he to start working at 7 am start”
Eh kasi naman po, the richer countries export the hard labor.
I worked at Texas Instruments – The French divisions will have their 35-hour work week, The US Branches will have weekends off and long christmas holidays…
What about the Philippine plant – it works 3 shifts for 24 hours, it’s operational during Christmas day, and you are required to come during weekends to keep up with demand and unreasonable predictions from the bosses on 35-hour work weeks…
So it’s not really that simple to say we are working any less or any harder!
rego – agree naman ako diyan. sino ba gusto magtrabaho beyond 5 and into the weekend. Americans are able to do it because they have made immense investments into capital equipment that reduces the need for manual labor.
And that farmer works all day practically, except for a 30 minute nap after lunch, sabi niya
Compare a grain combine or harvester with a Filipino farmer’s simple tractor and you will see the difference.
Now the ability to make that large an investment is a function of many things — ranging from product market to capital market conditions and policies, to overall political and economic stability.
And it’s not about hiya or not if you work longer. Take a look at it as a question of: what can I do so that I can increase my ability to demand a higher price for myself? Is it simply an improvement in your bargaining abilities or a need to improve your skills, or both?
But if the firm you work for really discriminates based on ethnicity, e mahirap talaga yan.
UPnStudent, I’m not really sold on a year-zero and on a military takeover, because that’s a roll of a dice — you can get someone benevolent, or you can get Idi Amin. What I want more is a system that is able to check the oligarchy and elites when they try to manipulate the system unfairly in their favor.
My problem is I’m not sure how to get there without going through some disruptive, systemic change, since it seems that the oligarchy and political elites are unwilling to agree to it, or make substantial concessions.
We can do all the motherhood statements we like about the need to get to point B from point A, or “how Filipinos should behave.” And I do believe that designing the system will get us the proper individual behavior that Benign0 pines for, and not the other way around.
The question is how to do it.
Cvj says : “our Oligarchs get their funding by extracting ‘tribute’ from the rest. We can see this from the fact that it will be the public that has to pay for any loans they contracted from ….”
——–
DuckVader says : “What I want more is a system that is able to check the oligarchy and elites when they try to manipulate the system unfairly in their favor.”
———-
to DuckVader: If you are “…not really sold on a year-zero and on a military takeover”, why make it among the most repeated sentences that you say? Sloganeering is better when you say something you really believe in, like benign0 and his version of “Just do it!!”
“Year-Zero” is oft-associated with nulling out all the oligarchs (and a willingness to accept a lot of collateral damage because because oligarchy-house-cleansing is never surgical in precision). And almost guaranteed, there will be one person (not one institution, one person) who will elevate himself into the power-vacuum, like Mugabe.
And it sounds so mundane, basic and boring, but
….. a system that is able to check the oligarchy and elites when they try to manipulate the system unfairly in their favor is called an efficient civil service and legal system plus a society that conforms to rule of law.
——
Have you ever given thought to working with an oligarch to better the country? Or to become one of the oligarchs (like a Villar, a Zobel, an Ayala, an Alcantara) from whence you may be better positioned to better the country?
And this sentence — the taxpayer does have to pay for any loan that the Philippines incurs to fund the construction of a new highway or a new airport;
is not the same as cvj’s sentence :
“… our Oligarchs get their funding by extracting ‘tribute’ from the rest.”
Have you ever given thought to working with an oligarch to better the country? Or to become one of the oligarchs (like a Villar, a Zobel, an Ayala, an Alcantara) from whence you may be better positioned to better the country?
— I have worked for these oligarchs, and nearest the highest rungs of these organizations. And that is why I am disappointed with them. Think of this: you go to work for a drug dealer and then you ask the drug dealer — why not stop dealing drugs for the betterment of society? It’s not in his interest to do so. I’m not saying they are drug dealers, just that they will find it hard to accept change, where the change prejudices them.
In the same way, if you ask the oligarch to do something for the benefit of his country but against his personal/family/business interest (such as opening the sector up to competition), what will his answer more likely be?
And to motivate the Philippines to more quickly have an efficient civil service and legal system, foreign money has been given, and more promised. Latest example —
July 2006: US$21Million provided by Millenium Challenge Corp to fund the two-year threshold program to improve revenue administration and anti-corruption efforts in the country. Said funding will be administered through the US Agency for International Development (USAID). The $21M distributed — to the Office of Ombudsman ($6.5 million), Bureau of Internal Revenue’s Run After Tax Evaders (RATE) Program ($9.4 million), Bureau of Customs’ Run After the Smugglers (RATS) Program ($3.1 million), and Department of Finance’s Revenue Integrity Protection Service (RIPS) or Lifestyle Check Program ($1.4 million).
An additional $175Million will be made available if the current government achieves specific targets like : (1) increase the conviction rate in corruption cases filed before the Sandiganbayan to 40 percent;
(2) increase the number of cases filed under the Revenue Protection Service of the finance department from 13 to 50; (3) increase the number of officials charged by RIPS Program from six to 35; (4) increase the percentage of corporate tax returns filed by 10 percent; (5) increase the number of cases filed under the Custom’s RATS Program from nine to 24; (6) increase the number of cases filed under the RATE Program of the Bureau of Internal Revenue from 44 to 116.
But DuckVader, it is “different folks, different strokes. Oligarchs have differences in opinions and differences in business interests.
So if you want to lobby to open the commercial-banking sector to foreign competition, then your paycheck better be from an airlines-oligarch (or a Church-guru) who don’t give diddly doodah about the issue (or who will benefit if he can get lower rates on his loan needs). And if you want to import more Indian low-cost drugs, your paycheck better not be from a local-pharmaceutical whose business will take a hit when the Indian drugs get in.
——–
It is wise to remember —- when XYZ is good for A, B, C, D and E…. 95%-or-higher odds, there will be U and V who will be negatively affected.
Hard Work is not just equals to better life.
Here is an example.
I know 2 buko vendors. Kuya buboy and Boss jericho. They have 2 children and live at the same area din. Kuya buboy also have another job selling balut at night but boss jericho stays at home.
Buboy always complain na napakaliit ng kita nya pero boss jericho even have a magic mic at home plus a god damn washing machine all from katas ng buko. I asked boss jericho what’s his secrets? he told me na he just maximize his income and save ng save if he wants something.
Naguguluhan din ako minsan. Pero even I na undergraduate lang earns more than all IT Managers I know. I also put hard work din but lesser hours nga lang. Sometimes siguro dapat samahan din ng diskarte.
to those old enough, the shouts of KM-SDK will resonate: ibagsak!!! “piyudalismo”, “pasismo”, “imperialismo”,”elitistang burgis” “diktaturyang militar”
its saddening that things have not changed much since the early 1970s.
as benign0 implicitly said, it might take generations to extricate ourselves from this dire straits.
dear fellow MLQ3 commenters:
CEASEFIRE
My fellow country men, although we cannot join our leaders (who no doubt paid for their trip using their OWN money), let us pray for Manny Pacquiao…wala siyang katolad!
VIPs in Las Vegas right now: they deserve a break because they have been working so hard and so smart.
“The VIPs are joining the Pacquiao-Marquez II frenzy.
Speaker Prospero Nograles is already in this glitzy city, along with Senators Jinggoy Estrada and Bong Revilla and former Sen. Robert Jaworski.
De Castro is expected to be joined at the $600 ringside section by a host of Filipino politicians.
They include Environment Secretary Lito Atienza, Rep. Monico Puentevella, Rizal Gov. Ito Ynares, former Ilocos Sur Gov. Chavit Singson, Bacolod City Mayor Bing Leonardia, former Rep. Prospero Pichay, former Gov. Faustino Dy, Palawan Gov. Joel Reyes, Nueva Ecija Gov. Oyie Umali and wife Czarina, 3rd district congresswoman.”
At least I’m pretty sure Chavit paid for his trip from his jueteng collection…
Benigno,
You seem to be developing quite a following. It seems a commendation on that aspect is quite in order for you.
With that now being out of the way; you are soooooooooo asking to be exposed AGAIN as fitting the description that best describes you and that you are still just so full of it.
In the article “Education Telling children about sex” dated 1999, Newcastle city in the United Kingdom was to set up a project to help parents tell their children about sex.
“Sian Bufton, project manager at the family centre, said: “This is a much-needed piece of work.”
“Many parents struggle to address these vital subjects and this course aims not only to dispel some myths and arm parents with all they need to know, but also help them in the language they use and the way to go about broaching the subject.””
Of course the 9 year difference between the date of the article and now could be significant regarding the relevance of that article, but that is if 21st century Philippines had the status already of 1999 UK.
——–
From The Children Medical Group Kid Stuff Radio “Talking about sex” by Dr. Herschel Lessin; he points out that
“Last time, I pointed out that the United States is unique in the fact that it is one of the few civilized countries in which parents routinely refuse to talk to their children about sex. This refusal is made all the worse in that our society bombards its children with messages that having sex is associated with success and happiness, and never has any consequences.
Much of our attitude is sort of a vicious (sic) circle. Our parents never talked to us, therefore, we are uncomfortable with the entire subject. In turn, we are nervous about talking with our own children, and the cycle continues from generation to generation. Unfortunately, the past generation has seen a dramatic change in the risks associated with sex. Our parents and most of us did not have to worry about AIDS, Herpes, and abortion, all of which have come to the forefront in the past 15 years.”
And if that isn’t enough, we can discuss the ways adults advise other adults in America how to tell children that one of their parents committed suicide. You can view one from Berkeley parents network.
——–
And regarding your “details”; what seems apparent is that you have a hard time of developing valid details from a slew of what someone has termed as your motherhood statements.
If we were to go back to your hundred candidate scenario; surely you had mother ideas there but either you didn’t use it to arrive at your details (which would beg the question of why didn;t you use them) or you have a hard time developing it from them.
Imagine your recommendation to the 98.9% voters who voted for right candidates that in order to rectify the situation of a bozo being elected by 1.1% of the voters, your advise to the 98.9% is to vote for right candidates. Essentially what they did the first time.
And you like to denigrate the idea of doing the same thing and expecting different results!
Nash and other Paquiao fans,
I hate to think that whenever Pacquiao fights, so too goes a lot money coming from the govt coffers. I’ll bet some of those pinoy hunchos who go to Vegas bring with them taxpayers money under the guise of attending an international seminar or training (ala Lozada), fund raising for their poor constituents (kuno), or some other alibis just to get money legally.
In any case, I wish Pacquiao would beat Marquez. But if he loses, I won’t heave a sigh (“sayang’) or shed a tear, not at all.
For Chavit, you can be pretty certain that he has diverse sources, jueteng collection being one, for his travel. He got millions of unliquidated cash advances. That’s why he liquidated the auditor who tried to point this out, according to some sources.
similarities? desire and aims – actual change for the better. differences? Pol Pot (or Idi Amin or Mugaba, etc)
the ideology fell because of the leader, not the idea.
UpN, i’ve soul-searched long and hard for this and ended up with this conclusion. the answer is there. go back to all our cultural flaws, our system’s dysfunction, our beliefs and traits…
how do you stop a vicious cycle? throw a poke in the wheel or destroy the wheel altogether?
hence the need to wait in starting the revolution until the RIGHT LEADER has been found.
Duck, exactly why I believe in year-zero. better to roll the dice and at least HAVE A CHANCE, than wallow in this vicious cycle FOREVER. again, my point: year-zero revolutions only need the right leader.
re Pacquiao, he is a very bad role model.
pays lip service saying he is fighting for the country’s honor when really, he’s just fighting for himself. remember his motto when the Arum and Dela Hoya bidding war started? may the best bidder win.
gambles. hardly ever used his money for something good. and no, promoting mendicancy in gensan doesn’t count.
his success and example encourages kids to drop out of school and just get into boxing. wtf? do they realize the precentage of success in that venture?
favors english over our language in interviews for our own viewers! filipino na ang nagiinterbyu sa kanya, iinglesan pa rin. i saw marquez being interviewed. spoke spanish w/o feeling the need to speak broken english.
oh yeah! go Pacquiao! ipagmalaki mo ang Pilipinas! and start that by denying your idenitity by favoring a foreign language. understandable kung foreigners kausap mo, pero pati ba naman mga kababayan mo, iinglesan mo?
The Philippines is still very much very near year zero for its development. You can barely see the embryo of civil society starting to form. Will it have enough to implant itself in the womb is anyone’s guess.
It will be turbulent for sure as a country that eats for today and does not bother to worry about when they have to pay for it is bound to crack up in the long term. It is natures way of corrections.
Filipinos who owe their economic survival to foreign sources cannot do much to help this anomaly. They have become its moral hazard. The OFW has become the cross of moral hazard of the country.
“We have very modern institutions. They were part of the legacy of Western colonialism; they did not spring organically from the soil of our own traditions. But this does not mean we cannot make them our own. Indeed, the conditions that would compel them to work as they should are taking shapeâ€â€universal education, modern mass media, the globalization of financial markets, the emergence of international legal instruments and standards, the rise of a scientific culture, just to name a few. Our optimism however must be cautious. The persistence of mass poverty and of extremes in wealth and power among our people continues to block all efforts to make our institutions work. Unless this obstacle is lifted, there is no way we can free ourselves from the scourge of dysfunctional governance and its twinâ€â€patronage politics.”
“We may see from this analysis that while Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has become the face of political dysfunction, the movement for social change has to look beyond her regime. This is not just about Ms Arroyo; this is about the whole Philippine social system that nurtured leaders like her. It is thus with great hope that we welcome the substantive intervention in the current crisis of the group of former senior government officials unpretentiously calling themselves “FSGO.†As past heads of key government agencies, they are familiar with the structural strains of Philippine governance. They have earned the right, and they have the duty, to speak in the name of our institutions.” Randy David
When I talk to expats who help once in a while in NGOs, why do I get the sense that foreigners are more interested in putting up the necessary funding towards modernizing the Philippines?
As an adjunct to DuckyVader’s comment on an oligarch’s position, a Lopez, for example, would typically fund their own tax-shelter foundations rather than another NGO. It’s easier to wring out donations from an owner of a recruitment agency than from one of those oligarchs — which is ironic because this recruitment agency I know sends entertainers abroad.
BTW, I just read hvrds’ and tonio’s posts, very informative. Thanks a bunch, guys.
On Pacquiao, I still give him some benefit of the doubt. At least, he succeeded by his own effort – without the need to do shortcuts (by cheating, lying, fooling others). Unlike those dirty politicians, or shrewd oligarchs. They try to barter image with Pacquiao, ride on his popularity, as if by being photograph with him after those victorious fights they also do the nation pride in its ecstatic celebration. Isn’t that distasteful?
In the same vein, by allowing himself to prop up the sagging image of those corrupt and disdainful politicos, Pacquiao demeans the merits he earned by his own individualism.
As many see it, Pacquiao does play the political game and wittingly sullies himself. Time to learn for him, after his bitter loss to Darlene Custodio, who was dozen pounds lighter but tons wittier than him.
DevilsAdvc8: If that’s your take on year-zero, then so be it.
I suppose when the next violent coup comes and a Generalissimo (or a nun… but how come nuns don’t get to pull off a putsch????) takes on all the power, we all just sit and watch. But the days of chaos will be exciting, and I’m kinda prepared since I am one of those who can scream at a threatening mob with “… I have a gun… and I know how to use it!!!” More important is my credit card which can put me on next-available flight to Narita, Bangkok or Sydney, as opposed to waiting for re-education.
@hawaiianguy, devils
I’m really not interested in Pacquiao as much as which government official is going to Las Vegas on a junket.
I remember when PM Gordon Brown was given tickets to the Rugby World Cup. Aba, tinanong ng masa “Sinong nagbayad ng ticket niya?” at nung sinabing libre ang ticket niya, lalo siyang tinanong “Kung libre man ang ticket niya, may ethical questions yun dahil isa siyang government official, and the highest one at that..”
These questions, we take for granted in our beloved country. When FG Mike Arroyo got his Las Vegas suite, gratis, no one raised a hoot about the impropriety of that..Now, we have the VP. Out of his own pocket, he can afford the ticket, no doubt…but what if it was free, given by someone – now that’s improper..
I’m sure kung manalo si Pacquiao, all these sleazy politicians, especially Chavit, will go inside the ring to get photographed….My advice to the referee – Hide your wallet, sa dami ng mandurugas sa ring, baka ka madukutan…
😀
cheers
the argument of changing filipinos’ overall mindset and attitude to change the present course of the entire nation is easily seen when a filipino goes overseas to work.
you will notice that most filipinos excel and out performs his foreign counterpart in performing his work. juan works a lot harder than the rest. he tends to follow the host country’s laws and becomes an entirely different person. why is this?
once juan gets to his host country and starts working he realizes that his hard work is equally compensated and chances of going up the ladder is there for him to take if he just work hard. he gets recognition from his employer for doing a good job and working hard. taxes taken off his check actually, most of it goes to public services not just to the pocket of governmnet officials.
he also realizes that if breaks the laws he will get punished, have his head cut off or he get sent to jail. in short one actually gets punished when he breaks the law, even the government officials of that host country. there is somewhat fair and equal treatment for everyone. and when a government officials breaks the law or gets involved in a scandal, he resigns or quit and walang pakapalan ng mukha.
so blaming the regular juan in the philippines for the current situation or telling juan he is the problem is pretty much insulting to juan.
we need to enforce the laws of the land and respect the constitution. our leaders should lead us by example. stealing, cheating and lying is not a good example. juan will excel given the right conditions. the problem is with the leadership. it’s not a blame game, just look at the facts and it is that simple indeed.
side-topic, address to Abe. Now I know why you /Abe like Obama. You belong to his church thinking and that because America has supported Israel and oppression by the whites, then World Trade Center is just payback. Go google or do searches on youtube. You don’t have to imagine an angry spiteful twisted old man, you can see and hear him screaming God Damn Amerikka!!!
For the greater good!!!!
istambay:
Actually, I’ve observed the same thing when I talk to OFWs in other countries, and I interpret the opposite: it shows the weakness in the character and values of the typical Filipino.
Totoo naman, eh — parte ng patakaran ng lansangan yung gulangan. Kapag sumakay nga ako ng dyip, go ang red light kung may lusot sa gusot (i.e. kung walang parak sa kalye).
That’s why I subscribe to the simple things that tonio suggests —
– indicate and pay the correct amount on one’s cedula.
– will use the pedestrian bridge instead of crossing the street on those intersections marked “NAKAMAMATAYâ€Â, in fact, on all intersections where pedestrian areas are marked.
– take the ticket instead of paying off the traffic enforcer.
– flag down public transport in designated areas and wait till such transport gets to the sidewalk before boarding or getting off.
I do agree that the typical Filipino respects authority. Nakaranas ka na ba ng raid ng OMB, o yung zona sa probinsya, o yung demolisyon sa squatter? Hindi gustong magpabugbog sa tigasin kahit sino dito.
“….Because the stuff we’ve done overseas is now brought back to our own front yards.”
I can almost hear —person/blogger1— and —person/bloggger3– as Rev Wright speaks of a white America that “… gives him the drugs and builds bigger jails and then wants us to sing God Bless America. No… No…not God Bless America. God damn America for killing innocent people!!!”
Is Obama serious when he says that he/Obama has never been told this side of his pastor?
Obama’s spiritual advisor, on tape:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQdOBtyuMN4
and why should adults, apparently normal, need an “example” to do what is right? why should personal irresponsibility be blamed on their perception of their “leaders”. why should it be blamed on any other than the irresponsible adult at all? stop this blame game. one should not get away with anything just because he thinks a “leader” is “stealing, cheating and lying”.
that’s the big problem with most pinoys. oftentimes,they blame everyone else but themselves for their own shortcomings and resulting misfortune.
upn, i’m not a racist, but did you notice that the blacks are almost voting solidly as one for obama? i would not be surprised if even black republicans would vote for him over mccain should obama become the democratic nominee. this is a rare window of opportunity that they have been waiting for.
i have serious misgivings about the guy’s readiness to lead us in these day and age of global terrorism and religious fanaticism. i think leadership is not about oratory or eloquence. i still believe that in this world, everything has, and should be in, its proper place.
Bencard: I had commented in another Q3-blogthread my sentiment that General Colin Powell would have been presidential material except that when asked, he said “yes” and served as Secretary of State.
Bencard:
It takes a certain amount of cunning intelligence to survive the meaner streets and barrios in the Philippines, and authority as exercised here in the Philippines is partially to blame for that. Who do you think exercises authority here in the Philippines? I wouldn’t go so far as to remove any blame from the leaders of the Philippine government.
Nash:
no one raised a hoot about the impropriety of that..
as far as i can recall, conrad de quiros criticized FG in his column as well Recah Trinidad, who was there covering the pacquiao-morales fight.
as well as
What Gloria Arroyo Should Have Learned in Assumption Kindergarten!
Teachers are always looking for those opportune moments in time when real life provides a chance to give students a rich example to consider. For those who teach history as well as those who seek to teach the development of character, there has perhaps been no greater opportunity to teach about Leadership or about Ethical decision-making than to follow the recent issues surrounding Gloria Arroyo.
Her tenure as President is fraught with glaring examples of her inability to separate her personal agenda and ambition from right and wrong. As the person expected to be the symbol for the rule of law in the Philippines, her blatant disregard for the law will make her a future case study for those who seek to teach ethical decision-making.
One should ask whether Gloria ever learned the basic values which little toddlers learn in kindergarten:
*The Golden Rule
*Be honest !Don’t tell a lie!
*Don’t take things which aren’t yours!
*Play Fair
*Respect Others:Remember the three “Râ€Âs – Respect for self; Respect for others; and Responsibility for all your actions.
*Don’t hit people
*Share: Help the needy
*When you go out into the world, watch out for traffic, hold hands and stick together .Think of others ,not only of yourself.
As an adjunct to DuckyVader’s comment on an oligarch’s position, a Lopez, for example, would typically fund their own tax-shelter foundations rather than another NGO.
and the reason for this is obviously simple: foundations are a rich man’s haven in avoiding taxes, can use it for money laundering, and can earn from donations to boot! the only foundations i will believe in are those that open their accounting books to the public.
then you have nothing to worry abt. your escape plan is already waiting. leave the worrying to folks like me who believe in the revolution.
Obama has more than that. He has the ability to inspire and that special talent to make people wanna follow him. leaders like that are hard to come by. and they are a FORCE OF CHANGE bec people willingly believe and follow them.
UpN, yes i’m one of those folks who say: goddamn america and goddamn those neo-cons!
well i guess mea culpa! leaders should not be held to a higher standard and also not be held accountable for their transgressions and crimes. it is entirely the fault of every juan tamad! no wonder why japan, s. korea, singapore and the rest of the asian countries are leaving us behind! and to think of it they used or still come to our schools and research centers to learn. their supposed leaders were/are being held accountable not like here in philippines.
a young juan growing up seeing and learning the supposed leaders of this country not held being accountable for their actions will not learn to do the right thing themselves too. i remember that old informercial in it where is says, ang mali ay nagiging tama sa mata ng bata kung ang matatanda ay di rin sumusunod sa batas, something to that point.
grown-ups who does the right thing are trying to correct this by holding our so called leaders accountable. yet time and time pakapalan ng mukha pa rin.
is there presently or in history otherwise a country lead by crooked leaders ever progressed? even usa, a mighty country, being led by that moronic bush. what is happening over there now? their economy is in shambles. stupid policies and blunders in decision making by the government created the atmosphere for their current situation. then should we blame every joe?
CVJ,
I really tried to digest your views,especially that elites have no place in modern society; I have found the link below. It stated with Paretos view of democracy in the early twentieth century that democracy is really just controlled by the few. It also includes 21th century empirical studies of the elite in society.
This link might interest you.
http://www.samfunnsforskning.no/files/CSR_2006_introduction.pdf
DevilsAdvc8: Are there any Reverend Wrights in the CBCP or in the Iglesia ni Kristo or among heads of the many colleges and universities who yelled “… eh tayo naman ang may kasalanan talaga, eh” about the SuperFerry 14? Does your pastor or parish priest scream “God damn the Philippines!”?
Duckvader,
My previous decision to pass on your question has many reasons, una naduwag na naman ako,because I don’t hide who i am and it is not always eay to be candid.
Duckvader, senator Trillanes is my kinakapatid, I might have questioned his move during the pen siege,because that was my personal opinion,wala namang masama don; at isa pa he may be my godbrother ba tawag don,pero we are not that close naman.During that day the celphone of my dad kept on buzzing with texts from all corners,asking what the hell was he thinking, and sometimes even pressuring him if he knows any damn thing about it.
Yun na lang, kaya I would refrain to comment na lang about revolution,coups and anything related to it,because it might get my dad in trouble.
One really need not even focus their attention on Pinoy politicians to find disgraceful institutionalised injustice in Pinoy society.
Even amongst ordinary Pinoys, banal regard for injustice and impropriety pervades the general mindset.
Think of how ordinary Pinoys are inherently unjust and lack that delicadeza that we so self-righteously call our politicians to exhibit:
(1) Whenever that motorist (usually a jeepney driver) nonchalantly cuts in or muscles into a lane even as other patiently queue for their turn to get through a bottleneck;
(2) Whenever your neighbour suddenly decides to put up a piggery or raise fighting cocks (who crow at 3am every morning like clockwork) in his backyard;
(3) Whenever you see morons text messaging while knelt in prayer during Sunday mass;
(4) Whenever you see cretins urinating on a public street; and,
(5) Whenever a cop books you for having the wrong plate number on the wrong day while jeepneys and buses zoom by risking passengers’, pedestrians’ and fellow motorists’ life and limb with their impudent reckless driving;
Whether Gloria, ERap, or Fidel is president does not affect the average Pinoy’s life as much as the little injustices, general rudeness, and unsocial behaviours of his/her fellow citizens.
Three fingers pointing back? 😀
Abe said: “Obama has more than that. He has the ability to inspire and that special talent to make people wanna follow him. ”
Well… Obama was able to inspire his pastor to join his/Obama’s quest to try for the White House. Now if the pastor apologizes for his “god damn America” and “come home to roost” remarks, then I’ll believe that Obama, with his leadership and inspirational speech-giving, was able to share with his pastor a graceful and hopeful view about the country of their birth.
to KG: Thanks very much for pointing to that pdf file. Somewhere in that 8-page document is this sentence:
The provocative theory at the core is that consensually united elites are necessary for the establishment and maintenance of stable democracies.”
————
Now (and I’m not sure about this….) some Filipinos may say that “… only in white countries” are elites necessary.
Now, those who believe the thesis, the next-action may include to be a Villar — get rich!!!! — join the elites (disparagingly called oligarchs by some people). As an elite, from a position of influence especially in collaboration with other elites, one can be better positioned to affect the direction of the nation.
benign0 will like this — the thesis says “…am working for the greater good!!” and “…am focused on getting rich and powerful” do not clash. Self-abnegation is not necessary.
I once did say this:
Great nations were not built on good intentions. They were built on business sense. Real change in Pinoy society will never be achieved through the “sacrifice” of altruistic “heroes”. True change will be driven by people who find no shame in expecting a buck for their trouble.
I like. 😀
Thanks as well Up n Student,
I know we have an unwritten rule of respecting ideas,but I hope there is nothing wrong to look for ideas that may either reinforce an idea or ideas that differ.
I also noticed the interchanging of elites and oligarchs.There is a big difference.
was i not clear enough on my last post above? i did not say our leaders should not be made accountable for their wrongdoings. i said every normal adult should own up to his/her own faults without transferring the guilt to the “leaders”. this habit of blaming someone else when they do something bad, usually common among kids, should not be carried into adulthood. let juan grow up and be responsible for himself. he should suffer the consequences of his own acts.
if blaming the “authority” was okay for somebody’s transgression, who would be the ultimate authority to be blamed…God?
were not talking here of common juans, the problems that plague our society at present and mostly in the past are primarily caused by our crooked leaders that are seldom or never held accoutable for their transgressions!
being held accountable in the eyes of God is individual’s responsiblity. but in the society of man where he should be held to laws of man not to laws of heaven, leaders are chosen to lead his people is reflective of the status of situation of his society.
responsiblities which includes enforcing the laws and at same time observing same laws and be subjected to a higher standard than the common juan.
the common juan can only be morally upright and decent citizens to a point where he finds no progress and his leaders are mostly corrupt of morals and criminals which leads to demoralization and lost of hope of the citizens which is the current state of our country.
not being helped that the leaders are hanging on to their power like leeaches that attached itself to juan’s skin sucking his blood until it is bloated close to explosion, filled with juan’s blood.
juan trying to right the direction of his nation being met with violent resistance by the minions of his leaders. what can a honest and decent juan can do? oberving laws and working so hard that he has to leave his country and family which leads to degradation of family as a basic unit of the society which leads us back to where? responsibiity resting soley to the shoulders of his leaders who are tasked with such responsibilities.
are laws of this land being equally and fairly enforced?
selective ecnforcement is the norm of this society. who are tasked to enforced such laws? the cops. who’s responsibilities is it to make sure the law enforcement officers follows and appplies the laws appropriately and eqaually? our leaders all the way to the top. where in this is not follow, breakdown of society is guaranteed and chaos and anarchy is not far behind which is where we are leading unless the slide is not arrested.
change in leadership who will show the common juans the way will assure that the society is harmonious and it’s citizens are living to it’s full potential.
who says grown ups don’t need leadership? it this is true then why chose a leader?
accountability rest on every juan but most of the responsibilities rests juan’s leaders!
the common juans works his butt off to feed his children and family and to blame him is both a tragedy and an insult. adding salt to his multiple wounds already inflicted by his leaders!
this is not a blame game but assigning accountability and responsibilities where it belongs. responsibilities are not all of the same and equal level, where more is expected of its leaders.
give me a society where in it’s citizens are mostly morally upright and outstanding citizens but it’s leader are morally bankrupt and corrupt. where do you think this socitety is heading?
now reverse the equation, a great leaders, respects the laws and consitution of his land and makes sure everyone including himself is held accountable for his actions.
what will kind of society do you think will come of this?
who of the two above will be more a progressive society? which citizen will be more upright and law abiding? it all sums up to having a leadership who can rally his citizens to his visions and goals.