Airah “Airah” Cadiogan www.eightysea.multiply.com
Chairperson
Jaqueline “Jaque” Eroles
Vice-Chairperson
Councilors
Katrina Nessa “Nessa” Abad
Fermina “Amme” Agudo
Isabelle “Issa” Therese Baguisi
Ronnie “Ron” Bermundo
Allan “Allan” de Guzman
Janina Karla “Karla” Domingo
Jemimah Grace “Gem” Garcia
Efren “Efren” Maglangsakay, Jr.
Iris Charmaine “Iris” Olaso
Raymong Charles “Mon” Pestana
Mohamad Jumer “Jumer” Sali
Marian Kris “Marian” Santos
College Representatives
Danim “Danim” Majerano (CAL)
Kim Elaine “Kim” Balderama (CHE)
April Angela “Gel” Nolasco (CMC)
Rainer Astin “Rain” Sindayen (CSSP)
Ana Angela “Angela” Cayabyab (CSWCD)
Ma. Cristina “Brandy” Brandares (CEduc)
Demi Anne “Demi” Obidiencia (CEng’g)
Rudolph “Ralph” Guibani (CFA)
Catherine “Kate” Razo (CMusic)
RG Emmanuel “RG” Tessa (NCPAG)
Teopisto “Theo” Futalan, Jr. (SLIS)
Lester “Lester” Cajegas (SStat)
STRENGTHEN OUR UNITY, ADVANCE OUR STRUGGLE FOR GREATER VICTORIES!
Last week, we secured the historic success of the CRSRS (Codified Rules on Student Regent Selection) Referendum, a process that drew over 26,000 students from all over the nation, a resounding 73% if which voted yes. This is the epic triumph of all iskolar ng bayan who responded to the clarion call of the times, heeding the need to defend that most basic of civil liberties – fair representation.
Our success in the referendum attests to three things: that efforts to discredit the mandate of the Office of the Student Regent – an institution that is borne and continues to assume the democratic struggle of the students – will end in futility; that attempts to place student representation at the crux of uncertainty will fail at the gates of our collective dissent; and finally, that we are ready to overcome divisions so that higher battles may be fought and won over.
Indeed, both the UP administration and the state have evolved mechanisms to thwart our democratic rights, covertly attacking student formations and institutions. Yet no assault can withstand the strength of our united stance; our collective resolve shall always persist and prevail.
The referendum, however, is just one of a series of victories. Last year, we were able to set a dialogue with UP Pres. Emerlinda Roman, resulting in the barring of Provision 444 of the 2006 UP Code, which unduly prohibits sectarian organizations.
Through UMAKSYON, an alliance of student formations against commercialization, we exposed exorbitant and pending fee increases from the colleges of Engineering, Mass Communication, Human Kinetics, Economics, and Education. We also forged inter-unit alliances to assist other UP units in their campaigns. For instance, following strong pressure from students systemwide, UP Los Baños Chancellor Luis Rey Velasco finally recanted his earlier stance to bar the university student elections, resulting in the highest voter turn-out of 70.53% in UP LB after seven months of delay.
We also made a deep mark in national affairs, mobilizing some of the largest number of students, professors, workers and other sectors to protest the depravity of the current Gloria Arroyo regime. We lead in the convening of the national youth alliance, Youth ACT Now, to press for truth and accountability from the government, especially after the $329 million NBN-ZTE scandal.
In all these, the iskolar ng bayan was a critical participant in the shaping of issues both local and national in scope.
For in a time of conflict, where opposing ideas contend to determine the order of society, it is all the more crucial to stand for the voiceless and marginalized. This is why, in its 100 years of existence, UP has stood as a stronghold of activism.
STRENGTHEN OUR UNITY
At this juncture, we recognize the long, arduous road ahead; there are grave concerns that we have yet to confront. Even as the global economic crisis deepens, with over 1 million Filipinos jobless, the thrust of the government is still aligned with the blatant neglect of social services. Our response, then, is to glean lessons form previous victories to guide us in present confrontations.
Today, battles continue to be fought. The ferocity of struggles we wage within and outside the university is crucial in the resolution of social ills that have kept many deprived. We should not hesitate in the fulfillment of such vital responsibility.
As past events demonstrate, only the collective action of students can counter the regime’s systematic attempts to abandon the education sector at the behest of commercial and corporate interests. Let us summon, therefore, the spirit of collective indignation.
Let us rebuke authorities who occupy the highest echelon of government, but do not serve the common interests of the people. Let us break the bonds of apathy and silence, and instead, claim the nation’s destiny as our own. Let the force of our united dissent reverberate through the halls, inside the classrooms, and in all corners of the university.
ADVANCE OUR STRUGGLE FOR GREATER VICTORIES
Thus, we look on to the future, resolute in the struggle for our student rights, and those of other marginalized sectors.
We shall amplify our fight for added state subsidy, and assert our legitimate right for accessible and quality education. We have endured dilapidated facilities and equipment, and declining university services due to reduced state subsidy. But we share an abiding desire to end this imposed scarcity, seeing that budget cuts have proven disastrous for UP.
We will push for democratic access of education, especially for the brightest and poorest of our youth. We are steadfast in the belief that education is a universal right, in which each of us has a claim. It is tragic irony when solons refuse to provide adequate funding for education but, in the same breath, condone the lavish misallocation of resources to military spending and corruption.
We will expose commercialization as a scheme that merely reinforces state abandonment. The government has maliciously approved various policies that erode the basic rights of the people. Through the Long Term Higher Education Plan (LTHEDP), exorbitant tuition and other fees have been imposed, despite the intense hardship of the Filipino people. But we know that once commercial interests pervade the university, profit-making — not academic pursuit or democratic access — becomes the overriding concern. That is anathema to the needs of the Filipino people who, at the very least, deserve a relief from the excessive fees that have kept them from receiving education, a right that is duly theirs in the first place.
Hence, our principal task is to advance our struggle for democratic rights, in the perspective of attaining a nationalist, scientific, and mass-oriented education. Let us condemn state abandonment by opposing the UP tuition policy while simultaneously insisting on greater state subsidy. Let us fight the commercialized and repressive nature of neoliberal education by renouncing its manifestations — such as exorbitant fees, scarce resources and services, attacks on student representation, and the lack of tambayans and even the unfair procedure for the recognition of student organizations.
On this historic platform, we will not be silent or passive.
History tells the story of a great struggle for democratic rights. That struggle is alive and well today, in each of the thousands of youths who will stand for justice, freedom, and ultimately, real and encompassing democracy.
Iskolar ng Bayan
Pag-aralan ang lipunan
Paglingkuran ang Sambayanan!
The group Choose to Know Alliance has stated in their statement:
The student regent rejected on Friday proposals from several student groups to include alternative questions for the January 26-31 referendum.
In a statement released last January 16, Student Regent Shan Abdulwahid reiterated her earlier decision to submit only one question to the students during the referendum:
“Do you approve of the existing Codified Rules for Student Regent Selection (CRSRS) as rules and qualifications to govern the selection of our student representative to the UP Board of Regents?”
SR Abdulwahid denied the protest-appeal submitted by 13* student councils and several student leaders to include specific questions regarding proposed amendments to the Codified Rules for Student Regent Selection (CRSRS). According to the proponent councils, such amendments would provide voting students with options, unlike the present question which “only pushes students to the wall” for a “yes” vote.
In a 6-page decision, SR Abdulwahid said that RA 9500 provides only for a referendum rather than an initiative. While the former gives constituents the power to approve or reject legislation, the latter allows them to propose and enact legislation.
SR Abdulwahid also cited Republic Act 9500 of the UP Charter of 2008, stating that under the current CRSRS, “proposed changes thereto should be submitted to the Office Of The Student Regent not later than the first day of October” (i.e. October 1, 2008 ) and that such rules “may be changed through the majority vote of all the student councils of the UP system.” If these two conditions are met, then such changes become “valid and proposed amendments” to the CRSRS, and can thus be put to a vote of yes or no among the students.
The student councils and student leaders who appealed, collectively known as the Choose to Know Alliance, criticized the SR’s decision as a manifestation of her unwillingness to yield to the substantial merits of the proposal by resorting to and insisting on mere technicalities.
–
The answer of DEFEND THE OSR System-wide Alliance:
The Office of the Student Regent’s decision never resorted to and insisted on mere technicalities in denying the Appeal filed by a certain group known as the Choose to Know Alliance.
The denial was premised on the fact that the OSR has no authority to include the said group’s alternative questions in the forthcoming referendum because such questions precisely have the purpose of amending the Codified Rules for Student Regent Selection (CRSRS).
To reiterate, as explicitly provided under the CRSRS, only all the student councils of the University of the Philippines System, through their majority vote, after compliance with the requirement of the submission to the OSR of the proposed changes to the CRSRS not later than October 1 (October 1, 2008 for the school year 2008-2009), have the power and authority to adopt and make valid any proposed changes to the CRSRS.
These are not mere technicalities. These are substantive matters.
The OSR cannot simply ignore or disregard the existing CRSRS, as all the student councils of the UP System, through their majority vote, have previously validly and legitimately passed and adopted the same.
In the same breath, the OSR cannot simply ignore or disregard the majority vote of all the student councils of the UP System in their collective and democratic decision to pass and adopt the existing CRSRS. Otherwise, the OSR would be guilty of resorting to dictatorial schemes by a deliberate and conscious decision to solely and unilaterally entertain the proposals of the group Choose to Know Alliance in changing the CRSRS.
The OSR, as a lone office, does not possess any power or authority to overrule or supersede any valid and legitimate act of the majority vote of all the student councils of the UP System. The OSR alone does not possess any power or authority to overrule or supersede the General Assembly of Student Councils (GASC), which is the body constituted by all the student councils of the UP System.
If the OSR were to consider the alternative questions, and include the same in the forthcoming referendum, the OSR would be deliberately and consciously ignoring and disregarding the democratic manner by which the GASC has previously passed and adopted the CRSRS. In that case, the OSR would exercise powers beyond its jurisdiction, and encroach upon the powers of all the student councils of the UP System.
That is dictatorship, as what the group Choose to Know Alliance wants the OSR to do. That is dictatorship, as what the group Choose to Know Alliance wants to happen.
But the glaring truth is that the group Choose to Know Alliance sat and slept on their right to submit to the OSR any proposed changes to the CRSRS within the prescribed period. The said group chose to do the same, and only such group is to blame for their own inaction, no one else.
–
The group Choose to Know Alliance has stated in their statement:
The SR could not invoke the October 1 deadline for submission of amendments since it was set without consultation, contrary to Article IX of the CRSRS. Said provision states that, “The dates and periods pertinent to the selection process in the college, and system levels shall be fixed by the OSR with the consent of all the USCs and regional units.”
–
The answer of DEFEND THE OSR System-wide Alliance:
The above-quoted statement of the group Choose to Know Alliance is misplaced, false and erroneous.
The pertinent provisions of the CRSRS as regards the matter are the following:
“ARTICLE IX
General Provisions
xxx
Section 3. The dates and periods pertinent to the selection process in the college, AU and system levels shall be fixed by the OSR with the consent of all the USCs and regional units.
Section 4. These rules shall be amended or repealed through the majority vote of all the student councils in the UP System. Proposals to amend should be submitted to the OSR not later than the first (1st) day of October.
Section 5. These rules shall take effect immediately upon approval by at least a majority of all student councils present and voting.”
The above-mentioned Section 3, which was quoted by the group Choose to Know Alliance in their statement, is separate and distinct from the subsequent Section 4 of the CRSRS.
Section 3 refers to the “dates and periods pertinent to the selection process” of the Student Regent “in the college, AU and system level”, and such dates and periods “shall be fixed by the OSR with the consent of all the USCs and regional units.”
That is all there is to it. Section 3 has no relation whatsoever to the October 1 deadline for the submission to the OSR of any proposed changes to the CRSRS since such deadline is provided for under a different provision, which is Section 4, and not Section 3.
This is precisely because the October 1 deadline under Section 4 is a date for the purpose of submission to the OSR of any proposed changes to the CRSRS; it is not a date for the purpose of the selection process of the Student Regent.
The submission to the OSR of any proposed changes to the CRSRS is a matter entirely separate and distinct from the selection process of the Student Regent. Thus, there is no relation between the “dates and periods” in Section 3 and the October 1 deadline in Section 4, as each matter stands on its own.
Therefore, the OSR has validly invoked the said deadline for the submission thereto of any proposed changes to the CRSRS, not only because the same is provided for under the CRSRS but also because the CRSRS have been validly and legitimately passed and adopted by all the student councils of the UP System, through their majority vote, in a democratic and just manner.
Hence, the above-quoted statement of the group Choose to Know Alliance on the matter is utterly misplaced, false and erroneous, and intended only to confuse and divide the Iskolar ng Bayan as to the matters involving the forthcoming referendum.
–
The group Choose to Know Alliance has stated in their statement:
The Alliance also questioned the SR’s interpretation of a referendum as involving only a single question and her reliance on the ruling in Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 125416, September 26, 1996).
Sophia San Luis, the College of Law Representative to the University Student Council (USC), said “There is nothing in the laws and jurisprudence cited that says there should only be one question in a referendum. In fact, in Sanidad v. Comelec, the Supreme Court upheld a referendum where there was more than one question in the ballot.”
–
The answer of DEFEND THE OSR System-wide Alliance:
At this moment, we advise the group Choose to Know Alliance to review its premises with regard to their arguments.
With respect to the case of Sanidad v. Commission on Elections (G.R. No. L-35929, January 22, 1973) cited by the group Choose to Know Alliance in their statement, it is true that any number of questions may be generally asked in a referendum. An instance that may be cited is that of the January 10-15, 1973 referendum among Citizens Assemblies during the dark days of Martial law, whereby the referendum posed eleven (11) questions to the Filipino people for their approval or rejection, as discussed in the said case of Sanidad v. Commission on Elections, as follows:
“[1] Do you like the New Society?
[2] Do you like the reforms under martial law?
[3] Do you like Congress again to hold sessions?
[4] Do you like the plebiscite to be held later?
[5] Do you like the way President Marcos is running the affairs of the government?
[6] Do you approve of the citizens assemblies as the base of popular government to decide issues of national interests?
[7] Do you approve of the new Constitution?
[8] Do you want a plebiscite to be called to ratify the new Constitution?
[9] Do you want the elections to be held in November, 1973 in accordance with the provisions of the 1935 Constitution?
[10] If the elections would not be held, when do you want the next elections to be called?
[11] Do you want martial law to continue?” (Emphasis supplied)
However, based on the formulation of the referendum questions in the said Citizens Assemblies, it can be clearly seen that with respect to the issue of the approval or rejection of the new Constitution, there is only one question posed for such purpose; and that is question number 7 as highlighted above.
Any proposed amendments to the said new Constitution are not separately asked to the Filipino people in the said referendum. This is precisely because all proposed amendments to the Constitution have already been validly adopted and passed by the 1971 Constitutional Convention prior to the said referendum, and such act of the 1971 Constitutional Convention resulted to the proposed new Constitution subject to the approval of the people.
Hence, the said proposed new Constitution, which was subjected to the Filipino people through Citizens Assemblies for their approval or rejection, already contained all the validly adopted proposed amendments thereto – thus the wisdom behind the single question with respect to the approval or rejection of the new Constitution.
This is the same wisdom behind the single question posed to the UP students in the forthcoming referendum. And since the group Choose to Know Alliance has cited the case of Sanidad v. Commission on Elections in their statement as a basis for their arguments, albeit in a misplaced and erroneous manner, the DEFEND OSR likewise invokes the said case as regards the wisdom, merits, propriety and legitimacy of a single question in the forthcoming referendum as to the approval of the CRSRS.
–
The group Choose to Know Alliance has stated in their statement:
The Law Representative argued that the case (Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority v. Commission of Elections [G.R. No. 125416, September 26, 1996] cited by the SR is inapplicable. “The laws cited in the abovementioned case were created for a specific purpose. RA 6735 Section 3 says, ‘For purposes of this Act, the following terms shall mean…’”
“What this tells us is that the purpose of the definition that followed was limited specifically to initiative and referendum in order to amend the constitution, statutes or local legislation. As stated in the case of Defensor v. Roco (G.R. No. 127325), “R.A. No. 6735 was, as its history reveals, intended to cover initiative to propose amendments to the Constitution, ” and the CRSRS does not, by any means, fall under this,” she said.
–
The answer of DEFEND THE OSR System-wide Alliance:
The group Choose to Know Alliance is downright confused, in the same way that the said group’s arguments are confusing and contradictory.
First, the said group argued this:
“Sophia San Luis, the College of Law Representative to the University Student Council (USC), said “There is nothing in the laws and jurisprudence cited that says there should only be one question in a referendum. In fact, in Sanidad v. Comelec, the Supreme Court upheld a referendum where there was more than one question in the ballot.”
By making this argument, the group Choose to Know Alliance has used as basis in their concept of a referendum – in the formulation of referendum questions, albeit misplaced and erroneous – that which refers to the approval or rejection of the new Constitution (1973 Constitution), as discussed in the said case of Sanidad v. Commission on Elections. That decision of the Supreme Court in that case involves, among others, the issue of the approval of the 1973 Constitution through the referendum among Citizens Assemblies.
The group Choose to Know Alliance has used as basis the concept of a referendum involving the 1973 Constitution.
Then, the said group suddenly posited this view:
“The Law Representative argued that the case (Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority v. Commission of Elections [G.R. No. 125416, September 26, 1996] cited by the SR is inapplicable. “The laws cited in the abovementioned case were created for a specific purpose. RA 6735 Section 3 says, ‘For purposes of this Act, the following terms shall mean…’”
What this tells us is that the purpose of the definition that followed was limited specifically to initiative and referendum in order to amend the constitution, statutes or local legislation. As stated in the case of Defensor v. Roco (G.R. No. 127325), “R.A. No. 6735 was, as its history reveals, intended to cover initiative to propose amendments to the Constitution, ” and the CRSRS does not, by any means, fall under this,” she said.”
If the group Choose to Know Alliance has used as basis the concept of a referendum involving the 1973 Constitution, as the group cited the case of Sanidad v. Commission on Elections in support of their arguments, why then the said group suddenly and surprisingly contradicted their own view by stating in their immediately preceding quoted statements that the case of Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority v. Commission of Elections [G.R. No. 125416, September 26, 1996], which cited Republic Act No. 6735 (The Initiative and Referendum Act) and invoked by the OSR, is allegedly not applicable as regards the forthcoming referendum for the CRSRS, when such statute (R.A. No. 6735) likewise refers to the Constitution or legislation, as the case may be.
If the said group has relied in a Supreme Court decision (Sanidad) involving the 1973 Constitution, why then did such group choose to disregard another Supreme Court decision (Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority) discussing a statute (R.A. No. 6735) involving the same thing – Constitution – or legislation in certain cases.
Truly, the said group’s arguments are confusing and contradictory. The group Choose to Know Alliance merely copies and selects arguments that suit their personal interests. And no wonder why their arguments immediately fall to pieces upon scrutiny and analysis.
In the letter of the OSR denying the appeal of the group Choose to Know Alliance, the OSR, in invoking the case of Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority, has categorically stated that such case is quoted only “by analogy as regards the conceptual differences between the two (2) processes” of initiative and referendum, thus:
“The decision of the Supreme Court en banc in Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority v. Commission of Elections (G.R. No. 125416, September 26, 1996) is instructive as to the statutory and conceptual demarcations between a referendum and an initiative, which is quoted here by analogy as regards the conceptual differences between the two (2) processes:”
This is because no other relevant statutes, except R.A. 6735 and the related statutes cited in the case of Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority, define the concepts of the processes of initiative and referendum within the Philippine jurisdiction. Therefore, it is only proper and correct for the OSR to invoke such R.A. 6735 and the related statutes cited and discussed in the case of Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority as regards the conceptual differences between the two (2) process of initiative and referendum.
–
The group Choose to Know Alliance has stated in their statement:
Following the SR’s “final statement” on the matter, the student councils and student leaders strongly condemned the decision of the SR to make the process “undemocratic by taking away choices from the students, while hiding behind unsound technicalities of her own inaction”.
Meanwhile, students from different UP units have continued to rally behind the proposal. Student council members, organization officers, alumni, and non-partisan students, have signed and expressed their support to the Manifesto of Protest and Appeal to the Student Regent posted at http://choose2know. multiply. com.
The Manifesto denounced the earlier decision of the OSR to limit the referendum question to a mere “yes or no” saying that “such a decision is an affront to elementary concepts of democratic consultation and maximum student participation.” It called on the SR to include amendments to the upcoming referendum. The Student Regent has stuck to her decision notwithstanding mounting protests from various sectors for her to do otherwise.
The Choose to Know Alliance is a group comprised of student councils, student leaders and organizations, with support from ALYANSA and KAISA, formed in order to ensure that the referendum will not be a wasteful exercise of sovereignty.
–
The answer of DEFEND THE OSR System-wide Alliance:
While motherhood statements about elementary concepts of democratic consultation and maximum student participation are ideal, the same should not be resorted to by the group Choose to Know Alliance in confusing and misleading the Iskolar ng Bayan as regards the matters involving the forthcoming referendum.
Instead of dividing the Iskolar ng Bayan about the issues involving the forthcoming referendum, the group Choose to Know Alliance should engage itself and exhaust their efforts in ensuring the success of the referendum. At this point when unity is essential, division and confusion caused by others should not be countenanced.
We appeal to the group Choose to Know Alliance to put the interests and welfare of the students above their own personal interest. We appeal to the group Choose to Know Alliance to bring to an end their continued efforts to undermine the validity and legitimacy of the CRSRS. We appeal to the group Choose to Know Alliance to help us in the success of the forthcoming CRSRS referendum by lending its hand in ensuring that the “Yes” vote shall win in the said referendum.
DEFEND THE OSR System-wide Alliance
Umaksyon-Baguio.Defend OSR-Diliman.Defend OSR-UPEPP.Defend OSR Movement-Manila.Defend OSR-Los Banos.OSR Panalipdan-Visayas.SR Watch-Mindanao.
source: www.eightysea.multiply.com
BAYAN Statement on the Protest Action Condemning Israel’s Siege of Gaza
January 6, 2009
The Bagong Alyansang Makabayan joins the people of the world in condemning the brutal armed aggression of Israel against the Palestinian people in the Gaza. The 8-day airstrikes followed by the ground invasion of Gaza is the latest in the long list of atrocities committed by Israel against the Palestinians under the Occupation.
Israel justifies its armed aggression by saying it is a response to the rocket attacks of Hamas on Israel. This view is also supported by Israel’s # 1 ally, the United States. What Israel refuses to acknowledge is the broader context wherein this violence is happening. The actions of Hamas should be seen in the context of the brutal, more than half-century occupation of Palestinian territory by Israel. In the case of Gaza, while Israel has pulled out its troops and settlements over the past three years, Israel has effectively set up an economic blockade that systematically and collectively punishes, starves and kills the Palestinian people.
The residents of Gaza have been denied any meaningful economic activity as a result of the blockade. For months now, Israel has prevented food, medicine, and fuel from reaching Gazans. Even during the time of the airstrikes, Israel has prevented humanitarian aid from reaching Gaza as it has prevented Gazans from seeking refuge and hospital treatment outside.
It is the brutal occupation which has pushed the Palestinian people to armed resistance. It is the occupation that is the main stumbling block to a meaningful peace. It is Israel’s refusal to recognize the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and the establishment of a Palestinian State which is the root cause of violence in that region.
In light of the historical circumstances of Israeli occupation, the current offensive against the Palestinian people can never be justified.
We condemn in the strongest terms the US government for its political and military support for Israel. For decades now, US government has encouraged and supported Israel’s occupation of Palestine and its armed aggression against the Palestinian people. The US government not only provides billions of dollars of military aid to Israel, it also uses its veto power in the United Nations to support the cause of Israel. Recently, the US government even rejected a UN Security Council ceasefire resolution, a clear indication that the US supports the attacks on Gaza.
We call for an end to the siege of Gaza and for immediate relief for the Palestinian people ravaged by the Israeli armed offensives. We call for an end to the inhumane blockade imposed by Israel on Gaza and for allowing much-needed aid to be brought to Gazans.
We call for an end to the Israeli occupation as the only long-term and viable path to peace. We stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people in their fight of genuine self-determination and freedom from oppression.
STOP THE SIEGE! STOP US-ISRAELI AGGRESSION AND TERRORISM!
END THE OCCUPATION! FREE PALESTINE!
—
The Israeli military is doing the US government’s dirty work!
Stop the ongoing massacres in Gaza now!
BAYAN USA
The US Chapter of Bagong Alyansang Makabayan, or BAYAN USA, an alliance of 12 Filipino organizations in the US, vehemently condemns the US government-sponsored bloodshed that is currently ongoing in the city of Gaza, in the Palestinian territories. As of the writing of this statement, the Israeli military air strikes in Gaza have killed over 300 Palestinians, and nearly 1000 more are critically wounded, including women and children. The death toll from the last 72 hours alone in Gaza marks the highest in the decades-long so-called “Israeli-Palestinian conflict”. Israeli state officials claim the siege on Gaza is a response to the Hamas government’s continued “violent retaliation” in the form of rocket barrages.
To understand the so-called “Israeli-Palestinian conflict” more comprehensively, one must see it in the context of US imperialism’s role in dividing and plundering the Middle East to serve its economic and political interests. The state of “Israel” still serves as a strategic access point for US-imperialism to plunder the entire region’s most profitable resources– black gold and oil.The state of “Israel” is a US surrogate state that has long been funded by Washington DC to do its dirty work and uphold its interests in the region. This includes the ethnic cleansing of millions of Palestinian families who were violently forced to flee from their ancestral lands beginning in 1948 with the forceful and violent Zionist occupation of Palestine and the establishment of the state of “Israel”. The establishment of Israel and its systemic massacre and displacement of the Palestinian people is one of the greatest offensives of the US government in the Middle East, that duly serves the interests of US imperialism to control the region.
Israel-US government relations remain tight and intimate in this campaign. Israel is the largest recipient of direct economic and military aid from the US government since World War II. This means the Israeli military’s continuing offensives on Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip are made possible with generous funding from the US government. The hard-earned tax dollars of the people of the US are fueling these continuing attacks of the US surrogate government of Israel against the Palestinian people. At the same time, the global economic crisis is hitting the people of the US hard with massive job lay-offs, foreclosures, evictions, and budget cuts to health care and education.
In light of their historical oppression, the oppressed Palestinian people have every right to resist and determine their form of resistance in the interest of their national liberation. It is understandable that this heroic resistance includes armed struggle. The Palestinian people have suffered the most horrific crimes of war and massacre from US imperialism at the hands of the Israeli government.
In the same light, the Filipino people are suffering from attacks from the same enemy. If the state of “Israel” is considered US-imperialism’s front door to the rest of the Middle East and Asia, then the Philippines would be the back door. For almost 110 years, the US has forcefully imposed its control over the Philippines, directly and indirectly, for the sake of maintaining this strategic geo-political and economic post in the Asia Pacific region. One of the first colonies of US-imperialism at the turn of the 20th century, the Filipino people suffered great losses. More than one-sixth of the Filipino people were massacred with the first few years of US occupation.
Like the US surrogate government in Israel, the US surrogate government of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is also performing the same dirty work in the Philippines to advance US imperialism’s control over the country. While Israel is the largest annual recipient of US economic and military aid in the world, the Philippines is the largest recipient in Asia. But US economic aid to the Philippine government is not used for economic development of a very poor nation. Instead the Arroyo administration directs US economic aid towards beefing up the Philippine military, which has been responsible for the gravest human rights crisis in the country since the period of the US-backed Marcos dictatorship, and deepening corruption by buying the loyalty of corrupt Philippine politicians. The Philippine military is also responsible for the massive displacement of millions of Filipinos from their lands, especially the Muslim and indigenous communities.
Here in the United States, oppressed and working people have the responsibility to cripple the state terrorist machinaries of the Israeli and Philippine governments by demanding the withdrawal of US direct economic and military aid to both countries. As the global economic crisis continues to awaken the people in the US to the rotten character of US imperialism, we must strengthen our solidarity ties to national liberation struggles abroad, including Palestine and the Philippines. By intensifying our struggles and resistance against US imperialism in all parts of the globe, we can weaken our common enemy.
Furthermore, President-Elect Barack Obama’s swift appointment of Rahm Emanuel as his Chief-of-Staff foreshadows continued Zionist oppression of the Palestinian people. His father, Benjamin Emanuel, is an ardent Zionist militant who has been infamously quoted as bragging that his son will ensure the incoming Obama administration’s pro-Israel agenda, and offensively remarked that Arabs in the White House are usually relegated to cleaning floors. We must therefore remain vigilant and maintain no illusion that the incoming US presidential administration can effectively or even has the intention to restore peace in the region.
In condemning the attacks on Gaza, we demand justice for the Palestinian people. This means we demand the US-Israeli occupation of the Palestinian people’s ancestral land end, and that the right of the Palestinian people to return to their homeland be globally respected and recognized. Without justice, neither peace nor democracy can be realized or practiced in the Middle East or the Philippines.
STOP THE ATTACKS ON GAZA!
JUSTICE FOR THE PALESTINIAN VICTIMS OF THE US-ISRAELI ATTACKS!
FREE PALESTINE!
WITHDRAW US ECONOMIC AID TO ISRAEL!
WITHDRAW US ECONOMIC AID TO THE PHILIPPINES!
LONG LIVE INTERNATIONAL SOLIDARITY!
Nasasaktan nang tumulo ang luha habang tumutula,
animo’y nahulog na ulan,
punyal na tumatarak sa laman.
Inaamin ko, ang makata ay iyakin,
ang anino ay ligalig, naliligaw sa dilim,
nag-iisa habang binabagabag ng lamig.
Sa aking bawat hakbang, nagdurugo ang mga linya,
nalulusaw ang daan, nalalapnos ang hininga.
Hinihiwa na ng aking tinig ang gabi.
Napatingala ako sa kalawakan,
wala ni isang butuin,
nawawala ang mahiwagang bituin.
Nilisan ko ang mga halik, ang mga yakap sa lamig.
Nilisan natin ang mga halik, ang mga yakap sa lamig.
Naiwan ang talim, ang sugat sa labi.
Nasasaktan nang tumulo ang luha habang tumutula,
ulila na ang dilim, ang lamig, ang gabi.
Ang lahat ay nahihimbing,
ngunit ako ang saksi sa bigong panaginip –
ako na pumukaw sa iyong kaluluwa
naging tampalasan sa iyong mga mata.
Ninais mong ang ako at ikaw ay magtagpo
nang walang pangalan, walang kinabukasan,
anuman ay wala.
Nabigatan ka sa aking mga talinghaga,
sa bigkas ng mga talata, sa lalim ng balon
ng aking pag-ibig ika’y nalunod, nalunod.
Nilisan ko ang musa.
Nilisan ako ng musa.
Ang mga bakas ng naunang ngiti, tamis, tuwa,
sigla, ligaya, lukso ay naiwan.
Iyon lamang ang nais kong iguhit sa langit,
kukulayan ko ng bahaghari.
Itatatwa ko ang mga halik, ang mga yakap, ang bulkan
dahil ito’y walang pangalan, walang kinabukasan.
Titigil din ang luha
pagkatapos ng tula.
28 Disyembre 2008, madaling-araw
Maybe I’m a cheesy person. Well, I really am, I admit. That’s probably the reason I’m writing this entry. Or maybe not. I don’t know, since nothing is really certain in this world. Of course, except death and taxes as Joe Black said, and the victory of the revolution as Karl Marx elucidated.
Whatever it is, whatever may happen, I don’t know. We don’t have the answers.
That’s the beauty of mortals; any moment might be our last. We cherish every moment of joy, sadness, happiness and suffering because those moments shall pass. And the gods envy us for that.
And I envy the gods.
‘Di ko alam kung inaadya ng mga planeta.
Baka nga nasa linya ang Mars, Saturn at Jupiter
noon – nang kita’y masilayan, mamasdan.
Maningning kasi ang iyong paglitaw,
nasilaw ako nang bahagya, inaamin ko.
‘Di ko pinansin – bakit nga ba naman biglang
lilitaw ang ‘sang marikit, maamong bituin
sa dakong hapon?
Nang kita’y titigan, nakita
ko ang daigdig sa kislap
ng ‘yung mga mata.
‘Di ko pinansin – bakit nga ba naman biglang
magbibiro ang uniberso gayung matagal na
ako nitong binibigo?
Nang kita’y lisanin, nakita
ko ang kislap ng ‘yung mga mata
saan mang dako sa daigdig.
‘Di ko pinansin.
‘Di rin ako mapalagay.
‘Lang gabi ang lumipas, ang ‘yung kinang
ay nananatiling nakaguhit sa kalangitan –
nagbubura ng lungkot, naglalagay ng ngiti.
‘Di na ako nasilaw nang titigan kita.
Dahil nasilo na pala ako – ng ‘yung indak,
ng ‘yung ganda, ng ‘yung ningning.
Nang kita’y gawing musa,
naisip ko – mananatili ka bang nakasilay
sa gawing itaas ng Hilaga
gayung andito naman ako
sa gawing ibaba
nagpupuyat kasama ang masa?
Nagiging masalimuot ang mga pangyayari. Sadya lamang sigurong mahiwaga ang buwan ng Hulyo at Agosto. Pati pala ang Hunyo. Parang bagyo — laging walang pagbabadya, walang paalala.
May mga dahilan, nararamdaman ko. ‘Di ko lamang alam kung talagang inaadya. E kada buwan kasi, may nangyayaring mabigat — may bahaging negatibo, may bahaging positibo, meron din namang ‘di mo mawari kung ano, at meron namang nagbabadyang maging positibo pero negatibo pa ngayon pero pakiramdam ko ay hindi naman talaga negatibo bagkus ay positibo.
Ewan, pati ako naguguluhan na minsan. Paano mo ba malalaman kung ano ang susundin? Ang daming magkakahalo — palaging nagsasalimbayan, palaging nagpapaligsahan.
Baka ganoon na lang, naisip ko — ang gawing musa ang mga positibo, ialay na lang sa altar ang mga negatibo.
Magkakaroon ba ng aparisyon ng bagong musa na nilikha lahat ng mga positibo, kung gayun? O baka naman meron na, ayaw lang iadya ng panahon/pagkakataon? Baka naman inaadya na, kaya babaguhin na ang panahon/pagkakataon?
Susubukan kong magmalimos ng sagot sa darating na mga araw. Sa ngayon, hihiga lang ako gabi-gabi sa damuhan, titingala sa kalangitan, mananalangin ng mga pag-aadya. Ngingiti na lamang pagkatapos. Maaliwalas kasing titigan ang aking North Star.
Nakakapagod nang mag-isip. Ayaw kasing tumigil sa paggana ang utak ko — gising man ako o tulog, parang pareho lang ang antas ng brain cells na nagagamit ko.
Sabi nga minsan ng isang kaibigan, “Hindi ka ba marunong mag-shut down ng utak?” Ewan ko, ganito talaga ako e, ano pa bang magagawa ko. Mapagod man ako sa kakaisip ng kung anu-anong bagay — mula sa mga mapagpalayang bagay hanggang sa trivial matters — ang tanging magagawa ko lamang ay ang maghinaing, isulat ang blog entry na ito, at pagkatapos ay muling ipagpatuloy ang pag-iisip at paglalapat nito sa praktika.
Wala lang, pagod na talaga ang utak ko. Malamang susunod na rin sa kalaunan ang ibang bahagi ng katawan ko. Tag-ulan pa naman ngayon, kaya masarap lang talagang magpahinga, tumunganga sa wala, humithit ng yosi, uminom ng beer, at makipaghuntahan tungkol sa mga walang kwentang bagay.
Ewan ko ba kung bakit sinusulat ko ‘to. Siguro dahil bigla akong nagising kaninang 4:30 ng madaling-araw sa ingay ng message tone ng aking mobile phone at natanggap ang isang mensahe mula sa isang malapit na kaibigan. Pasensya na talaga, sa lahat ng tao ako pa naman ang dapat na nakakaalam at nakakaintindi sa sitwasyon mo ngayon, pero binigo yata kita.
Pasensya.
One television character once said that, “When you’re having intense emotional enlightenment, just listen to the songs of Sarah McLachlan, and everything will be fine,” or something like that.
I did, and I felt it — everything will just be fine. Just trust time, trust your heart, trust your soul. As one writer put it, “What we call the beginning is often the end. And to make an end is to make a beginning. The end is where we start from.” And I felt contentment.
Fallen
Heaven bent to take my hand
And lead me through the fire
Be the long awaited answer
To a long and painful fight
Truth be told I’ve tried my best
But somewhere along the way
I got caught up in all there was to offer
And the cost was so much more than I could bear
Though I’ve tried, I’ve fallen…
I have sunk so low
I have messed up
Better I should know
So don’t come round here
And tell me I told you so…
We all begin with good intent
Love was raw and young
We believed that we could change ourselves
The past could be undone
But we carry on our backs the burden
Time always reveals
The lonely light of morning
The wound that would not heal
It’s the bitter taste of losing everything
That I have held so dear.
I’ve fallen…
I have sunk so low
I have messed up
Better I should know
So don’t come round here
And tell me I told you so…
Heaven bent to take my hand
Nowhere left to turn
I’m lost to those I thought were friends
To everyone I know
Oh they turned their heads embarrassed
Pretend that they don’t see
But it’s one missed step
You’ll slip before you know it
And there doesn’t seem a way to be redeemed
Though I’ve tried, I’ve fallen…
I have sunk so low
I have messed up
Better I should know
So don’t come round here
And tell me I told you so…
Rainbow Connection
Why are there so many songs about rainbows
and what’s on the other side?
Rainbows are visions, but only illusions,
and rainbows have nothing to hide.
So we’ve been told and some choose to believe it.
I know they’re wrong, wait and see.
Someday we’ll find it, the rainbow connection.
The lovers, the dreamers and me.
Who said that every wish would be heard
and answered when wished on the morning star?
Somebody thought of that and someone believed it.
Look what it’s done so far.
What’s so amazing that keeps us star gazing
and what do we think we might see?
Someday we’ll find it, the rainbow connection.
The lovers, the dreamers and me.
All of us under its spell. We know that it’s probably magic.
Have you been half asleep and have you heard voices?
I’ve heard them calling my name.
Is this the sweet sound that called the young sailors.
The voice might be one and the same.
I’ve heard it too many times to ignore it.
It’s something that I’m supposed to be.
Someday we’ll find it, the rainbow connection.
The lovers, the dreamers and me.
Recent Comments