|
For the past 17 years, The Filipino Express has provided the Filipino American community the best news, arts and entertainment coverage from around the United States and the Philippines.
|
|
This website includes selected articles from this week's edition of the Filipino Express. Not all the stories published in the printed version appear on this site.
|
|
|
|
To tell us what you think about Filipino Express Online or to comment on the stories published here, E-mail us at Filexpress@aol.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ON FEBRUARY 24, certain segments of the Philippine military was poised to launch a coup d’etat to oust President Arroyo purportedly to save democracy. Later that day, President Arroyo placed the entire country under a state of emergency and curtailed basic civil liberties, also in the name of saving democracy.
But rather than saving democracy, both efforts ended up ironically in destroying it.
Two of the basic tenets of democracy are the supremacy of civilian rule over the military, and respect for the people’s basic rights and freedoms. Sadly, the twin events of February 24, 2006 struck crippling blows to the fledgling democracy in the Philippines.
The military was obviously out of line in attempting to launch a coup. In a democracy, the military is supposed to be apolitical; it should refrain from involving itself in the political processes of the country.
The problem with the Philippine military is that it has been politicized since the martial law years. The late President Marcos used the military to prop up his dictatorship. In EDSA 1 and EDSA 2, the military played a crucial role in unseating a president, which gave it the notion that not only can it participate in political processes, but it can also spring into action as heroes out to save the country in distress.
What is disturbing is the belief within the military that it should have a hand in determining who should sit in Malacañang as ruler of the land. What is dangerous here is the view within the military that it can unseat a president and topple a government.
What the Arroyo government did on the same day, however, was equally destructive. Curtailing basic freedoms, such as cracking down on media, conducting warrantless arrests, arresting opposition lawmakers, are definitely measures not meant to save democracy. These are measures aimed at preserving the reign of President Arroyo, which is not synonymous with saving democracy.
Freedom of expression and freedom of the press are the foundations of all freedoms under a democracy. Without these two, there is no democracy.
Because of the attempted coup and the declaration of the state of emergency, democracy in the Philippines is as fragile as ever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NEW YORK --- At a recent event of the Philippine New York Junior Chamber of Commerce (Jaycees), Inc., Consul General Cecilia Rebong was the keynote speaker.
The gathering, which was attended not only by Jaycees but also by many community leaders, was like an eagle’s nest. Here you can see the enthusiastic, idealistic, young and up-and-coming leaders together with the distinguished and accomplished but graying has-beens and current leaders.
It was like an occasion for a renewal of hope or a rite of passage which marks the changing of the guards from the old to the new; where the novice is now in control of their dreams and the veteran, ready to show their battle-scars and share their experience.
It was perhaps this stark reality that made the consul general choose the theme of her message to inspire her audience. In her usual ‘off-the cuff’ remarks whenever she delivers her speeches, she spoke about being forever young.
In her speech, many times she referred to the youth as the hope of the Motherland. And many times she wondered, as if piquing her audience, why this was so. She related her own experience as a junior staff member at the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA).
“It was one of the toughest examinations then at the Ministry,” she recalled. “And when I got in, I myself was excited with all these ideas in my mind.”
She also recalled the activists who were criticizing the government then but are now in high places in government. “Has there been any change?” she asked. But I noticed that as she was reflecting highlights of the past, she often paused in mid-sentence as if trying to find the right words to express her thoughts in diplomatic terms.
There are times when a speaker needs to say her piece in plain terms – one that is easily understood and remembered. And the consul-general, despite her grappling for words, said what was in her mind. To me, that was more personal and believable, which was needed in a gathering of eagles like that of the Jaycees, where the old and new leaders were intently listening to her.
If we are to look back to our earlier years, what changes occurred to us? Was it spiritual, physical, financial, mental? Was it was character, behavior, ideals, or principles? Was it how we relate with people? Was it our vision of the world and how we could create a positive change in our communities?
I ask these questions because there are people who are content with what they were then and now. And the only change that happens is biological, that is, they wait for each year to come by.
That, I would say, is becoming forever young in the wrong sense. They live not for the passion for life but in the physical realm.
There are people who have experienced some changes in themselves but are now rigid or unyielding to new ideas. Their views are the only ones that matter since new ideas have not been tried and are doomed to fail. That, I would say, is becoming forever young in the wrong sense. They live not for the appreciation of life but in maintaining the status quo.
There are also people who have experienced some changes in themselves but do not understand the purpose for which these changes can be used for. They have acquired the tools to succeed in life but are lost in thought how to use these tools or which direction to take. That, I would say, is becoming young in the wrong sense. They live not for a purpose-driven life but a life that is meaningless.
Forever young is a nice catch-word, easy to remember and well-liked by those who are in their mid-life. The reality, however, is the difficulty to accept that time has caught up on them. They reject the notion of being old and of having archaic ideas even if signs of dementia are creeping in.
I refer to them as the young at heart.
Quoting an old expression, the youth, as the consul-general said, is the hope of the Motherland. That belief will continue in the years to come and remain forever young. However, the challenge for the youth is to understand their role, learn from the past and set their vision of the future.
Even though the consul-general may have meant differently with what I believe was the thrust of her speech, I hope the essence of being forever young is reflected here. And for leaders who are ready to hand over their roles to the young, up-coming ones, let it remain in their consciousness to be dynamic, caring, open, and always creating a positive change in the world we live in.
In my mind, that is being fresh and forever young.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 years ago, 1,000 Moros fought the US
|
|
|
|
Chicago, ILLINOIS --- If you pass by the Manila Police Headquarters, you will be greeted by a huge marker -- “Go, tell the passersby, that in this place, men know how to die.” Of course, students in history are familiar with this Herodotus’ epitaph of one of the world’s greatest stands, where the 300 Spartans (Greeks) opted to die to the last man, fighting the 100,000 Persian forces in the battle of Thermopylae 480 before Christ.
More than 500 years later, a group of Jewish Zealots would try to duplicate the feat of the Spartans by fighting the Roman soldiers in the year 72 of the Christian Era at the top of the mountain fortress called Masada. But rather than surrender to Roman invaders led by Governor Flavius Silva, the Zealots all committed suicide. Only two women and five children survived by hiding in a cave.
Unequal bravery
In a privilege speech at the Philippine Senate on March 7, Sen. Aquilino “Nene” Q. Pimentel jolted his fellow senators of a little known stand taken by about 1,000 Tausogs (Muslims), who, rather than surrender to the mighty American Army, decided to fight to the last man, one hundred years ago at an elevated encampment called Bud Dajo in Jolo, Sulu.
Given the choice between the battles of Thermopylae and Masada, the Tausogs would rather die fighting like the Spartans than surrender, like in Masada.
Read their kris: No taxes, no surrender
In paying tribute to the legend of the Tausogs, Senator Pimentel said, “100 years ago today (March 7), some 900 men, women and children died in defense of their homeland in Bud Dajo, Sulu.
“They did not wish to submit to American rule by paying taxes or surrendering their weapons.
“The Americans had taken over the Philippines by virtue of the Treaty of Paris in 1898 where the whole archipelago was supposedly transferred from Spanish to American sovereignty in consideration of $20-million.
“The Moros of Sulu and other tribes refused to recognize American sovereignty over their island (claiming Spain was not able to exercise effective governance over them).
“But the Americans refused to grant their wish. The Tausogs were called savages – not entitled to be heard by the civilized nations of the world nor extended protection of the so-called civilized conduct of war waged by the Americans in their homelands.
Swish of thier kris
Quoting author Vic Hurley, who wrote in 1936 the book, “The Swish of the Kris,” (now out of print), Senator Pimentel said, “Some 1,000 Moro rebels fortified the top of Bud Dajo, a lava cone of an extinct volcano, which has an altitude of 2,100 feet (a third of the height of Mayon volcano or 600 feet taller than the Sears Tower). The crater at the summit is 1,800 yards (about a third of golf course or a football field) in circumference and is flanked by rocky promontories, which made the approach of troops difficult. It is six miles from Jolo.
American Gov. Gen. Leonard Wood ordered the deployment of troops on March 2, 1906. It was composed of 272 men of the 6th Infantry; 211 men of the 4th Calvary, 68 men of the 28th Artillery Battery, 51 of Sulu Constabulary; 110 men of the 19th Infantry and six sailors from the gunboat Pampanga, totaling 790.
About 40 rounds of shrapnel were fired into the crater to warn the Moros to remove their women and children.
At daylight of March 6, American troops formed into three columns and began the march up the mountainside. The crests were approachable by three narrow trails and the advance began from three sides with detachments under the commands of Major Bundy, Captains Rivers and Lawton.
Let the assault begin
The rebel position was shelled thoroughly with rifle grenades and then taken by assault with bayonets. The Moros staged a terrific resistance.
Finding themselves in danger of being captured, they left the shelter of the barricade and sallied into the open with kris and spear. The fighting did not cease until the last Moro fell. Two hundred Mohammedans died before the quick-filing guns and rifles of the attackers.
The 6th Infantry suffered heavily, all of the casualties occurring in the last terrible rush of the krismen. Captain White was severely wounded in the knee and in the right shoulder while leading the charge that cleared the walls of the last of the Moros.
When the battle cleared, many of the 1,000 Moros killed had as many as 50 wounds each from the krag rifles and bayonets and modern weapons. The Moros were armed with kris, spears and a few with rifles. Six of the Moros escaped.
No glory for US military
The US military cannot claim any glory for the slaughter as their superior firepower lost 21 troopers and 75 others were wounded.
The Philippine Senate passed a resolution bestowing on the men and women and children who fought in the “Battle of Bud Dajo” the honor as “martyrs of freedom” and March 6, 2006 and every year thereafter as “Bud Dajo Day.”
Pimentel also challenged President Arroyo and her vice president Noli de Castro to make a similar supreme sacrifice like the Tausogs by stepping down and calling for an honest and fair elections.
lariosa_jos@sbcglobal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IS THERE “space for grace” in the brief pause that followed President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s lifting of the state of emergency?
Those who assail or back the administration, and the many who don’t give a damn, are at a standstill -- for now. But nobody has illusions. More storms are ahead because the interlocking causes remain.
Poverty is massive. An avaricious ruling class conducts “business-as-usual”. The communists try to hijack any movement to muscle their way into power. In the provinces, most fold their hands, saying a tainted opposition offers no credible alternative. Who’d stand up for Erap, Jinggoy, Franklin or Ping?
The administration hasn’t addressed charges on electorial fraud and corruption. Now, it gropes for ways to wield the mailed fist, even after scrubbing Proclamation 1017.
“At crisis’ center is ( the President’s ) determination to hang on to power and evade accountability within the present constitutional system,” warns the Institute for Studies in Asian Church and Culture. “Because of this, more and more people are being pulled towards military adventurism as an option.”
Delusion that only the military can “save” the nation is spreading as “third generation” unresolved grievances fester. “Never before has the military been more politicized than it is now”, an analyst says.
The military also hasn’t been able to get people behind them. EDSA was a civilian-led initiative against dictatorship. It saw the military morph from martial law enforcer into a backer of People Power. Now, the shoe is on the other foot. The five-hour uprising, at Fort Bonifacio, saw armed marines hunker down in a chapel and call for civilian support to legitimize a court martial offense.
“The worry many people have is that a time is coming when the military will unite and do away with civilian rule altogether, ” Lin Neumann writes in Asia On Line.
He quotes Rep. Teodoro Locsin Jr : “I think the army is calling the shots or will be soon”. Recalling the Roman historian Tacitus’ caustic remark, Locsin added : “They’re going to start making emperors somewhere other than Rome.”
So, is there a junta in our future?
Look at the reaction by influential religious groups and leaders. This institution always played a key role in People Power.
On Edsa Day, Cardinal-to-be-come-March 24 Gaudencio Rosales warned : “any military posturing” would only burden the impoverished. It would make the Philippines a pariah in the international community. “People Power is civilian power,” he stressed.
In it’s lucid “Preliminary Guidelines for the Present Situation”, Filipino Jesuits point out : Aside from ventilating legitimate grievances, there are groups in the military pressing for a coup. “Transitional juntas, with civilians participating, appear to be envisioned”.
“Any attempt to seize state power, however well motivated, cannot be supported,” writes Jesuit provincial Fr. Daniel Huang,. The experience of countries in which a politicized military has taken state power—what we often refer to as ‘banana republics’—gives sobering illustrations of these consequences.
“Once having captured the state, military forces have not given up power easily. A cycle of constant struggles for state control among military elements begins, to the detriment of political stability, democratic freedoms and national development.”
Myanmar’s junta suspended the constitution in 1988. Its last elections was in 1990. And the generals imprisoned the winner Nobel Laureate Aun Sang Suu Kyi. It rules by decree; the press is gagged; no independent courts function.. And the generals are linked to illegal logging, drugs and human rights violations. Earlier, there was Thanom of Thailand and Suharto of Indonesia.
Latin America juntas display the same pattern. The Somoza regime in Nicaruaga ended in 1979, after two sons succeeded Anastacio who created his junta in 1936. The sorry parade includes: Alfredo Stroessner in Paraguay, 1954; Haiti’s “Papa Doc” Duvalier” to General Afredo Pinochet of Chile and Manuel Noriega of Panama.
All caudillos claimed they were “guardians of the people”. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? “And who guards the guardians”? Not the “Rolex 12” of Marcos years.
In his article “Philippines: Military On The Move”, Neumann writes of an officer who insists : Abuses “will continue unless there is a restructuring, a cleansing. The only one that can do that can change it is the military.”
So, will a junta be our savior, like it or not?
The most oppressive is a tyranny “exercised for the good of it’s victims,” C.S. Lewis once wrote. Robber-barons are sometimes sated, often times relax. “But those who torment us, for our own good, will torment us without end because they do so with approval of their conscience.”
Democracy doesn’t grows out of a gun barrel. It “demands the rule of civilians who are legitimately chosen from and by the people, and not simply kept in power by military might, “ the Jesuits guideline state.
Yet, the failure to muster People Power may not be a failure. It could be a sign of increasing political maturity, says Institute for Studies in Asian Church and Culture. In this time of ambiguity... there is space for grace. We call on the President... seriously consider setting into motion an orderly and peaceful succession.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“Approved” relative petition does not give immediate legal status
|
|
|
|
MANY people think that an approved relative petition means they are immediately in legal status, enabling them to stay, live, and work in the U.S.
For example, soon after the petition is filed, the person receives a notice from the USCIS stating, “The above petition has been approved.” The family gets excited, thinking that if the family member is in the Philippines, he or she will soon be able to join them. Or, if the petitioned family member is already in the U.S., he or she can begin working immediately. After all, they have an approved petition. Right?
By law, only the spouse, minor child, or parent of a U.S. citizen (“immediate relative”) are “immediately” eligible for their green cards. For all other family petitions, there is a backlog or waiting period for green cards:- F-1 - single adult child of citizen;
- F-2A - spouse and/or minor child of green card holder;
- F-2B - single, adult child of green card holder;
- F-3 - married child of citizen;
- F-4 - brother/sister of citizen.
This waiting period can be anywhere from 4 to 30 years, depending on:- the status of the petitioner (immigrant or U.S. citizen);
- the age (under or over 21);
- marital status (married/unmarried) of the person being petitioned, and
- the relationship of the family member to the petitioner (husband/wife, parent/child, brother/sister).
Just because a person has an approved petition, does not mean that they are in immediate legal and/or working status. In fact, on the back of the Approval Notice, it specifically states:
“The filing of an application or petition does not in itself allow a person to enter the United States and does not confer any other right or benefit.
“Approval of an immigrant petition does not convey any right or status. The approved petition simply establishes a basis upon which the person you filed for can apply for an immigrant or fiancé (e) visa or for adjustment of status.
“A person is not guaranteed issuance of a visa or a grant of adjustment simply because this petition is approved.Those processes look at additional criteria.”
As you can see, except for “immediate relatives”, the approval of a family petition does not confer any immediate rights or benefits to the person being petitioned. The family member must still wait several more years until their priority date is current (or the visa is available), before they are able to legally enter, live, and work in the United States.Until their visa is available (or priority date is current), they would be without legal status and, technically, deportable/removable if caught (unless they have some other type of authorization or visa to live and/or work in the U.S.).
If you or a family member are under a family petition and are impatient with the long waiting time involved for the visa to become available, you may wish to consider other ways for the family member to be petitioned, such as through employer sponsorship (called Labor Certification/PERM ).
Remember, if a person has already been petitioned by a relative, they can still be petitioned for a green card through as many different ways as are legitimately available to them, all at the same time.
(In addition, under Section 245(i), if a petition was filed for you before April 30, 2001, it is possible for you to be interviewed in the U.S. for a green card even under a new Labor Certification/PERM application filed by an employer after April 30, 2001.)
You should see a reputable attorney, who can advise you and your family of possible faster ways for the relative to immigrate to the U.S.
WEBSITE: www.gurfinkel.com
Four offices to serve you:
LOS ANGELES:
219 North Brand Boulevard
Glendale, California 91203
Telephone: (818) 543-5800
SAN FRANCISCO:
966 Mission Street
San Francisco, California 94103
Telephone: (415) 538-7800
NEW YORK:
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2101
New York, NY 10165
Telephone: (212) 808-0300
PHILIPPINES:
Heart Tower, Unit 701, 108 Valero Street
Salcedo Village, Makati, Philippines 1227
Telephone: 894-0258 or 894-0239
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
