|
For the past 20 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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FOR 17 years now, we Filipinos here in the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut area have been celebrating Philippine Independence Day. Many of us go to the Independence Day Parade and Fair in Manhattan year in and year out without fully understanding what the celebration is all about.
But what is it really that we are celebrating? The greatest fallacy surrounding Philippine Independence Day is that it is on June 12 that the United States government granted independence to its former colony, the Philippines.
There are two major errors in that statement above: the first is a factual error, the second is of historical significance.
June 12 was not the date when the US government ‘granted’ independence to the Philippines. It was on July 4, 1946, when the US honored its promise to recognize the independence of the former colony.
What we are celebrating on June 12 was the declaration of independence in 1896 of the first ever Philippine Republic. On that day, General Emilio Aguinaldo raised the Philippine flag for the first time and declared independence from Spanish colonialism.
There was a time when the Philippines celebrates Independence Day on July 4. It was during the time of then-President Diosdado Macapagal in the 1960s that the country officially recognized June 12 as the day of our independence.
June 12 symbolizes the struggle and the sacrifices of our forefathers to throw off the yoke of colonialism. It embodies the awakening of Filipinos as a nation, and of our people’s first crucial steps towards freedom and self-rule.
July 4, although it was the day when the republic that we know today was born, was more of a “hand-me-down independence”. There is something wrong when a country thinks that its freedom is something that another country grants out of its own goodness. Freedom and independence is never given on a silver platter. These are something that you fight for, even die for.
What the Americans did on July 4 was simply to recognize the independence of the Philippines that was already evident even before it subjugated the country.
As we celebrate the 108th year of Philippine Independence, let us commit ourselves to proving that we are worthy of the independence that our forebears have paid for in blood.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Love: greatest reform in ourselves
|
|
|
|
PHNOM PENH, Cambodia -- As Philippine Independence Day commemoration takes center stage this Sunday at Madison Avenue and 23rd Street in Manhattan, all eyes are focused to see what will happen; all ears are close to the ground, and as usual, many would be speaking in ten thousand or more words in positive or negative terms about Sunday?s big event.
As six board members of the Philippine Independence Day Council, Inc. (PIDCI) are about to end their term, perhaps after all the hard work, sleepless nights, and constant worries, they feel relieved that their services will soon be over. And for some, the event could be an opportunity to bring out their wit in politics again.
Will the community see a repeat of what transpired in last year?s elections? Will some of the candidates that didn’t make it at last year’s PIDCI board run again? Perhaps, the most important question is: Will our community remain fractious as it has been in recent years in electing their PIDCI leaders?
While board members try to prevent this from happening through what they call a “constitutional reform” by suggesting amendments to PIDCI’s by-laws, perhaps what is more important for all community leaders is to re-examine themselves whether they are ready to show love to their peers and the community they serve.
Love of their fellowmen is I believe what’s lacking in the hearts and minds of our leaders that is causing these problems among themselves. As I see it, the love for one’s self is more important than the larger community. As a result, there are divergent interests that conflict with each other.
Genuine love is shown in deeds that are beyond our selfish needs, that is, to focus on the needs, care and compassion of others. Our community leader’s constant reminder and challenge is to love other people, especially those whom they find most difficult to love.
If our so-called leaders love one another and show their care and compassion of others, would they find themselves arguing about what is right and wrong, and proving among themselves who is the better person to lead PIDCI?
There is goodness in every human person. However, if we do well out of our love for one another, then it is said that we will bear more fruit. Life will be filled with greater joy, if each time we do some good to others we say, “I do this out of love for you.”
I know it is easier said than done. But if we begin to put love of others as the only criterion in our relationship with others, perhaps we will all see a change in ourselves and in our community. Pride, although quite difficult to get rid of, may dissipate as we think of what’s best for others than ourselves.
As we all know, hate is the opposite of love. And hate, I believe, is the most damaging element a person can have. Hate is driven by greed, envy, pride, and self-righteousness. A proverb says: “Hatred stirs up dissention, but love covers all wrongs.”
Doesn’t that proverb remind us that indeed, this is what’s going on in our community? But if love were expressed in so many ways towards one another, would there be division among our leaders?
Mac Villapando opined in one of his e-mails, which he wrote in Tagalog, to a PIDCI board member concerning “Shooting ourselves in the foot,” an article I wrote previously. Loosely translated, I believe he wrote that the desire for involvement in the upcoming independence commemoration should come from a person’s own initiative and not through the influence of others.
Villapando’s opinion is fair. However, I do not agree with his conclusion that the cause of this “hidwaan” or “division” in PIDCI runs deeper than what people know about. He said he observed that this “division” was brought about by some “bad elements” in the community. Just as he believes there are no “losers” or “winners,” isn’t it also fair to say that there are no good or bad elements in PIDCI?
Differences in opinion on certain issues doesn’t necessarily mean that one person is good or bad. In fact in every issue that concerns our community, the more we consider the opinion of others, the better we can refine the discussion and propose a resolution to a problem. The greatest hurdle, however, is for people to agree to disagree.
Chances are disagreements bring about division and hurt feelings. And war instead of peace between certain factions begins.
All of us long for peace in our lives. The peace that we experience when things go well in our lives and in our families and in our community is good and very human. But as I see it, peace has a different meaning in our community.
Peace, as some people expressed it, is achieved when a battle of wits, schemes and strategies is won. Peace has become synonymous with envy and arrogance. To some people, there is only peace when there is power and influence.
So as we come to a conclusion of another independence commemoration, the greatest reform we can have in PIDCI is for its leaders to examine themselves whether they have love, joy and peace in their hearts and minds.
If they don’t search their heart, they only end up fooling themselves and our community. Reform begins with oneself and collectively, we all can experience love, joy and peace.
Failing to do that, our community will remain as fractious and contentious as it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
China No Fan of Dubya’s Iraq War
|
|
|
|
CHICAGO -- The Philippines is little by little crafting its own independent foreign policy without really trying.
Take for instance, the visit of Senate President Franklin M. Drilon and Senators Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr. and Richard J. Gordon to China and North Korea during a recess of the Senate session between April 15 and May 14 this year.
If we are still in the Era of the Cold War, this visit of the Philippines’ ranking legislators would have been unthinkable. They would have been barred from leaving the Philippines and would be severely criticized as being pro-Communists by a Philippine government, toeing the U.S. government line that had conveniently tolerated the McCarthyist witch hunt in the fifties.
They would have been accused of propping up the home-grown underground Communist Party of the Philippines headed by its exiled leader Jose Ma Sison. The CCP is branded by the U.S. State Department as “one of the most active terrorist groups in the Philippines.”
Thanks to the “openness” espoused by Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev rebelling against repressive regimes, like Philippine Marcos’ martial law, it spawned People Power Revolution in the mid-eighties.
It later gave birth to copycat revolutions around the world, including the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovak and the Fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, that led the Philippines to pursue an independent foreign policies, among them the removal of the US military bases from the Philippine soil.
Of course, the three senators are not part of the Philippine government executing its foreign policies. But their views and unique experiences in China and more especially in the “hermit kingdom called North Korea” attract a lot of curiosity, not only from the Philippine foreign policy makers but also from its other allies, particularly the United States.
Truth basis of foreign policy
I always believe that an effective foreign policy by a host country should be based on the truth it gathers about its “targeted” foreign country. Aside from basing its policy on “assessments” by its own foreign embassy staff, it is never a bad idea to get insights from certain country based on information obtained by its other fact-finding agencies, like the CIA and the US Peace Corps volunteers, and non-government organizations such as newspaper agencies and religious groups like the Mormons and business groups, tourists and others for feedbacks. Anything less will be based on flawed foreign policy.
It, therefore, behooves upon the government of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo to take a peek on some of the extra-ordinary information the senators managed to gather from their recent trips.
No separation of Church and State
For instance, in a 60-page email attachment sent to me by Senator Pimentel, he noted that the over-reaching government of China is not observing the separation of powers between the church and the state. Mr. Pimentel noted that “priests” in Beijing are not ordained by bishops from Vatican but “by the civil authorities of China.”
He said the “Chinese Pope” is identified as “Liu Bainian, the layman Secretary General of the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association.”
Masses attended by the 12-million Catholic Chinese, some of whom celebrated by underground “priests and laypeople,” are in Latin and are attended by many foreigners.
The Chinese government, which has been preparing for the 2008 Olympics, has been encouraging foreigners to visit the world’s most populous country.
As guests of Chinese lawmakers Wuo Banguo and Lu Yongxiang, the chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National People’s Congress, and Jia Qinglin, chair of Chinese People’s Consultative Committee, Senators Drilon, Pimentel and Gordon, who were returning the visit of their hosts, who attended the Parliamentary meeting in Manila the year before, were told that “China would patiently wait for a peaceful solution” to the union of China and Taiwan, which has been so through centuries.
They were also informed that China is interested in pursuing the US$300-Million North Rail Project in the Philippines, which the Senate finds overpriced. It was also disclosed that China has exported US$15-billion last year but the Senators were surprised to learn that the Philippine government merely recorded US$7-billion receipts. They would now want to identify the smugglers, who pocketed this huge amount of missing revenues.
As Senator Gordon noted the arrivals of 100,000 Chinese tourists in the Philippines last year, he suggested to his hosts to encourage a slice of the 100-million Chinese tourists to visit the Philippines in the next few years.
N. Korea and US should revive talks
Their Chinese hosts noted that “people the world over are (now) questioning” President Bush war in Iraq.
When the stalled six-party North Korea nuclear talks were raised, Qinglin expressed the hope that North Korea and US would agree to have it revived.
While Wu Banguo told the Philippine delegation that China had always “respected the rights of other nations,” it was not mentioned if the delegation was able to raise the “Spratly” islands dispute in the South China Sea.
From Beijing, the group traveled to Chengdu, the capital town of Sichuan province. Chengdu, a popular tourist destination, is home to 10-M Chinese. There, they visited the Panda Breeding and Research Center, where Pandas are bred in captivity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“IT WAS the final nail on his legal coffin that he ironically hammered down himself.”
House Majority Floor Leader Prospero Nograles said that of former president Joseph Estrada’s admission, in court, that he signed bank documents as “Jose Velarde.”
That point is crucial. As Prosecutor Joker Arroyo rightly said at the Estrada impeachment trial, “This case will be won or lost through bank records.’’ But the “final nail” is for the courts to decide. All we can say now is that this is clumsy footwork with names. Thus, we wrote in an earlier column:
“No. Groucho is not my real name,’ dead-panned the mustached brother of Marx comedians Moe and Harpo. ‘I’m just breaking it in for a friend.’
“Did Erap do a Groucho after the court ruled that he can’t be prosecuted for signing, before startled Equitable PCIBank officers, as ‘Jose Velarde’?”
That was not a crime in February 2000. The prohibition on aliases or numbered accounts in the Anti-Money Laundering Law took effect only in October 2001.
The account started with a P1 deposit on Aug. 26, 1999. When closed on Nov. 10, 2000, it held P3.2 billion.
Not mine, Estrada said, that belonged to my good friend, Jaime Dichavez.
In a February 2000 interview, Estrada told ANC TV he signed as Jose Velarde as a “guarantor of William Gatchalian for the account of Jaime Dichavez.”
Was this the Jose Velarde everyone had been futilely looking for, many asked then.
Where in the world does a guarantor for half a billion bucks sign on the dotted line with a false name -- and on somebody else’s bankbook? “Onli in da Pilipins.”
“Was Estrada breaking in, as Groucho Marx did, a name for a crony? Greater love than this no man has, than he lay down his name for a friend.”
A name, the dictionary says, is “a word or phrase that constitutes the distinctive designation of a person or thing.”
“William Saunders” and “Jane Ryan” were names that appeared on Swiss bank papers. Edsa People Power I crowds stumbled across them littering Malacañang floors after the Marcoses fled.
It was not illegal in 1986 to have pseudonyms on bank books. But the Marcoses never admitted to a Groucho caper. Unlike Estrada, they didn’t sign bank documents before a Clarissa Ocampo.
Filipino maxims on names are linked to integrity, notes the authority on our proverbs, University of the Philippines professor emeritus Damiana Eugenio. “A good name is better than wealth,” is an axiom common to Maranaos, Ilocanos, Pampangueños and Boholanos.
The Estrada impeachment tossed up a unique use of code names. Witness Carmencita Itchon, for example, claimed “Jingle Bells” -- then-mayor Jinggoy Estrada -- called repeatedly about “jueteng” takes.
“Exoticism rules the world of names here,” Matthew Sutherland wrote in the Observer. “Does the randomly inserted letter ‘h’ give a touch of class to an otherwise average name,” like Jhun, Ghemma or Jhimmy? Sutherland asked in his feature titled, “A Rhose By Any Other Name” -- a spin off from balcony scene in Shakespeare’s 1595 tragedy “Romeo and Juliet.” Remember Franco Zefirelli’s brilliant film of this tragedy?
“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose / By any other name would smell as sweet,” Juliet frets over Romeo’s family name. They came from the feuding Montague and Capulet families.
“Is she a Capulet?” a bewildered Romeo asks.
Many bicker over names of places where one resides: upscale subdivision like Forbes Park or crummy Tondo. “We go to gain a patch of ground / That hath no profit in it but the name,” Hamlet groused. But then he lived in a castle, albeit spooky.
Muslims have 95 other names for Allah. Jews would not address God directly. We have a “God of A Hundred Names” say Barbara Greene and Victor Gollancz in a book that collates prayers of various faiths, including the Christian direct address, “Our Father.”
Names in religious history have a function that has more than just accidental applications. Adam, Genesis tells us, named all creatures. He “called his wife Eve because she was mother of all the living.” The Baptist’s name was chosen before his birth.
“Our name is legion,” screamed the spirits in the Genasarene cave dweller, in response to the demand by one whose name, Luke writes, was chosen before his birth. And the night before he died, he would pray for others: “Protect them with the Name you gave to me.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preparing for your future
|
|
|
|
|
THERE is the story of a despot who made it his project to build the most modern and most comfortable penitentiary facility. He did it as an act of kindness to the criminals who were incarcerated in the antiquated crowded dungeons that still served that purpose. That’s what he claimed. But the rumor that went around was that he was really preparing for his future, to assure himself of a pleasant confinement should he be convicted of his numerous crimes after his reign.
That’s not what exactly comes to mind when the news of the negotiation broke into print between the government and the Marcos family to settle the disputed recovery of the dictator’s huge plundered wealth. But something very close. Some observers perceived that the objective of the secret ongoing negotiation was to establish a precedent for subsequent plunderers of the nation’s wealth. In other words, plunder now and escape punishment later by parting with some of the loot. In other words, impart the lesson that crime, after all, pays.
Those involved in the issue should pay heed to the reaction of former Senator Jovito Salonga, printed in the magazine of Kilosbayan. Sen. Salonga was the first chairman of the Philippine Commission of Good Government created by President Cory Aquino to undertake the recovery of the Marcos plunder.
We only met Sen. Salonga once but he had always impressed us as highly principled and deeply nationalistic. And at the time of our meeting, we forget what we discussed but we cannot forget a statement he made to us. “There are two things one cannot compromise. Truth and justice.”
Commenting on the compromise negotiation, Sen. Salonga said, we “cannot give up the sense of right and wrong.” Otherwise, he said we shall be showing that crime pays.
He likened the government move to arrive at a compromise with the Marcos family to the Holocaust victims cutting a deal with Hitler. He said Hitler’s victims took 50 years to bring their case to a close. He said the Philippines’ claim is only on its 20th year.
On one of the reasons given by the PCGG on why a compromise should be sought, namely, loss of valuable evidence, Sen. Salonga expressed great doubt. During his time at PCGG, the former senator said they created four or five sets of duplicate originals of documents which were stored in public and private offices here and in the U.S.
It is unfortunate that the passage of time has tended to dull the people’s feelings about the case. The widow and her political children continue to flaunt a conspicuously wealthy life style. They continue to run for public office, although avoiding national elections, because presumably they believe the people has not forgotten that much.
But the actions of PCGG Commissioner Ricardo Abcede socially consorting with Imelda Marcos and arrogantly criticizing observers who called his actions highly improper was just too much. Too much.
Marcos’ cousin, former President Fidel Ramos, commented on the compromise saying it should not apply to criminal cases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senate passes comprehensive immigration reform bill
|
|
|
|
BY A vote of 62-36, the Senate approved, last Thursday, May 25, a sweeping immigration reform bill that would provide a three-tiered approach towards the legalization of undocumented aliens, and strengthen border security in the United States. Earlier, in December 2005, the House of Representatives approved its own controversial “enforcement only” bill, which seeks to strengthen border security and make it a felony to stay illegally in the United States or to aid illegal immigrants. The House bill did not provide for a path to legalization for undocumented aliens.
With the passage of the Senate bill, a conference committee, composed of representatives from the Senate and the House of Representatives, will try to reconcile the differences between the House and Senate bills and come up with an immigration bill to be presented to the President for signature.
There are several provisions in the Senate bill that look encouraging for Filipinos. Eric Lachica, executive director of the American Coalition for Filipino Veterans, reported that the Senate has incorporated into the bill a provision that would allow Philippine-based single or married children, including minor grandchildren, of World War II veterans, to join them in the United States as immigrants.
Another provision would benefit nurses, as it removed the cap on the number of visas granted to foreign nurses, a vast number of whom are Filipinos.
As reported by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), the Senate bill contains the following important provisions, in addition to many measures that address border and interior enforcement and create a new employment verification system:
Path to Legal Status for Undocumented Aliens Currently in the United States - Undocumented aliens in the U.S. for at least 5 years prior to April 5, 2006 (estimated 6.7 million) will be eligible for 6 years of work authorization and path to eventual permanent legal status, upon payment of $2,000 fine, meeting English and civics requirement, passing background checks and paying taxes owed.
- Undocumented in U.S. less than 5 but more than 2 years, (estimated 2.8 million) would be in “Deferred Mandatory Departure” (DMD) status, providing work authorization and eventual path to permanent status. Family Unity and Family and Employment Visa Backlog Relief
- Those in current family backlogs (or under petition) will get “green cards” before any of the currently undocumented aliens
- Hundreds of thousands of additional visas per year will be added, to reduce backlogs in family and employment-based petitions High-Skilled Immigration Reforms
- Increase H-1B cap from 65,000 to 115,000, so that supply of H-1B visas can “meet” the demand. New Temporary Worker Program with Labor Protections and Path to Permanent Status
- New program for 200,000 new temporary “essential” workers per year
- 3 year visa, renewal for 3 years, with ability to change employers
- Current undocumented aliens who entered U.S. after January 2004 are eligible, but must leave US to apply. The 3/10 year bars are waived. Path to Legal Status for Undocumented High School Students (DREAM Act)
- Students who entered U.S. before age of 16 and are present for 5 years before date of enactment, and who have graduated from high school (or GED), can apply for 6-year conditional status
- Within 6 years, if graduated from college or completed two years in a degree program, or served in Armed Forces, conditional status becomes permanent status (“green card”)
Not yet a law; only proposals
It must be emphasized that until the Senate and the House finally agree on a single piece of legislation (that would enable millions of undocumented aliens to eventually legalize their status), I must remind readers again that these provisions are mere proposals. It is not yet “law”. Until then, I advise people to look for available means for legalizing their status and to seek the advice of a reputable attorney on how they can do so.
Michael J. Gurfinkel has been an attorney for over 25 years, and is an active member of the State Bar of California and New York, as well as the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the Immigration Section of the Los Angeles County Bar Association.He has always excelled in school:Valedictorian in High School; Cum Laude at UCLA; and Law Degree Honors and academic scholar at Loyola Law School, which is one of the top law schools in California.
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
(This is for informational purposes only, and reflects the firm’s opinions and views on general issues. Each case is different and results may depend on the facts of a particular case. All immigration services are provided by an active member of the State Bar of California and/or by a person under the supervision of an active member of the State Bar. No prediction, warranty or guarantee can be made about the results of any case.Should you need or want legal advice, you should consult with and retain counsel of your own choice.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
