“I am John Kerry and I am reporting for duty”

“I am John Kerry and I am reporting for duty.” With that opening statement and a salute, Massachusetts Senator John Kerry officially accepted the Democratic Party nomination as United States presidential candidate. The 46-minute speech, dubbed Kerry’s speech of his life, was undoubtedly optimistic (expected), inspiring, and can be considered a defining moment of Kerry’s campaign. Taken at face value, this speech laid his campaign platform and as former U.S. President Bill Clinton noted, distinguishes Democrat ideals and values from that of Republicans. Conservative New York Times columnist David Brookes had to admit that the speech and delivery was so good that it sounded Theodore Roosevelt Republicanesque. Indeed, President Bush will be hard pressed to match this nomination acceptance speech given the country’s current economic problems, healthcare crisis, and the Iraq and Afghanistan quagmire.

This last day of the four-day Democratic National Convention at the Fleet Center in historic Boston, Massachusetts provided a very exciting, up-beat, and climatic Kerry speech. Arizona Congressman Raul Grijalva nominated Kerry and at the same time was critical of Bush’s economic and war- on-terrorism programs. Defeated rival candidates Senator Joe Lieberman (the first Jewish-American Democratic Vice-Presidential nominee) and retired General Wesley Clark, as well as California Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi and former Secretary of State Madeline Albright all gave classy speeches talking about the courage, integrity, and dedication to public service of Kerry. Kerry’s daughters Vanessa and Alexandra portrayed him as a loving and principled father and public servant. Prior to the introductory speech of former Georgia Senator Max Cleland, himself a Vietnam veteran and amputee, Kerry’s Navy Swift boat crew was introduced on stage. Jim Rassmann, the Green Beret pulled out of the Mekong River by Kerry when they were ambushed, also gave a short spiel on Kerry’s bravery and leadership skills. Rassman, by the way, is a disillusioned registered Republican. McClelland’s speech was touching and inspiring, especially when he described what he went through (lost both legs and right arm) and how he turned his life into one of service.

If anyone had doubts that Kerry would be not take a stand on the controversial issues of the present, this speech, using his Vietnam experiences, defined which side of the Mekong River he and the Democrats are on. He noted that his parent’s generation was the greatest generation, winning WWII and the Cold War and keeping the peace for over 50 years. He repeated that Americans are a “can do” people and have dreamt audacious goals and achieved those dreams. Kerry emphasized honesty and values, which must be exercised first by the President. Government, from the President downwards, need to be tell the truth to the American people, from the mistakes in the Iraq war, the rise of resentment against the United States, the true state of the economy, the environmental and the healthcare crises, among others.

While not personally attacking President Bush, he promised though, that his Vice-President would not “secretly meet with polluters” and his Attorney General will “uphold the Constitution”. He would not shirk from asking the hard questions and would demand the answers. He also stressed that he would only lead the nation to war “not because we want to, but because we have to”. Kerry stressed that for the U.S. to win the war on terrorism, the U.S. must be strong both economically and in homeland security. Importantly, according to Kerry, the U.S. needs a new President with the credibility and the skills to restore alliances with other countries. Kerry, like the other speakers, before him, noted that never has the U.S. been so isolated and despised as today because of how the Iraq situation has been handled.

As Kerry put it plainly, the coming elections are very important for the country because the “stakes are very high”. Assuming Kerry follows through with his stated commitments if he is elected, fundamental policy changes will happen on the war on terrorism, as well as a reconsideration of its international commitments on environment, human rights, and trade, among others. Both Kerry and Edwards noted the need for special forces to combat terrorism, which is an implicit admission that the war on terrorism is a low-intensity, localized affair that is heavily dependent on intelligence/counter-intelligence.

Implications for the Philippines

The U.S. presidential election and that of the Australian national elections later this year will hinge on how the situation in Iraq and other arenas of the war on terrorism continue to unfold. At this point, the Bush, Blair, and even the presumptuous Howard administrations are under constant criticism for the failure to find weapons of mass destruction (WMD), the primary reason for invading Iraq. Further, the continuous revelations of prisoner abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo by U.S. soldiers and new revelations on abuses by British soldiers, the perception of favoritism in awarding reconstruction contracts, and other reports of irregularities have severely eroded the moral high the U.S., U.K., and Australia claimed to have in invading Iraq.

Australian PM Howard’s administration, for example, has been accused of denying and then covering up prior knowledge of the Abu Ghraib abuses. Some British soldiers were recently court-martialed on charges of murdering in cold blood Iraqi civilians, while an American decorated soldier was recently charged with theft of a SUV. Add to this an ex-CIA officer’s assessment of rising Islamic hatred of the “invading infidels” because of their presence in “the two holiest places in Islam, the Arabian Peninsula and Iraq,” (American Conservative 2004), more terrorist incidents are expected. Their positions then are very tenuous compared to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who has a fresh six-year mandate.

These dynamics provide President GMA with the leverage in dealing with the harsh words of U.S. and Australian officials on the withdrawal of the Filipino military contingent. Should these officials continue to malign the Philippines in brazen violation of diplomatic protocol, then the GMA administration is in a position to publicly call into question the probity of the Iraq invasion and the inherent weakness of the program of “winning the peace in Iraq”. Hers will be one of an increasing number of voices criticizing Bush, Blair, and Howard. There is a sense here, if Michael Moore’s blockbuster film is reflective of this emerging realization, that the Iraq debacle could have been handled more professionally and more forthrightly. In other words, GMA’s officials should take into consideration the scenario of new administrations in the U.S., U.K., and Australia by next year.

Watching and listening to the speeches and various commentaries were spine-tingling and learning experiences to this politically jaded observer. Taken at face value and if good speeches can translate into votes, the speeches given by various Democrats and their charisma, from Hillary Rodham Clinton to Bill Clinton to Barack Obama, to Teresa Heinz Kerry, and others, and to John Edwards, and John Kerry today , the Democrats should be able to regain the White House in November. I’ll write more about their speeches in future pieces as I look forward to the Republican National Convention.

What is Effective Microorganisms (EM)?

1.0 What is Effective Microorganisms (EM)?

EM is short for Effective Microorganisms. EM are a group of heterogeneous microorganisms composed primarily of Photosynthetic bacteria, Ray fungi, Yeast, and Lactic acid bacteria, that affect the world of nature in a positive manner. These organisms are soil-borne, free-living and of the beneficial type. “By extension, EM is also the term applied to the liquid concentrate comprising very large numbers of such effective microorganisms that have been extracted from the natural world and coexists harmoniously in a liquid state” (Higa, 1994).

EM research and application was started in Japan by Dr. Teruo Higa through his research efforts in reducing the over dependence of Japanese farmers on ultimately destructive harmful chemical fertilizers, insecticides, fungicides and pesticides being currently used. He eventually concluded that microorganisms of different strains determine the quality, whether good or bad, of the receiving environment. Dr. Higa’s EM are comprised of 80 different strains taken from 10 distinct genera belonging to five different families. It can exist in both aerobic and anaerobic states (with and without air) and can easily be produced from household organic wastes and a little dose of EM liquid concentrate. EM in liquid form is formed at high pressure with a pH of 3.5.

The applications of EM are numerous and can raise the quality of life anywhere and with minimal investment. It raises agricultural productivity, provides an alternative to solid wastes and wastewater disposal and management, makes the livestock industry a cleaner and more efficient industry and can basically improve the health and hygiene of communities and of farm animals- all through natural means. The technology is currently being employed in 51 countries worldwide, including Japan, United States, Brazil, Thailand and now in the Philippines.

2.0 Application/ Current Uses

EM was initially developed and used as a microbial inoculant for soil conditioning and agriculture throughout the 1970s and 1980s but at the experimental and research stage. It was found to be an “effective tool for manipulating and managing the overall microbial ecology of complex and diverse systems” (EMTech). EM is a versatile technology and can be used in soil conditioning, crop and livestock production, aquaculture, bioremediation of industrial wastes, and as a de-odorizer in markets, homes, offices, garbage transfer stations and landfills.

A number of farms planted to rice, vegetables, sugarcanes, banana and other crops are currently using EM and there are testimonies that harvests have increased, produce were of high and safe quality and soils became more productive have been gathered. In addition, many livestock raisers (poultry, swine, quail) are using EM as feed and water additive, deodorizer and as an important ingredient in organic fertilizer production. EM is also used by operators in prawn, bangus, tilapia and lapu-lapu production in many areas of the country, whether in cages, fishponds or in brackish culture. Many progressive local government units, including those in Metro Manila, are utilizing EM technology as a deodorizer of solid wastes in transfer stations and in landfills.

3.0 How does EM work?

During the last 50 years, microorganisms have been used extensively to advance medical technology, improve human and animal health, make food processing efficient and safe, advance genetic engineering and agricultural technology, contribute to environmental protection, and more recently, effectively treat and manage agricultural and municipal wastes. These have been well documented. The success is possible because certain microorganisms interact in a positive or beneficial manner in the environment they are in, be it, the soil, flora, fauna, water or air. (Parr,1995). Controlling diseases or pathogens in the receiving environment and decomposing wastes pollutants are significant contributions of beneficial microorganisms.

In developing EM, Dr. Teruo Higa has been able to isolate over 80 different strains of effective microorganisms/ beneficial taken from 10 distinct genera belonging to five different families. It is precisely this heterogeneity among the various microorganisms that give EM its amazing and wide-ranging effects. In fact, no particular limit is placed on the number of microorganisms used in EM. Apart from the advantage of having a heterogeneous group of beneficial microorganisms (EM), it is the regenerative quality of these microorganisms that enable the quality of anything such as the soil, the air or even the human body to be raised to a more positive level.

Another property of EM is that it demonstrates the ability of aerobic (existing with air/oxygen) and anaerobic (without air/oxygen) bacteria to coexist, which, until recently, was thought of to be impossible. Bacteria of opposing types, when together, act in mutually beneficial and complementary manner. Anaerobic bacteria/ microorganisms bring about decay in organic matter; whereas, other types of microorganisms can cause fermentation[1] of the same organic matter, hastening its transformation into useful substances. It is also a very effective anti-oxidant, that is, it has anti-aging and disease-suppressing components by limiting the activities of oxidants (activated oxygen)[2].

Thus, “microorganisms are in abundance everywhere and have a large influence on biological and chemical qualities such as the extent of putrefaction, fermentation, disease and oxidation of any system." (EMTech). EM technology has recognized these properties and is using these properties to raise the overall quality of the environment.

4.0 How effective is EM?

EM is currently being used in 51 countries for a variety of uses delineated above. In livestock production, the use of EM microbial inoculant holds great promise including its effectivity in improving production performance, odor control, waste management, sanitation, and manure fertilizer production. It is also an anti-oxidant. Basically, it:

· eliminates foul odor;
· prevents disease development & epidemic;
· treats waste to pass allowable discharge criteria;
· improves growth rat, increases weaning rate / adult fertility;
· decreases mortality rate;
· improves quality of produce (e.q. taste, texture, smell); and,
· helps convert animal waste into organic fertilizer.

Reports received from a field testing in a hog farm in the Province of Iloilo, Philippines note that the application of EM technology has resulted in a signifcant reduction of Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) from an initial level of 4,300 ppm to 165 ppm and then to 90 ppm. Upon recommendation of further aeration of the settling ponds to complement the EM inoculation, the BOD level, after the two-month trial period, was reported at only 3.0 ppm (the DENR standard is 50 ppm). The hog farm did not have a Sequential Batch Reactor (SBR) to treat its wastewater. In the Holiday Hills II and Domino Stock and Breeding Farms in the Province of Laguna, Philippines, there has been a noticeable drop in malodor. Last 09 October 2000, Universal Robina Corporation (URC) of the Gokongwei group issued a certification of the successful use of EM in controlling odor from their hog farms.

A five (5)-month study conducted by the International Training Center on Pig Husbandry (ITCPH) in Lipa City, Province of Batangas, Philippines in 1995-1996 concluded that EM was an effective way of improving the production performance of fatteners and that a higher average daily gain and a lower feed conversion ratio can be attained. This was due to the considerable drop in ammonia levels and pathogenic microbial count, the former a significant factor in respiratory problem management and odor problems, the latter a factor in cases of infection (ITCPH: Buizon et.al, 1996)

The cities of Manila and Lipa have likewise recently issued (23 and 07 August 2000 respectively) certifications as to the use and effectiveness of EM in deodorizing and disinfecting the solid wastes (garbage) being collected daily.

In farming, experiments in other countries have demonstrated the effectiveness of EM in controlling erosion, reducing irrigation, increasing higher water infiltration and water holding capacity, reducing compaction of the soil, suppressing attack by soil pathogens, reducing use of chemical fertilizers, insecticides, pesticides, herbicides etc. Agricultural products such as vegetables, citrus, rice, cut-flowers, wheat, peas, bamboo, banana etc. have been experimented on with the use of EM. Experiments in the use of EM for golf courses have been successful in golf courses both in the U.S. and here in the Philippines.

5.0 Is EM safe?

EM has been thoroughly tested in most countries where it is in use. In the United States, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has categorized all microorganisms in EM as generally recognized as safe (GRAS); while the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has categorized most of the microorganisms as food grade microorganisms (EMTech).

In the Philippines, the Clinical Laboratory Report (05 May 1995) of the Toxicity Test issued by the Director of Bureau of Animal Industry, Department of Agriculture stated that the Kyusei EM-1 Liquid and EM Bokashi (solid), had “no untoward effect on laboratory animals. All inoculated mice were apparently healthy and alive.” The Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) of EM produced in the U.S. is enclosed.

Kyusei[3] EM-1 is currently being produced here in the Philippines, utilizing locally available substrates. The original “seed” comes from Japan. The “seed” is composed of live beneficial microorganisms carefully selected from the list of the so called 2000 “beneficial microorganisms”. The National Institute of Molecular Biotechnology (BIOTECH), University of the Philippines at Los Baños, the accountable agency mandated by the Philippine government to handle products of this kind, tested/evaluated Kyusei EM-1 and found out that this microorganisms are the same, types of microorganisms found in the soils, regardless of the country of origin.

EM has successfully passed the standards in the United States of America where the environmental concern is far advanced than any other countries in the world. The Agricultural Research Service of United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has conducted laboratory, greenhouse and field tests with Kyusei EM-1 and has found it to be a mixed culture of common microorganisms often found in agricultural soils including mainly Lactobacillus spp., photosynthetic bacteria, yeast and actinomycetes (Parr, J. F., 1995). These microorganisms are not “engineered” nor the exotic types, and are not known to be harmful to plants, animals or humans.

Research conducted by scientists in other countries, including the Asia-Pacific region, has shown that EM is very useful in rehabilitating deteriorated soils brought about by intensive cultivation and application of harmful agricultural chemicals. This has led to the proliferation of the pathogenic types of microbes, as manifested by the occurrence of diseases in plants and animals.

Several scientists in different countries have shown that the application of EM improved the microbial diversity in agricultural soils and even improved the population of inherent beneficial microbes therein. This shows that EM cannot cause the extinction of any inherent microbe in a certain locality. Besides microbial taxonomy is generally not based on locality. A Lactobacillus acidophilus found in Japan or in the United States of America is the same Lactobacillus acidophilus that can be found in the Philippines.

-------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Fermentation is essentially an “anaerobic process by which facultative microorganisms (e.g., yeasts) transform complex organic molecules (e.g. carbohydrates) into simple organic compounds that often can be absorbed directly by plants.” The process yields a relatively small amount of energy compared to aerobic decomposition, which results in complete oxidation that releases large amounts of energy, gas, heat with carbon dioxide and water. Putrefaction is somewhat the reverse of fermentation in which “facultative heterotrophic microorganisms decompose proteins anaerobically, yielding malodorous incompletely oxidized, metabolites (e.g. ammonia, mercaptans and indole) that are often toxic to plants and animals.” (Higa and Parr, 1994)

[2] Activated oxygen attacks the cell by oxidizing the unsaturated fatty acid to lipid peroxide which causes the cell membrane to malfunction. Oxidation is the process by which a molecule gives up electrons and become unstable. Thus, in the cell membrane, oxidation causes the unsaturated fatty acids to give up its electrons, and consequently, its stability.

[3] Japanese for “saving the world”

FLYING ANGEL OUT OF IRAQ/ COMMENTS

Note: These posts were just recently transferred from livingplanet2001.blogspot.com

AVENGING ANGEL

Hello and thanks for the feedback on the piece! A number replied and the feedback was varied as it was very informative. I’ve always believed in creative tension, when people disagree, but agree to disagree and to continue discussing. We won’t be able to kick out the evil politicians, but at least, we know that there are people there, Filipinos, who are aware and are discussing these issues. Hopefully, our discussions should lead to some concrete actions at various levels. Just hearing from you was well worth it.

To my friends and colleagues, it sure would have been nice to discuss this over drinks and pulutan. To family, these discussions over a meal would have been very lively. But hey, I have all your comments, and without your permission (sorry!), I’ve placed them in a blog I’ve set up (livingplanet2001.blogspot.com). Of course, your names have been removed and identifying characteristics have been omitted, i.e. a former singer etc.. J

Most agreed with what I wrote and gave additional comments such as the fact that Europe paid so much ransom money for the Dos Palmas hostages that that the “exchange rate in Mindanao actually appreciated to 42 when the USD/PHP rate in Manila was at 50!” Others also reiterated that all countries focus on their own national interests and that the U.S. has a history of propping up dictators, including Saddam himself. Lastly, most had contempt for GMA and the politicians for the state of our nation and the fact that GMA was really acting for her own political survival. All very incisive.

New developments include the announcement that Thailand and Norway are also withdrawing their troops.

Those who disagreed, and this is what I want to comment on, cited our loss of face/ international credibility, the risk we are taking, that more terrorist acts are forthcoming, that patriotism and self-sacrifice is needed even for OCWs (as if they are not already sacrificing) etc.

In my piece, I noted that GMA was acting very Machiavellian in withdrawing the troops. I have no problem with that as I wrote because it saves a Filipino life and corrects a policy mistake (supporting the Iraq invasion). The loss of face and international credibility is a serious matter that the Philippine government’s future actions should consider. My last three paragraphs provided opportunities to counteract this loss of face. Let me expand it.

First, to reiterate, we have to support legitimate actions against terrorism and that should be in Afghanistan, in Africa, in Kosovo etc. Our contribution will be more deeply appreciated since peacekeeping is direly needed.

Second, I have to emphasize that withdrawal is not a static, one point in time, end-game, zero-sum event. Terrorism will strike us whether we withdraw or not. Counteracting terrorism, as I said, is a long-term, global, multi-dimensional, multi-level activity that requires innovative counter-strategies and counter-intelligence. Will the terrorist have won if we withdraw? On the short-term maybe. Geopolitically though, this can be much debated. Iraq is so fluid these days, it is now very hard to determine the ultimate causes of the rise in terrorism and violence in the country. But withdrawal, as stated by several of you, gives some level of protection to our over 1 million OCWs in the Middle East.

Third, my martial arts and U.S./ Filipino military trainer -friend opposes the withdrawal on the grounds of encouraging more terrorism and that Saddam’s removal is moral and right. On the surface I agree with him, but his view contradicts his advice to me, which I used in my second to last paragraph. In defense, he says, do not tell them what weapon you have, what you are going to do, what skills you have. When you hit back, hit hard and make sure the other guy doesn’t get up. He also said that the Filipino soldier, provided good logistical support, is a world class soldier.

This is precisely the point I am making. The Philippines reserves the right to protect its citizens in any manner, including retribution (I did not want to elaborate on this but here goes…). By withdrawing, everybody thinks we are cowards, but has anyone tried calling a Filipino a coward to his face? Let us see what will happen. Imagine meeting Jay Leno walking towards you. What would you do? If Angel or anyone else in the future gets decapitated by these terrorists, what prevents us from not striking back, one year from now, five years from now? I remember reading Rosaldo’s book on Illonggot Headhunting on how the Illonggots on their own would ambush the fully-armed Japanese soldiers and lop off their heads in WWII.

If terrorists hit, so can the Philippines hit back (with all its pork barrel funds). A slush fund and team to focus solely on these issues should be set up. We’ve all heard about millionaire kidnap victims seeking their “own” justice afterwards. As I said, in the fight against terrorism, agility, creativity, long-term planning, better geopolitical analysts, special forces, good negotiators etc. are needed. The fight against terrorism needs out-of-the box thinking and not the bureaucratic and “total war” approach (War against whom? We don’t even know who they are!) that governments today are advocating.

It is only when we do not seek justice and/or retribution that we lose face permanently. Our actions, although wobbly at times, should speak for itself. One friend wrote that it was the Philippines who alerted the US FBI/CIA about the original Al-Qaeda plot to fly airplanes into American buildings and that we also caught that Yousef Rahmzi guy. Abu Sabbaya has been killed and the Abu Sayyaf are on the run… We are in the thick of the fight against terrorism, here in the country and in Asia and this withdrawal is just one of several strategies we have taken for the moment. The world shouldn’t forget that.

It is now up to GMA to avoid future blunders.

Have a good week everyone!


FROM DOWN UNDER…

Having said that, I must admit that your editorial piece did grab my attention and rouse strong feelings. I have been mulling the situation over in my head and feel the same Way you do. I wanted to share a few points of my own. Would like to hear your thoughts on it when you have time.


1. The US only looks after its own national interests. Yes, Manila was the second most devastated city after WWII, but do people also know thatJapan received more reconstruction aid than the Philippines did?

2. Yes, the Philippines has been at the forefront at the war on terror, even before it was described as such. Perhaps the judgmental Western media need reminding that it was the Philippines who alerted the US FBI/CIA about the original Al-Qaeda plot to fly airplanes into American landmarks? (To say nothing of the negligent handling of that information by the US agencies concerned.) Obviously, the US was "interested" in other issues.

3. When the Abu Sayyaff hit Dos Palmas (?) and took several European hostages, the European governments concerned sent their own negotiators over and paid the ransom. This short-term fix, while understandable from a humanistic view, strengthened the terrorists in Mindanao; they won more supporters and with the cash they bought enough firepower (guns, fast speedboats, etc) to overwhelm the Philippine government's troops. These people had so much USD that the exchage rate in Mindanao actually appreciated to 42 when the USD/PHP rate in Manila was at 50!

But I wonder how the Western press reported these negotiations? Were the European governments concerned portrayed as weak, as the Philippines is being portrayed now? Or were described as heroes who did the right thing in saving their own citizens from terrorism?

I think we all know the answer to that. It's often said that history is written from the viewpoint of the victorious. In a similar vein, I believe the international news is written by the rich.

4. The OCW community is the country's no. 1 source of foreign exchange, without which the Peso could easily deteriorate to Php 100 against the USD.

What sort of actions would the US resort to (overt and covert) if it found itself in a similar situation? While it is impossible to answer this question, one could start to forman answer by recalling instances when the US pursued its interests at the expense of everyone else: propping up dictators (Marcos, Noriega, etc.), supporting terrorists (Bin Laden, etc.), invading countries(Panama, etc.), avoiding the Kyoto agreement, being the number one exporter of arms, etc. (I'm sure there are lots more examples you could add.)

And let's not forget the media's current favorite interests: torture at the Abu Grahib and Guantanamo Bay prisons and, guess what, there were no WMD after all, "but we were still right to invade Iraq".

Given this track record, can the self-anointed "global policeman" really claim any moral high ground here?

5. To press the point home, if the US is the kind of global policeman that invades countries / props up dictators / etc. to support interests with limited economic value, what would it do to other countries if its major economic interests are threatened? (Can you spell o-i-l?)

Note that most of these actions were designed to project US influence overseas; e.g. to contain communism, etc. But from an economic perspective, none of these actions, taken separately, would have destabilized the US economy to the same degree as losing its number one source of foreign exchange.

Yet that is precisely the situation the Philippines finds itself in. And it is being portrayed by the Western media as a spineless developing country that just can't get its act together.

The Philippines can and should pursue its moral and economic interests, like all the other nations do. And if Bush is convinced that he was "right to invade Iraq anyway", why does he need the additional symbolic validation of minor coalition members? In some parallel reality, if the Philippines and Spain did not pull out of Iraq, I argue that the
political ratings of John Howard and Tony Blair and George W. would STILL have dropped to current levels--because it was the wrong thing to do.


FROM A PHILSOPHER-PRIEST


Thanks for sharing this. Helped me a lot to clarify my own thoughts on the matter. For a while I was thinking GMA was wrong, but now, especially after having read I am convinced that GMA did the right thing, though she certainly has left herself wide open to attack. But, as you say, it is not only what she did, but what the national interest is. If USA attacks her for "cowardice" and leaving her "allies" in the lurch, then I hope USA will will at least be honest enough to beat their breast and say Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa, for having misled the Philippines and other supportive allies into a hell of hole. Anyone can make a mistake. But it is the mark of a wise and honest man to right the mistake and not make the same mistake twice.


FROM AN ASTUTE AND SHARP M.I.L. (FIRST AND BETTER THAN A COLUMNIST’S VERSION!)

Yes, you can go on and on in its' deliberation and yes, it is our prerogative to withdraw whenever and for whatever reason specially because the presence of mass destruction for which they got everybody to war, could not be established by the Americans themselves. And many more.

But if you were here, I think that more than what we would like to think of GMA's noble intentions for the pull out, personally, it was a political survival that made her decide to do this. You see, de la Cruz became a symbol of the Pinoy OFW in Iraq, pretty much the way Flor Contemplacion became the symbol for the domestic OFW. And if he got beheaded, then all this legitimate and illegitimate howling by numerous protesters, will only be used by the opposition to kick out GMA or show her "incompetence", and charge her further as a puppet of Bush. The Contemplacion case led to the "beheading" of Bobby Romulo and Nieves Confessor. I am sure the opposition, who has obviously run out of ammunition, was salivating and hopeful for a similar incident they could use on Gloria. So I think she is a smart cookie.

If the situation were not as critical as today, GMA could have stuck to her original decision to pull out in August and take the risk of de la Cruz' beheading. But she knew that she couldn't afford that gamble. So noble or not her intentions were, for the moment, I agree.

You have to know that people here are just hungry for jobs so that even if there is a ban for further hiring to Iraq, people continue to line up at the recruitment offices. So that contingent over there, don't really want to come home. The longer their employment is extended, the better. Which is why, like most things, you can't please everybody - damned if you do, dammed if you don't.


CONERNED WITH OCWs

Actually, --- and I had this same discussion just last night. Gloria's loyalty should be to the people. We need unity and this is something that will unite us. The US has reneged on many of their promises to the Filipino people. We don't owe them anything.

Although we are a very poor country (a fact which Marcos is directly responsible for), we are still blessed with being strategically positioned. And we are the only ones Uncle Sam could really count on in Asia. I don't think they can do squat about scaring us. We have nothing to lose anyway.

So, Gloria's decision to stand by one Filipino (who has become a symbol of our OFWs) is a wise choice. Think of the many families who feel good with this choice (say 1M OFWs multiply this by a minimum of 7 family members...that's a lot of happy people!).

Hopefully, the Filipino people will learn how to unite for the good of the country (although I know that's highly improbable). As I told Bet, my ka-debate on the state of our nation, the only way for the Philippines to reach its glory is to kill all current politicians and a third of the adult society. We need to start from the basics. So, sorry for us, none of our kids will ever experience this dream. But for this one instance, wherein our president and country unite as one, the glimmer of hope is aroused. Then you read the papers and see Borgy Marcos Manotoc, his mom, Imee, and his lola......... GRRRRR!!!!


FROM A BALIKBAYAN

I say save Angelo and pull out. What are our troops in Iraq doing anyway? They are standing in the middle of intersections waving traffic through. Any Iraqi can do that! Our military presence in Iraq is not critical to the coalition effort. Angelo's survival is critical to
his family (8 kids! Who's going to feed and educate these poor souls?). Save Angelo.

God will take care of those damn kidnappers.


FROM A GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL

Whatever other people say, I don't agree to decision that showed we could easily wilt under pressure…

FROM A FIL-AM

Sorry but I have to disagree with the pulling out of our soldiers in Iraq. All we did was send a message that we can be pushed around into giving in when pushed against the wall. All we did was encourage terrorists into making more future demands because they now think we will give in at any moment in time. What's next? Hostage for ransom so they can continue their terorrizing ways?

I honestly don't know how I would react if it were one of my family members who ended up a hostage. We have not given into terrorists demands in the past in Mindanao and now that we are in international spotlight, we decided to do so. What was once a proud people is now falling deeper into more embarrassing situations. This is not the movies and our country led by actors and actresses are NOT qualified for such situations.

I knew that from a Military standpoint, it was the wrong thing to do. Just as soon as I heard about the abduction , the first thing I thought was, what would a President with a military background do? Just the other day Former President Ramos came out and said we should have not pulled our soldiers out. Gloria Macapagal is not trained in such Military tactics and neither is our congress who are either actors/actresses or more concerned about their pockets.


Our problems with terrorism back home is that of our own doing. We play with politics too much and keep voting the wrong people into power that these problems are ignored

Not long ago I was in Cavite training both the US and Philippines force at Balikatan. Sad to say the guns that our own soldiers had would not even fire and if it did it would either misfire or jam.

The Makati incident by our Military did not go without reason. It has been proven that our better weapons are being sold to the people who are our so called enemies and in turn put the lives of our own soldiers at risk because they are at a loss with equipment provided to them. Go to any of our camps and you will see what kind of lives our soldiers lead while our politicians continue to mislead and put money in their own pockets.

Tell me, how in the world are our politicians getting richer each day while our soldiers who are dying everyday to protect our country both external and internal are getting poorer and poorer?

Makes you wonder who our enemies are. Our politicians who take away from it's own people for their personal stability or the terrorists. It's harder to distinguish one from the other. Just a different strategy. Not all politicians are out for themselves and I still believe there are some of the very minority who care for our country. They are just being crushed by our system of politics.

The so called Iraq invasion is justifiable from an American standpoint regardless of whether or not there were weapons of Mass Destruction. It did not take an entire military attack or so called weapons to kill thousands of people in the World trade Center disaster. A couple few planes and terrorists that could be counted with the fingers in our hands.

The World is a better place without Sadam. Whether it directly affects out country or not. He was a terrorists to his own people and other ethnic cultures close to Iraq.

Pointing fingers at Bush and Blair, let us look from within our own backyard. Hundreds of $$$ are sent back home by Filipino Nurses that work in America. They depend on the prosperity of the American economy just so that they too can send money back to their families in the Philippines.

I understand that we have a million contract workers in the Middle East. If our politicians did their job, then our contract workers wouldn't have to be there in the first place. Our own people wouldn't have to be maids in Hongkong, Korea, Saudi etc. Our Doctors wouldn't have to go back to school and study nursing in the hope that they can come to the states and send home some $$$ to their families.

Yeah, it's easy to blame Bush , Blair and company for what's happening in Iraq. That's a laugh. Remember, when you point a finger at someone, three of those fingers point back at you.

PS - If my mom didn't pass away, dapat tumakbo na lang ako. After all I am qualified for Philippine politics. Showbiz School for Philippine Politics. :D



ARTICLE WRITTEN LAST FRIDAY

FLYING THE ANGEL OUT

The pullout of the 51-man military contingent from Iraq is correct even though it is perceived as acquiescing to the terrorist threat to behead the hapless driver Angelo Dela Cruz. Whatever the Machiavellian intentions of the Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s (GMA) Administration, it is the morally right thing to do. Further, this is just how realpolitik works in this new era of global terrorism.

First of all, GMA’s decision should be based first and foremost on national interests, not that of the U.S. or Australia or any other European nation. Our interests in security matters are not inherently and fundamentally tied to that of the U.S. or Europe. During World War II, if not for the insistence of General Douglas McArthur, the retaking of the Philippines would not have been prioritized. Manila was the second most devastated city next to Warsaw with many civilians dying from the indiscriminate bombardment by advancing U.S. forces. Lastly, our WWII veterans are still languishing from their unpaid WWII benefits. Remember these facts when talking about national interests.

The Philippines has been at the forefront of the war against terrorism and we have paid the price for it, in Mindanao, the LRT bombings, the PAL bombings. The 1995 capture of Al-Qaeda terrorists in Malate was an explicit warning to the U.S. that planes were to be used for kamikaze strikes. The country has not shirked its responsibilities.

Our foremost interest then is to preserve life, Filipino life, and to enhance the quality of life of the Filipino. Hence, Dela Cruz must be saved by principled means possible. Now, is withdrawing our forces principled?

Yes it is because the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq ordered by Pres. Bush on the grounds of terrorist links between Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda and the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq have been established by the U.S. Senate and by the British Parliament inquiry (as reported by the media) to be false and inaccurate. In other words, there was no justifiable reason to attack Iraq. Deposing Saddam Hussein is another matter, but this was not the reason used to attack Iraq and kill an estimated 10,000 soldiers, civilians, men, women, and children.

The invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with the so-called “War on Terrorism”. The death of so many Iraqi civilians from collateral damage, which are unreported or not highlighted by the Western media, the prisoner abuse scandals in Abu Ghraib and in Guantanamo, the perceived ineptness and corruption in the Iraq-reconstruction efforts by American officials and corporations are possible reasons for the rising resentment and violence against U.S. and coalition forces. The debacle in Iraq has led to the influx of both terrorists and those genuinely angry at U.S./coalition forces. Terrorism is actually on the upswing because of the Iraq invasion.

In the U.S., the Iraq war has divided the nation to an increasing extent to that of the opposition to the Vietnam War. Bush’s standing in the next election is not assured. Already 1,000 American soldiers have died and more continue to die since Bush made his aircraft carrier landing announcing the end of hostilities in Iraq last year. Even British Prime Minister Blair is being accused by his countrymen on Iraq.

The Philippines should distance itself from the quagmire that is Iraq and from the adventurism of the Bush and Blair administrations. If we are to support the war against terrorism militarily, then we should send a contingent to Afghanistan, where reinforcements are really needed and the fight is genuine and moral. We should also send a contingent to Sudan and Rwanda, where international peacekeepers are direly needed to prevent continuing massacres.

Lastly, the war against terrorism requires flexibility and agility on the part of government that approximates that of the terrorist. Bluster and full military response is NOT how to combat an unidentified, agile terrorist. Rather, better intelligence, better communications, better-trained kidnap, hostage, ransom experts, quick strike, highly trained/ skilled, small forces, and full logistical support are what we need in this age of terrorism. Fighting terrorism is more an intelligence affair and low-intensity conflict and not a full-scale war as the Bush administration presents it.

The Philippines reserves the right to address threats to its citizens in any manner possible, including retribution. A withdrawal is just one of many strategies in the long and deadly struggle against terrorism.

What LivingPlanet is all about

LivingPlanet, a venue for sharing my and your vivid memories, passionate concerns, and intriguing ideas on social, cultural, political, educational, economic, and environmental issues. Share your thoughts, your activities, what you plan to do with the rest of your life, and how you plan to change or make a difference in the world (if you want to!). In sharing (or debating!) ideas, thoughts, and experiences, we create a community of knowledge bearers and transmitters, which hopefully leads to personal and societal growth. I have been privileged to meet, talk to, make friends with some of the most intriguing and passionate people, and I look forward to others and learning what they think, do, and stand for on a variety of issues. This site is a tribute to them, those with a passion for life, growth, and social justice, and for the privilege of learning from them and from you!