Post EDSA Aquino Blues and the Real Status of Filipinos

The following article is written By BongV at AntiPinoy Website ...

AntiPinoy Website - The recent litany of misgivings about Aquino’s failures in performance, in diplomacy, in the economy gets longer. The mainstream media which supported “the anointed one” is stuck knowing they endorsed Aquino all the way, despite knowing that Aquino was a lazy oaf who played hooky while in Congress and the Senate.

It is not surprising therefore that as President, Noynoy Aquino as of late:

• Played hooky at the height of the Mendoza brouhaha;
• Nonchalantly brushed the Arroyo-Le-Cirque-category insensitivity of the recent Porsche and bulletproof Lexus brouhaha
• Played lousy poker with the Chinese drug mule issue
• Has juveniles in its diplomatic trips who are more concerned about wine and pretty faces than diplomacy
• Arrogated the performance of Gloria Arroyo in securing the MCC millenium package;
• Retaining an incompetent DILG undersecretary (well in fairness, there’s lots of incompetent USecs)
• Caught with pants down with the OFWs debacle in the midst of the Arabian spring;

These were the very nature of things that were foreseen to happen in an Aquino presidency.

Clearly, the pro-Aquino forces had the resources, had the better communication strategy – but definitely, the wrong programs (if there was one in the first place).

To a discerning electorate – spotting the fluff in Aquino’s campaign message was easy, specially when run against the facts of Aquino’s lack of ability and capacity for the job. However, for a non-discerning electorate which can’t distinguish between fluff, sh*t, and the real deal – the results can be catastrophic when a leader bumbles and fumbles from one crisis to another. And this has never been more glaring today in the growing list of Aquino’s misadventures in governance. It is ironic that while Aquino mouths good governance as the key, his governance is anything but good.

25 years after EDSA

During Noynoy Aquino’s speech on the 25th year after EDSA 1, he asked these 3 questions:

1. Are we not better off today than we were a generation ago?
2. Have we not finally regained the respect of the global community as a beacon of democracy?
3. Are we not on the way to becoming a more equitable society?”

Allow me to answers questions #3 and #2 first, and I’ll finish up with the answer to #1.

Are we not on the way to becoming a more equitable society?

A review of the Gini Coefficient shows the Philippines remains above 40 – the lowest Gini since 1985.

2010 – 44 – Arroyo (Much Worst)
2006 – 45.8 – Arroyo (Much Worst)
2003 – 44.53 – Arroyo (Worst)
2000 – 48.1 – Estrada (Very Worst)
1997 – 46.2 (FVR/Asian Crisis) (Much Worst)
1994 – 42.89 – FVR (Worst)
1991 – 43.82 – Cory (Worst)
1988 – 40.63 – Cory (Playing Safe)
1985 – 41.04 – Marcos (Communist crisis against govt.)

What that means is that Philippines has High Levels of Social Inequality. Therefore, NO we are not on the way to becoming a more equitable society.

Have we not finally regained the respect of the global community as a beacon of democracy?

AP’s position on this matter is quite well-known. However, let’s have other voices do the talking.

As Maria Ressa puts it on CNN – “People power should never have become part of the regular political arsenal; it was a once-in-a-lifetime act that should have been followed by the hard work of building democratic institutions. That never happened. That is the work that, 25 years later, desperately needs to be done in the Philippines — and the lesson Egypt should take to heart.”

Bobit Avila says After EDSA: We are still wanting for reforms! – – “Open any national news daily or any TV network channels and you will see ugly reports of killings, rape, kidnappings, Senate hearings (that doesn’t lead to imprisonment of those charged), our problems with Muslim separatists and the still raging internal conflict waged by the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) through its armed wing the New People’s Army (NPA). That promise of change in effect only changed the top leadership of this nation, but the system that could have launched this country to new heights was never put in place. Yes, I’m referring to our shift to a federal system of government away from this centralized form of government.”

BBC’s Kate McGeown, also wrote in People Power at 25: Long road to Philippine democracy – And while the revolution brought some name changes in the top echelons of power, that power remained concentrated among a small rich elite – something that is still the case today. Cory Aquino’s administration also brought few improvements to the lives of the poor, and failed to lessen the yawning gap between them and the moneyed few. And perhaps most surprisingly, the revolution also failed to get rid of the Marcoses. Ferdinand died in Hawaii shortly after he was ousted from office, but his flamboyant 81-year-old widow Imelda is back in the Philippines, with a seat in Congress. Several of his children also hold government posts – his son Bongbong is an influential senator and could well run for the presidency in the next elections in 2016.

TIME.COM reports in Philippines: 25 Years Since ‘People Power’ – “A third of Filipinos live on a dollar a day. Lack of jobs at home has forced an estimated 10 percent of the 94 million Filipinos to work abroad, sending home billions of dollars that help shore up the country’s economy”. 

Thus to answer Noynoy’s question – NO we have not gained the respect of the international community as the beacon of democracy – what we are is the butt of jokes – our Presidents are jokes, our congressmen are jokes, our Senators are jokes, our justice system is a joke, our government is a joke, our voters are one big joke, the Philippines is one big joke – what a tragedy for this self-declared “beacon of democracy”. No sir, we can’t sing, dance, and box our way out of the joke.

Are we not better off today than we were a generation ago?

Ted Reyes, gives juicy answers for Noynoy Aquino to chew on. Ted, in his blog post – Where is the Philippines 25 years after EDSA that:

25 years after EDSA, the Philippines is ranked as the most dangerous place for journalists. In the nine-year administration of Gloria Arroyo, scores of media men have been killed for doing their jobs.

25 years after EDSA, the Philippines is ranked in the top 10 most corrupt nations on earth.

25 years, after EDSA, many works of art are still getting censored out if they are contrary to the government or the church.

25 years after EDSA, the government, Muslim, as well as, communist rebels are still engaged in peace talks and in between, thousands die.

25 years after EDSA, the Philippines is still under heavy debt and has yet to find itself out of the bracket of third world nations.

25 years after EDSA, election fraud continues to decide who will govern.

25 years after EDSA, the politicians in power today bear the following family names: Arroyo, Aquino, Cojuangco, Estrada, and Enrile.

Most of the heroes and villains of EDSA 1986 maybe dead and gone, but the demons that made the heroes rise up and fight are still alive and kicking.

Perhaps these demons will outlive us all, including the spirit of that miraculous four days on Epiphanio De Los Santos Avenue.

If 25 years after EDSA we still question its point, then it has no point at all.

If a quarter of a century has passed since EDSA, and we still question if it succeeded, then it failed.

It may be hard to swallow but yes, the spirit of EDSA is dead.

We grieve as we surrender to the truth that 25 years after EDSA, nothing has changed.

For short – NO, we are not better of today than we were a generation ago- it actually feels we are WORSE. There are more thieves, clowns, and incompetents in government. A generation ago, I was living and working in the Philippines and had no reason to migrate. Funny how a few years can make a difference. When Erap won the Presidency, I felt it was time to for my life to move on because the Philippine electorate isn’t ready for honest-to-goodness development, yet. More disturbing, however is that in the last Presidential elections – Estrada was playing second to Aquino. If Aquino lost, Estrada would have been president.

Perhaps, the incompetence of Aquino is really needed to drive home the point to our collective national consciousness. The point being – winnability is not enough.

The ultimate challenge at this points is to be able to reach out and connect with the Philippine electorate to initiate a paradigm shift – from winnability to ability – a meritocracy. Until such time we vote for candidates based on merit, expect more Yellow kool-aide and yellow stuff to hit the ceiling. The Philippine electorate voted for winnability – and got what they asked for – Noynoy Aquino and all his warts.

Massacre After Edsa 1 - Where is the Real Spirit?

The following is from Bulatlat News Analysis...

The Hacienda Luisita Massacre, Landlordism and State Terrorism

The public outrage ignited by the Luisita Massacre should also keep an eye on other potential flashpoints that could lead to similar acts of state terrorism. There are several other plantations, large estates as well as development projects and mining exploration areas in many parts of the country that have been militarized.

By: Bobby Tuazon

Vol. IV,    No. 42      November 21 - 27, 2004      Quezon City, Philippines

Bulatlat - The violent dispersal of the strike of Hacienda Luisita farm workers on Nov. 16 that led to the death of 14 farmers including women and children and the wounding of 200 others was a massacre bound to happen. 

The labor dispute that pitted, on the one hand, the hacienda’s 5,000 farmers and 700 milling workers who were demanding among others the reinstatement of 300 workers and on the other, the management that has rejected every inch of their demands was in a deadlock. With their families living on starvation wages and themselves threatened with a mass lay-off, there was no way by which the workers could push their cause except by staging a strike.

From the very beginning, it appeared that the only response that the powerful Cojuangcos – including former President Corazon Cojuangco-Aquino – had in mind was by military means. Most of the accounts that have been reported about the Nov. 16 massacre have overlooked the fact that the 6,000-hectare hacienda, known in the past as Asia’s largest sugar plantation, has been militarized since the beginning. 

The military detachment that was put up at the hacienda reportedly carried out harassment operations against union leaders particularly in the thick of the election of union officials. Union officials were accused as “NPA rebels” or “sympathizers” – a demonization campaign that, in the military’s counter-insurgency strategy, is usually the prelude to the summary execution of progressive activists. 

Just across the commercial complex that adjoins the hacienda along the MacArthur Highway in Tarlac is the Philippine Army’s Camp Aquino. Camp Aquino, while serving as the headquarters of the Army’s Northern Luzon command, virtually guards the vast hacienda and its units are at the beck and call of the Cojuangcos and other powers-that-be in the region during times of labor unrest or during election.

Other flashpoints

Yet the public outrage that the Luisita massacre has generated should also keep an eye on other potential flashpoints that could lead to similar acts of state terrorism. We refer to the fact that there are several other plantations, large estates as well as development projects and mining exploration areas in many parts of the country that are under militarization. These are areas where the lands of farmers were either grabbed from them or where agricultural estates due for land distribution have been subjected to land conversion schemes. 

These are also areas where communities of upland farmers and indigenous peoples are displaced to pave the way for so-called energy, irrigation or similar development projects and mining exploration activities. In these areas, landlordism and transnational corporate power cast a net of terror backed by government agencies, local officials and military and police forces and often also by paramilitary and private armies. 

Thus, in Negros for instance, farmers and human rights groups have accused another Cojuangco – former Marcos crony Eduardo Cojuangco, Jr. – of using his political influence to use the military, police and even a gun-for-hire “rebel” group to protect his landholdings and corporate property. 

On Mindoro island over the last few years, scores of activists, community organizers including human rights volunteers have been killed reportedly by government troopers and their assets. Today the island has once again been opened for the entry of transnational mining corporations out to exploit Mindoro’s mineral deposits.

In Siocon, Zamboanga del Norte where the Arroyo administration has allowed the Canadian firm Toronto Ventures, Inc. (TVI) and Benguet Corporation to conduct mining exploration and production, military and paramilitary forces have been deployed to block attempts by the Subanons to stop the destruction of their communal and sacred lands. 

In these and many other provinces, counter-insurgency has been used as a ploy by civilian and military authorities to suppress the resistance of hapless farmers and indigenous peoples. Too many cases of human rights violations have been committed against unarmed protesters in the name of counter-insurgency.

“Outnumbered”?

In the Tarlac massacre, government has said that the soldiers and police units deployed at the height of the strike were “outnumbered” by the protesters who were able to mass up 4,000-strong. And so sword had to be unleashed: an APC (armored personnel carrier) rammed through the workers’ picketline while machine gun and snipers’ bullets were fired into the crowd from several directions coming – so surviving victims and eyewitnesses said – from atop buildings of the hacienda. Apparently, the strike was violently broken to allow at least 50 truckloads of sugarcane to be milled, also inside the hacienda, and hence allow the Cojuangcos to continue reaping some more money.

The ghosts of the past have returned. The whole of Central Luzon – which includes Tarlac province – has probably the most number of massacres that have taken place in recent memory. The list takes you all the way from the Philippine-American war at the turn of the 20^th century where whole communities were raided and pillaged and their inhabitants murdered without mercy by U.S. mercenary troops, to the massacres perpetrated by soldiers and constables under the command of then Defense Secretary Ramon Magsaysay and CIA operative Col. Ed Lansdale as well as during the Marcos dictatorship and until today. 

One of the most gruesome cases was the massacre in Lupao, Nueva Ecija in the early part of the Aquino presidency, where 17 farmers including women and children, were killed by Marines on suspicion that they were NPA rebels. Before that in January 1987 – the second year of the Aquino presidency - 13 farmers were shot and killed by Marines and policemen as some 10,000 farmers from Central Luzon and Southern Luzon marched to Mendiola to demand genuine land reform.

Central Luzon used to host the biggest U.S. military bases outside the U.S. mainland – Clark Airbase in Angeles City, Pampanga which is some 20 kms from Tarlac, and Subic Naval Base in Olongapo City, Zambales. The military bases were there not only because of the vast valley’s strategic location but because their presence was supported by the powers-that-be, such as the Cojuangcos and Aquinos.

More important however is that Central Luzon has been historically dominated by traditional oligarchs with big landowners maintaining haciendas not only here but in other regions as well most especially in Pangasinan, Iloilo and Negros. Some of the country’s presidents – including the current one – come from here. Indeed the elite power that originates in Central Luzon casts its tentacles far and wide. 

In Congress, landlord-representatives were the first to emasculate the much-touted Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), reducing it, as organized farmers said, into a mere scrap of paper. At the village level, town and agrarian officials colluded with judges preventing large landholdings from being subjected to CARP through trickery and other machinations. The myth about President Aquino’s sympathy for the peasant masses through her “centerpiece” CARP quickly crumbled when she unleashed her total war policy where tens of thousands of peasant families bore the brunt of militarization and atrocities. She and her successors hyped about land reform while the sword of war was pointed against the peasantry. 

 

Landlordism has made Central Luzon as having one of the biggest populations of tenants and farm workers and the displacement in the livelihood of many others is being made possible by the bulk importation of cheap rice, corn, vegetables and even salt, no thanks to President Arroyo’s trade liberalization policy. Probably the only flicker of hope that an ordinary family can grope for today is a contractual work abroad. The region is thus where many overseas Filipino workers now in Iraq and other Middle East countries come from. From them one can sense the strong will to survive despite the hopelessness they leave at home: “Di baleng mamatay sa Iraq hwag lang magutom ang pamilya sa Pilipinas” (It’s better to die in Iraq [by having a job] than see my family starve to death at home).

Widespread poverty, landlessness, union repression and state terrorism help fuel the armed revolutionary movement here. One cannot mourn of the Hacienda Luisita massacre without thinking that this would ignite some kind of a prairie fire that would engulf the entire region once again – as it has been in recent past. Bulatlat Analysis

Philippine Economy After 25 Years of Edsa 1 - The Promise of Nothing

The following is from Ibon Foundation Feature Article...
 
The 1986 People Power uprising created a moment of national unity and international credibility that could have been the starting point of real economic progress.
By SONNY AFRICA
Ibon research head | Ibon Foundation

Ibon Features - The anniversary of the first People Power is a time to reflect on how the nation is 25 years later. The 1986 People Power uprising after all was driven by a desire for political and economic democracy. Politically, Filipinos were emboldened to oppose the Marcos dictatorship upon years of determined struggle by Filipino activists. Economically, people saw that a handful of cronies and foreign elite were prospering amid high unemployment and widespread poverty.

However outside of appearances, there has been scant progress towards this democracy over 25 long years.
Economically, twenty-five years would have been long enough for the economy to take-off. The 1986 People Power uprising created a moment of national unity and international credibility that could have been the starting point of real economic progress.

Sweeping genuine agrarian reform should have been done immediately while the landed families were on the defensive against a surging mass movement. This would have unleashed the country’s agricultural potential, raised rural incomes and broken the back of peasant poverty. An industrialization program should have begun that preserved what domestic manufacturing existed and that phased the steady development of key and strategic industries. Foreign debts of the Marcos administration should have been cancelled and the resources freed up poured into domestic education, health, housing and infrastructure.

Even just 10 to 15 years of progressive and nationalist policies since 1986 would have been enough to start building solid domestic economic foundations. Instead, 25 years of five post-Marcos administrations embraced and implemented free market policies of neoliberal globalization – trade and investment liberalization, privatization and deregulation. Economic growth, foreign investments and exports were treated as ends in themselves rather than the mere means to development that they are. Profits and commerce were hyped while the State’s responsibility to deliver real social and economic development was disparaged.

The 7.2% annual growth in gross domestic product (GDP) in 2010 and the average 4.5% growth during the previous Arroyo administration from 2001-2009 are considerably faster than the average 3.9% growth in the period 1986-1991 under the first Aquino administration. Foreign direct investment (FDI) has markedly increased from US$2.0 billion in 1986 (equivalent to 6.7% of GDP) to US$23.6 billion in 2009 (14.5% of GDP). The value of exports rose from being equivalent to 16.2% of GDP in 1986 to average 46.1% of GDP over the decade 2000-2009.

Yet there has also been rising joblessness, persistently severe inequality and growing numbers of poor amid economic decline. The unemployment rate which averaged 10.6% in the pre-People Power uprising six-year crisis period 1981-1986 has even risen to average 11% in the period 2005-2010, according to Ibon’s estimates; this increase has only been camouflaged by a convenient redefinition of official unemployment in 2005. The 2.6 million unemployed Filipinos in 1986 increased to 4.4 million in 2010.

Inequality remains persistently severe. In 1985 the top 20% of families cornered 52.1% of total family income leaving the bottom 80% to divide the remaining 47.9% between them. This has barely changed over the last 25 years and in 2009 the top 20% of families still claimed 51.9% of total family income (with the bottom 80% dividing the remaining 48.1%). Also in 2009, the net worth of just the 25 richest Filipinos of US$21.4 billion (Php1,021 billion at the prevailing exchange rate) was equivalent to the combined annual income of the country’s poorest 11.1 million families or some 55.4 million Filipinos (computed with an average family size of five) of Php1,029 billion.

The number of poor is a bit more difficult to compare because of at least two changes in the methodology for estimating poverty in the country. The government officially counted 26.7 million poor Filipinos in 1985 rising to 30.9 million in 2000. A subsequent revision statistically reduced the 2000 estimate to 25.5 million with this rising, according to the same methodology, to 28.5 million in 2009. Yet another revision statistically reduced the official 2009 estimate to 23.1 million. In any case, in 2009 some six out of ten Filipinos were trying to survive on incomes of PhP82 or even much less per day for all their food and non-food expenses.

The explosion of optimism for change in 1986 was followed by decades of missed opportunities. There was likewise a burst of optimism in 2010 following the end of the nine-year Arroyo administration. Indeed the economic lessons are there to be learned and the next decades need not be more of the same. For now the optimism comes from the rising number of Filipinos wielding People Power not just in moments of revolt but also in daily and organized struggles for real social change.

Ibon Foundation, Inc. is an independent development institution established in 1978 that provides research, education, publications, information work and advocacy support on socioeconomic issues.

The Dark Truth of EDSA 1 - The Unpatriotic Overthrow of Ferdinand Marcos

The following Q & A are extracted from:

"The Marcos Legacy Revisited - Raiders of the Lost Gold"
By: Erick A. San Juan, published in 1998 in Makati City, Philippines.

This Q & A is with Erick A. San Juan a prominent civic leader, political activist (anti-Communist advocate), author, journalist & weekly contributor to newspapers & Philippine radio.

Q. From your direct knowledge, what events or conversations with certain personalities indicated foreign complicity in the EDSA Revolution and its connection to the Marcos gold? Who were the gainers and why?

A. During the latter stages of the Marcos regime, I came to be friends with James Brandon Foley* [Note: I am constrained to break my pledge to preserve the anonymity of my sources because without any attribution to an authoritative source, this revelation will be nothing but hearsay. My apologies. I sincerely hope he will understand, given the situation I am in and the position I have taken.] a political officer (another term for CIA agents at that time) of the U.S. Embassy. We used to go out and date several women, sometimes to discos, and the like. Our favorite hang-out was the Hyatt Regency. In between socials, Jim and I would engage in frequent brain-storming at his private apartment at the Seafront. On one particular night, he disclosed to me that there was a secret operation plan to oust Marcos, and that men like Jose Concepcion of RFM and the Ayalas were being used as conduits to access the smooth flow of funds to finally bring an end to the Marcos authoritarian government.

Jim likewise mentioned the involvement of Cardinal Jaime Sin, whose role was to draw a large crowd of supporters and sympathizers in the event that a blocking force was needed. Sin is an expert in the Antonio Gramsci-type of Marxism. This was confirmed by Dr. John Coleman in his expose 'The Violation of the Christian Church,' where he stated that Sin's Radio Veritas 'speaks out Communist propaganda in 13 languages all throughout Asia,' using Liberation Theology to destroy the moral fiber of the large number of Catholics. Sin believes in the Marxist principle that 'Religion is the opium of the masses.' He exploited this tactic to the hilt and succeeded in what is now called 'people power' mass action. As acknowledged by Coleman, 'Cardinal Sin of the Philippines worked diligently to overthrow the government of President Marcos. He was ably assisted by a former executive of the World Council of Churches, Jovito Salonga. Salonga was brought back to the Philippines under escort of the U.S. State Department.' (CDC Report, October 1988)

In Coleman's estimation, Salonga was to take Mrs. Aquino and this Protestant 'will cut a deal with the Marxist New People's Army (NPA).' Although this did not materialize because of Salonga's poor health, Coleman was still partly correct. Another fellow Protestant filled in his shoes (Fidel V. Ramos) and has quite successfully negotiated peace with the Communists!

Q. What events preceding Marcos' announcement of the snap election proved that he was under American pressure? Why do you think he acceded to the 'request?'

A. Everything really hinged on the Marcos gold bars. The Trilateral Commission was convinced that they had been conned by President Marcos. This being so, the Commission did everything to pressure him, to destabilize his one-man rule, cut his source of funding, and even blackmail him (the Dovie Beams affair). A part of the globalists' notorious activities were documented by David Smith of the U.S. based Newswatch magazine, in August 1987: 'Representatives from Indonesia and the Philippines went to Jonathan May (ex-World Bank head) and stated that agents from the Chase Manhattan Bank and other banks said they would 'forgive' the loans and interests if the following were met:

(1) Eliminate their National Currency;
(2) Dollar-denominate their new money system;
(3) Use a debit card system instead of a currency system;
(4) Give the bankers perpetual rights over all natural resources.

Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines refused to accept and was deposed very shortly thereafter.'

Marcos eventually gave in to the globalists' proposal for a snap election, using veteran 'ambush interview' expert Ted Koppel of CBS. Clever as he was, Marcos did not reveal to the Americans that prior to his interview with Koppel, he had already conducted a secret survey of the electorate. Despite the adverse media hype launched against him, Marcos was confident of a re-election.

However, Jim Foley (who was later transferred to Algiers), disclosed that the real agenda was not the snap election; rather, it was to persuade Marcos to sign a document attesting to the fact that his gold bars and other precious metals deposited at Fort Knox and other depositories of the world would be under the guardianship of the Trilateral Commission, and a certain percentage would be given to the Philippine Government in the form of an investment loan from the World Bank.

The document was subsequently hand-carried by. U.S. Ambassador-at-Large Phillip Habib, which Marcos refused to sign. The Filipino head of state felt that the war loot (which was remolded into gold bars bearing the Central Bank seal) must be given to the Filipino people.

Q. How was the American's influence exerted during the snap election? Was there American involvement in the walkout of the computer workers?

A. First, there was the barrage of disinformation launched by Newsweek, Time and other publications regarding the illicit love affairs of both Marcos and the First Lady (e.g., George Hamilton), the incurable ailment of the President, and the public confidence in Namfrel and distrust in the Comelec. Then came the walk-out of the computer workers at the PICC. These were all part of the U.S. scenario during the snap election.

Most of the computer workers were promised visas and immigrant status to the U.S. Some of them, I understand, took advantage of this rare opportunity.

Q. Did any of your contacts know about the outbreak of the mutiny at EDSA?

A. Both Jim Foley and Norbert Garrett, CIA Station Chief, U.S Embassy, predicted a bloody confrontation in the event that Marcos stubbornly decided to stay in Malacanang. The Presidents only saving grace was the signing of the document brought by Habib.

Q. Who were pressuring Marcos to give in and leave? Is there any, credible evidence that this happened?

A. The pressures came from both U.S. and Philippine sources. On the American side, there was Philip Habib. He was joined by U.S. Ambassador to the Philippines, Stephen Bosworth, Richard Armitage, Michael Armacost, Rep. Stephen Solarz, Norbert Garrett (CIA Station Chief in Manila), and Joseph Mussomelli (Anti-Fraud Section, U.S. Embassy). Senator Paul Laxalt as you probably know, was the guy who spoke to Marcos on the phone and told him to 'cut and cut cleanly.' Lines to Washington were kept busy by calls coming in from Lawrence Eagleburger and Henry Kissinger. Later on, I was told that operating funds came in from Maurice 'Hank' Greenberg, through dollar grants from the C.V. Starr Foundation of New York. Greenberg is a powerful member of the B'nai B'rith. Others like Higdon, Brzezinski and Generals Pike and Allen of JUSMAG also formed part of the American initiative to oust Marcos.

On the Philippine side were assets like Joe Concepcion, Jobo Fernandez, Cesar Zalamea, Jaime Ongpin, and Alex Melchor. Journalists, likewise, were used for their media hype.

Q. Could you elaborate more on Habib's role in the events that followed?

A. As I have earlier stated, Habib was sent by the Trilateralists to the Philippines to pressure Marcos into signing the document prepared in the U.S. It contained provisions of equal sharing of the gold bars among different countries (through their banker's in the Commission), transshipped by Marcos to Fort Knox and other depositories under a top secret operation plan coded 'Tuna Highway.' Initially, Marcos was supported by the Commission to implement martial law in l972, and was even provided with a martial plan. Along with it came a minting plant, installed at the Central Bank premises by Thomas de la Rue Ltd. of London, and a smelting plant with which to convert the war booty into new gold bars. The plan was executed by trusted generals of Marcos who diverted some portions of the shipment to other destinations aside from Fort Knox. This was covered by a prescription period (November 1945 to November 1985) in accordance with international law. After this 40-year period, it was to be declared 'finders keepers.' Some countries who felt conned by these agreements pursued their claim at the International Court of Justice, to mature in 2005.

Had Marcos chosen to sign the document, he would have remained President for life. In the process, he would have received the distinction of being 'the best President we ever had.' In addition, the Philippines' share could have paid our external debt of, at that time, $24 Billion, plus a comprehensive Marshall Plan for industrialization. (To date, our external debt has zoomed up to $47 Billion, according to the latest BSFI figures.) Instead, he chose the hard way, and very badly miscalculated. He wanted to regroup his forces in the North, but was flown to Hawaii instead.


A. Definitely. It has always been standard operating procedure for our military officials to 'keep the line open' between them and the defense attaches of the U.S. Embassy. Most of out top ranking officers have been nurtured in U.S. military schools. Some were even granted immigrant status in the U.S. while serving the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP). Their families were granted entry to the exclusive clubs of the American government such as JUSMAG, Seafront, Clark Air Base, Subic Base, Camp John Hay, etc. There they could avail of clubhouse facilities, golf courses and other amenities.

After EDSA, most of the renegade Marcos generals migrated to the U.S. These are the ones who never resisted the Aquino-Ramos-Enrile-Sin forces.

Q. Why didn't Marcos move during the first hours of the mutiny when there were very few people around the camps?

 A. Marcos was sternly warned not to harm the people at EDSA, Otherwise, Malacanang would be targeted by the U.S. military sources. Thus, Marcos took the backseat and relied on the group of then Col. Rolando Abadilla to finish the job for him. You see, Abadilla's elite force from the MISG (Military Intelligence and Security Group), together with a SWAT team, successfully penetrated Camp Crame, disguised as Ramos supporters. As soon as Marcos was confronted about this by his Chief-of-Staff, General Fabian Ver, the president simply advised the latter to relax, as Abadilla was in the process of arresting Defense Secretary Juan Ponce Enrile and his cousin, Fidel Ramos, whom the president underestimated as a gutless individual. Marcos never imagined that Abadilla would have a change of heart. Abadilla was the prime suspect as the chief operator of Ninoy's death at the tarmac.

Q. How do you connect Cardinal Sin with the American plan?

A. Cory Aquino was instructed by Cardinal Sin to seek refuge in a Cebu convent. As the fireworks were about to start, Cory was to install her revolutionary government in Davao with the assistance of the RAM forces and her NFIA sympathizers. This alternate plan vas likewise designed by the CIA, with Col. Voltaire Gazmin given the role of securing Cory in Cebu.

This plan was totally discarded when Marcos peacefully left the Philippines, due to the insistence of Cardinal Sin, who was backed up all the way by the Vatican and the U.S. State Department. Cory ended up being the sole titular head.Q. Were there contacts between the Military camps and the embassy and/or Washington during the four days at EDSA?