Above was the title of a sonnet I wrote many, many Holy Weeks ago. Allow me to re-publish it here as the whole of Philippine Christendom is celebrating one of its most solemn holidays.
PICNIC
One Easter Sunday morn, as was their weekend plan,
A couple, with young Anne, packed up their tinted van
With foods and drinks galore and lots of picnic ware,
Then beach-ward drove in haste to beat the summer air.
The car had passed the church when suddenly the lass,
On seeing worshipers march off the morning mass.
Remarked with focused glance at people on the way:
"Mom, aren't we and Dad going to church today?"
Trading embarrassed eyes, the couple felt aback,
For, lo, in quick response their lips did truly lack!
The mother fumbled long to satisfy Anne's plea:
"Dear, we can pray to God and worship by the sea."
To which, as only from a five-year old may come:
"But we won't. answered Anne."Will we? O, come on, Mom!
Happy Holidays, everyone!
Miyerkules, Marso 27, 2013
Sabado, Marso 23, 2013
OF CHIZ AND HEART
Of the many personal advises to the benighted Chiz-Heart relationship that have been lately aired in the news, methinks that which had com from charlatan Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago to Chiz was so far the most telling and practical: "Mag-igib ka, magsibak ng kahoy. Practice a little humility to your future in-laws. 'Yan ang kulturang Pinoy!"
Indeed, I cannot understand why an otherwise simple and very common problem among two people in love had to end up like this: virtually not unlike that of Romeo's problem with Juliet's parents in Shakespeare's timeless novel? 'Yang manliligaw na inaayawan ng bibiyanin ay di ba't pangkaraniwan lamang naman? But why a highly charismatic Senator with a strong potential to succeed PNoy after 2016 cannot solve or satisfactorily handle an otherwise very simple problem such as this one is truly dumbfounding. Aba, eh, kung itong ganito kaliit na problema ng pamilya ay di kayang ma-solve ni Chiz Escudero, paano kaya niya maso-solve, kung sakali, ang higit na malalaking problema ng bayan? 'Mon Tulfo was comparing Chiz Escudero to Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde in Robert Louie Stevenson's 1887 novel. Hindi naman siguro ganoon katindi ang comparison, because Mr. Hyde ay tunay na evil at kabaligtaran ng goodness ni Jekyll, although tila meron din ngang pagkaka-hawig. Si Chiz, sa mata ng maraming Pinoy ay tunay ngang isang matalino at karismatikong politiko, subali't tila unti-unting lumalabas ang kanyang may pagka-aroganteng katauhan sa kanyang ipinakikitang behavior nitong nakaraang mga araw.
Consider this. Bago pa man lumabas at nag-tungayaw sa media ang mga magulang ni Heart Evangelista ay malaon nang open-secret sa publiko ang Chiz-Heart relationship. Sinasabi ng mga magulang ni Chiz na sila ay nabastusan sa inasal ng Senador noong unang gabi na iuto ay ipakilala ni Heart sa kanila. According to them, si Chiz ay dumating sa kanila na lango sa alak at sa halip na mag-bigay galang sa mga bibiyanin ay pasalampak na naupo lang sa sofa na no-pansin sila. 'First Impression is Lasting, the saying goes, so, hindi maiaalis sa mga parents ni Heart na magkaroon ng di magandang unang impresyon kay Chiz. But I think we are all too old to not realize that "first impression is not totally indelible." Subali't marami pa, sangayon sa dalawang matanda, ang nakita nilang di magandang ugali ni Chiz sa mga sumunod na raw. Ang tanong ay ito: Sa totoo o hindi ang umpisa ng di magandang impresyong ito, bakit ito hindi nagawan ng paraan ng Senador na mabago -- di ba 'yon ang unang-unang dapat asahan sa isang binatang manliligaw? -- ang impresyong ito bago lumala at sa bandang huli ay mapilitang ibulgar ng mga magulang ni Heart sa madla ang kanilang di pag-sangayon mapangasawa ng anak nila si Chiz. Heart, on the other hand, being madly in love with Chiz, cannot be expected to side with her parents at this point in time, especially since it may be assumed that Heart's parents might also have something to do with Heart's split with her previous boyfriend, Jericho Rosales. But Rosales, probably then in his late teens like Heart, was too young to be expected to do what would normally be expected from a far more matured and responsible Senator like Chiz. Heart revealed that her parents also did not approve of Jericho, but that nothing like that had ever been heard from the latter while Chiz continues to counter-denounce Heart's parents before the media is truly worthy of note in this regard.
I don't know about others, but for me, I will no longer vote for Escudero simply because of this. I know he would still be reelected with flying colors given his charisma and, I don't know if only, feigned, humbleness before the public. At the very least, because of this, I had been compelled to research deeper into Escudero's credentials and performance as a lawmaker and member of both Congress and Senate. It was truly a great frustration that I could not find any (I urge others to make their own research and prove me wrong) landmark legislation he had so far authored or had figured out as a principal sponsor of. And so, I feel obliged to repeat: If Chiz could not handle so simple a problem as a future in-laws' apparent disapproval -- the mere fact that Chiz is no longer in a position to give Heart a church wedding need not be taken for granted -- how very much less can one expect him to satisfactorily handle the country's more pressing problems? At any rate, I still sincerely wish Chiz and Heart all the luck and blessings that Planet Earth can give them in their love affair.
Indeed, I cannot understand why an otherwise simple and very common problem among two people in love had to end up like this: virtually not unlike that of Romeo's problem with Juliet's parents in Shakespeare's timeless novel? 'Yang manliligaw na inaayawan ng bibiyanin ay di ba't pangkaraniwan lamang naman? But why a highly charismatic Senator with a strong potential to succeed PNoy after 2016 cannot solve or satisfactorily handle an otherwise very simple problem such as this one is truly dumbfounding. Aba, eh, kung itong ganito kaliit na problema ng pamilya ay di kayang ma-solve ni Chiz Escudero, paano kaya niya maso-solve, kung sakali, ang higit na malalaking problema ng bayan? 'Mon Tulfo was comparing Chiz Escudero to Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde in Robert Louie Stevenson's 1887 novel. Hindi naman siguro ganoon katindi ang comparison, because Mr. Hyde ay tunay na evil at kabaligtaran ng goodness ni Jekyll, although tila meron din ngang pagkaka-hawig. Si Chiz, sa mata ng maraming Pinoy ay tunay ngang isang matalino at karismatikong politiko, subali't tila unti-unting lumalabas ang kanyang may pagka-aroganteng katauhan sa kanyang ipinakikitang behavior nitong nakaraang mga araw.
Consider this. Bago pa man lumabas at nag-tungayaw sa media ang mga magulang ni Heart Evangelista ay malaon nang open-secret sa publiko ang Chiz-Heart relationship. Sinasabi ng mga magulang ni Chiz na sila ay nabastusan sa inasal ng Senador noong unang gabi na iuto ay ipakilala ni Heart sa kanila. According to them, si Chiz ay dumating sa kanila na lango sa alak at sa halip na mag-bigay galang sa mga bibiyanin ay pasalampak na naupo lang sa sofa na no-pansin sila. 'First Impression is Lasting, the saying goes, so, hindi maiaalis sa mga parents ni Heart na magkaroon ng di magandang unang impresyon kay Chiz. But I think we are all too old to not realize that "first impression is not totally indelible." Subali't marami pa, sangayon sa dalawang matanda, ang nakita nilang di magandang ugali ni Chiz sa mga sumunod na raw. Ang tanong ay ito: Sa totoo o hindi ang umpisa ng di magandang impresyong ito, bakit ito hindi nagawan ng paraan ng Senador na mabago -- di ba 'yon ang unang-unang dapat asahan sa isang binatang manliligaw? -- ang impresyong ito bago lumala at sa bandang huli ay mapilitang ibulgar ng mga magulang ni Heart sa madla ang kanilang di pag-sangayon mapangasawa ng anak nila si Chiz. Heart, on the other hand, being madly in love with Chiz, cannot be expected to side with her parents at this point in time, especially since it may be assumed that Heart's parents might also have something to do with Heart's split with her previous boyfriend, Jericho Rosales. But Rosales, probably then in his late teens like Heart, was too young to be expected to do what would normally be expected from a far more matured and responsible Senator like Chiz. Heart revealed that her parents also did not approve of Jericho, but that nothing like that had ever been heard from the latter while Chiz continues to counter-denounce Heart's parents before the media is truly worthy of note in this regard.
I don't know about others, but for me, I will no longer vote for Escudero simply because of this. I know he would still be reelected with flying colors given his charisma and, I don't know if only, feigned, humbleness before the public. At the very least, because of this, I had been compelled to research deeper into Escudero's credentials and performance as a lawmaker and member of both Congress and Senate. It was truly a great frustration that I could not find any (I urge others to make their own research and prove me wrong) landmark legislation he had so far authored or had figured out as a principal sponsor of. And so, I feel obliged to repeat: If Chiz could not handle so simple a problem as a future in-laws' apparent disapproval -- the mere fact that Chiz is no longer in a position to give Heart a church wedding need not be taken for granted -- how very much less can one expect him to satisfactorily handle the country's more pressing problems? At any rate, I still sincerely wish Chiz and Heart all the luck and blessings that Planet Earth can give them in their love affair.
Huwebes, Marso 14, 2013
SILENCE MEANS ADMISSION
In a recent press conference in Malacanang, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima was asked by one media representative what the government was doing with respect to Sultan Kiram's men who had been intercepted by the government carrying guns and bolos, and about the innocent Muslim Filipinos who continue to be subjected to atrocities and human rights violations by the Malaysian security forces.
Sec. De Lima immediately replied that charges, essentially illegal possession of firearms, were not being prepared against Kirams's men. But she kept silent on what the government is doing to help the innocent Muslim Filipinos whose lives continue to be put in the harm's way because of the ongoing atrocities in Sabah.
If I were one of the journalists who heard De Lima's ostensible attempt to sideline what really should be the more important part of the question, i.e. human rights violation, I would have outright pursue the question. I don't really know why he or she did not. Chances are, if it were Edwin Lacierda, the President's relatively more seasoned "shock-absorber," he might have reacted considerably more differently.
At any rate, what seems to be a minor lapse of de Lima -- or rather it might in fact be her true intention to ignore that part of the question for very obvious reasons -- had surely not escaped the observation of some of the presidents' men therein present, e.g. Lacierda. Whether or not silence was the best or most convenient strategy under situations like that is anybody's wild guess. For one thing, silence generally connotes "paduda" On fact, for another, silence means admission. Does it therefore goes to say that the government, through De Lima, admits the emerging widespread perception that from beginning to end, De Lima's boss has always been been in Malaysia's sides in all matters related to the Sabah standoff?
Sec. De Lima immediately replied that charges, essentially illegal possession of firearms, were not being prepared against Kirams's men. But she kept silent on what the government is doing to help the innocent Muslim Filipinos whose lives continue to be put in the harm's way because of the ongoing atrocities in Sabah.
If I were one of the journalists who heard De Lima's ostensible attempt to sideline what really should be the more important part of the question, i.e. human rights violation, I would have outright pursue the question. I don't really know why he or she did not. Chances are, if it were Edwin Lacierda, the President's relatively more seasoned "shock-absorber," he might have reacted considerably more differently.
At any rate, what seems to be a minor lapse of de Lima -- or rather it might in fact be her true intention to ignore that part of the question for very obvious reasons -- had surely not escaped the observation of some of the presidents' men therein present, e.g. Lacierda. Whether or not silence was the best or most convenient strategy under situations like that is anybody's wild guess. For one thing, silence generally connotes "paduda" On fact, for another, silence means admission. Does it therefore goes to say that the government, through De Lima, admits the emerging widespread perception that from beginning to end, De Lima's boss has always been been in Malaysia's sides in all matters related to the Sabah standoff?
Miyerkules, Marso 13, 2013
LAPSES IN A ROW
The common perception that President Aquino has by far the largest organizational set-up for communications and media affairs among this country's presidents is certainly not without basis. What with such popular names as Edwin Lacierda, Abigail Valte, Ricky Carandang, Manolo Quezon III, Sonny Coloma -- methinks I still miss some -- collaborating with one another to paint him a good image before the public eyes. It has therefore become unbelievable that the presidential communications group has so miserably failed to capture the letter sent to the President by the Sultanate of Sulu soon after his inauguration in 2010. But more incredible, if true, was that the Sultanate had sent two other letters, one in 2011 and another in 2012 -- the President neither denied nor confirmed this, anyway -- which have both been ignored. Now, the speculation is not entirely far-fetched that had not the presidential communication group "slept in the noodle house," if I may borrow a street metaphor, then the ongoing Sabah standoff and the innocent lives it had already claimed would have been reasonably forestalled.
Just recently, another presidential embarrassment came to pass. I am of course referring to the sudden decline of two presidential appointees to the Commission on Elections, former Justice USec Makabangkit Lanto and election lawyer Bernadette Sardillo, to accept their nomination. That the presidential appointment screening committee (I don't know who compose them) had not been aware of Lanto's pending case with the Sandigang Bayan and Sardillo being the election lawyer of former Isabela Governor Dy, also newly appointed Commelec Commissioner Grace Padaca's great nemesis, truly leaves much to be desired. Alas, I had thought the President had an amply hands-on control of his cabinets. Not so long ago, the President also received considerable jeers and flak from the public, as well probably as from the international community when it was revealed he had secretly sent Sen. Antonio Trillanes to China to undertake back-door negotiations with China on the Scarborough Shoal standoff. That the Department of Foreign Affairs had not been in the know on this was simply unforgivable.
Now back to the Sabah rift. . The President has been lately in the news as entertaining a lingering suspicion that there was a grand conspiracy behind Sultan Kiram suddenly sending armed supporters to Sabah and reviving the otherwise long-dormant Sabah claim. He kept saying Kiram, in secret cohorts with Nur Misuari, wanted to sabotage the ongoing peace talk between the government and the MILF, especially now that it is nearing its climax. Indeed, that the Tausogs and the MNLF, who were both ignored and sidelined in the negotiation may have had an ax to grind in this regard cannot be totally discounted. But for the President to charge (again for the nth time) that former President GMA and her ex-lieutenants in governance, e.g. Norberto Gonzales, Saycon and others, may be directly behind the conspiracy cannot but continue to reflect President Aquino's one-consuming hatred and continuing vendetta against GMA and the past administration. No right-thinking Filipino, unless blinded by revenge would ever venture to even imagine the involvement of GMA in such conspiracy. That is simply incredible and downright laughable! As a matter of fact, Teddy Boy Locsin had more or less something like this to say in one of his recent Teditorials: "If GMA, so sick and house-arrested in a hospital, strictly forbidden to have a personal computer, with neither a and sans land line nor a mobile phone, is able to mount a conspiracy and a sabotage like this, then let the people take her back to Malacanang for she is a genius president."
But of course, Justice Sec. Leila de Lima, who has been instructed to investigate Aquino's lingering suspicion may not be totally blamed if in due course she came out confirming that which his boss has in mind. There, then, should be a new case to file against her -- well, now that several of the cases against her has been gradually dwindling in the courts for lack of merit. Besides, I think de Lima has learned her lesson: Never disappoint the President, learn to guess what is in his mind and let the result of your investigation conform to it. Hindi nga ba't napaso na si De Lima in the case of the much ballyhooed Luneta Massacre of Chinese nationals not too long ago? Aquino then told De Lima to determine who had failed to do what he must and to report her findings in due course, emphasizing heads would surely roll. O di ba, nang lumabas sa imbesrigasyon ni De Lima that then DILG Asec Puno, the President's shooting body, were among those who grossly failed in their bounden responsibilities, and should be sanctioned, Aquino summarily disregarded De Lima's recommendations and simply let Puno totally off the hook.
Having said the above, I do not certainly mean the President should be as infallible as the Pope. Certainly not! All I say is presidential lapses -- all other lapses, for that matter -- need not come in a row.
Just recently, another presidential embarrassment came to pass. I am of course referring to the sudden decline of two presidential appointees to the Commission on Elections, former Justice USec Makabangkit Lanto and election lawyer Bernadette Sardillo, to accept their nomination. That the presidential appointment screening committee (I don't know who compose them) had not been aware of Lanto's pending case with the Sandigang Bayan and Sardillo being the election lawyer of former Isabela Governor Dy, also newly appointed Commelec Commissioner Grace Padaca's great nemesis, truly leaves much to be desired. Alas, I had thought the President had an amply hands-on control of his cabinets. Not so long ago, the President also received considerable jeers and flak from the public, as well probably as from the international community when it was revealed he had secretly sent Sen. Antonio Trillanes to China to undertake back-door negotiations with China on the Scarborough Shoal standoff. That the Department of Foreign Affairs had not been in the know on this was simply unforgivable.
Now back to the Sabah rift. . The President has been lately in the news as entertaining a lingering suspicion that there was a grand conspiracy behind Sultan Kiram suddenly sending armed supporters to Sabah and reviving the otherwise long-dormant Sabah claim. He kept saying Kiram, in secret cohorts with Nur Misuari, wanted to sabotage the ongoing peace talk between the government and the MILF, especially now that it is nearing its climax. Indeed, that the Tausogs and the MNLF, who were both ignored and sidelined in the negotiation may have had an ax to grind in this regard cannot be totally discounted. But for the President to charge (again for the nth time) that former President GMA and her ex-lieutenants in governance, e.g. Norberto Gonzales, Saycon and others, may be directly behind the conspiracy cannot but continue to reflect President Aquino's one-consuming hatred and continuing vendetta against GMA and the past administration. No right-thinking Filipino, unless blinded by revenge would ever venture to even imagine the involvement of GMA in such conspiracy. That is simply incredible and downright laughable! As a matter of fact, Teddy Boy Locsin had more or less something like this to say in one of his recent Teditorials: "If GMA, so sick and house-arrested in a hospital, strictly forbidden to have a personal computer, with neither a and sans land line nor a mobile phone, is able to mount a conspiracy and a sabotage like this, then let the people take her back to Malacanang for she is a genius president."
But of course, Justice Sec. Leila de Lima, who has been instructed to investigate Aquino's lingering suspicion may not be totally blamed if in due course she came out confirming that which his boss has in mind. There, then, should be a new case to file against her -- well, now that several of the cases against her has been gradually dwindling in the courts for lack of merit. Besides, I think de Lima has learned her lesson: Never disappoint the President, learn to guess what is in his mind and let the result of your investigation conform to it. Hindi nga ba't napaso na si De Lima in the case of the much ballyhooed Luneta Massacre of Chinese nationals not too long ago? Aquino then told De Lima to determine who had failed to do what he must and to report her findings in due course, emphasizing heads would surely roll. O di ba, nang lumabas sa imbesrigasyon ni De Lima that then DILG Asec Puno, the President's shooting body, were among those who grossly failed in their bounden responsibilities, and should be sanctioned, Aquino summarily disregarded De Lima's recommendations and simply let Puno totally off the hook.
Having said the above, I do not certainly mean the President should be as infallible as the Pope. Certainly not! All I say is presidential lapses -- all other lapses, for that matter -- need not come in a row.
Lunes, Marso 11, 2013
HAS THE UN OUTLIVED ITS USEFULNESS?
I wrote this letter, published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer. exactly ten years ago on the eruption of the US-Iraq war. Allow me to republish it here in light of the continuing ineptness of the United Nations to prevent the Malaysians from demolishing our fellow Filipinos in Sabah.
"THE FAILURE of the United Nations to prevent the US-Iraq war was lamentable. But history has just repeated itself. The League of Nations, the UN's predecessor, also had the same failure.
Formed after the end of World War I -- curiously with the United States never becoming a member even if President Woodrow Wilson was its chief founder -- the League in its early years settled a number of disputes and prevented several wars. But these were between small countries. It, however, failed to control the Axis and Allied Powers. After Japan invaded Manchuria in 1933, the league condemned the aggression but did not impose sanctions; Japan withdrew in 1933. Also withdrawing in 1933, Germany began to rearm, while Italy invaded and annexed Ethiopia in 1935. The League imposed economic sanctions but allowed Italy to get the supplies it needed most, until Italy withdrew in 1937. The league expelled Russia for its 1939 aggression against Finland, but then World War II had already begun.
There have been notable UN achievements, the first being the peaceful lifting of the Berlin Blockade in 1945. In 1947, the UN prevented a possible Balkan war. In 1949, it stopped the fighting between India and Pakistan over Kashmir, and also settled the Indonesian-Dutch War. The Korean War in 1950-53 marked the first time an international organization had recommended action that halted a military aggressor. In the Middle East, hostilities were stopped through UN efforts. The first effort ended the dispute between Israel and the Arab states in 1948. The second, following Egypt's seizure of the Suez Canal in 1956 and the eruption of the Egypt-Israel war, culminated in a ceasefire and the withdrawal of all troops from the Canal area and the Sinai peninsula. The UN again prevented an imminent and bigger Middle East conflict in 1967.
But UN efforts have been likewise marked by monumental failures. They failed to prevent the Vietnam War. in which the United States sided with South Vietnam and Communist China and the USSR with North Vietnam. The UN also failed to halt the advance of Russian tanks during the Hungarian Revolt in 1956. The only thing the UN could do then was to pass a resolution denouncing Russia.
During the Cuban Crisis in 1962, it was not the UN but US President John F. Kennedy who forced an arrogant Nikita Khrushchev to back down. And now, bereft of a UN imprimatur, the United States has invaded Iraq.
The above makes one conclusion inescapable: the UN is good only for petty wars; it is downright inutile when the world's superpowers are involved. Whether, like the League of Nations, the UN must bow out as a world peace maker, is the greatest dilemma that now haunts mankind."
As things now are, nobody knows how the Sabah standoff would end. Even as, pursuant to the UN's desire, in fact, already a mandate, for a tripartite peaceful dialogue between Malaysia, the Philippines and the Sultanate of Sultan to begin, the Malaysian forces remain arrogant and defiant as they continue to militarily pursue the Sultan's men into the Sabah hinterlands. Nothing has yet been heard from the UN since it announced its order for a ceasefire which, in turn, Malaysia had simply sneezed at. The curious question now aches for an equally curious answer: Has the UN really outlived its usefulness.as a peace keeper or is it rather simply because Philippine President Benigno Aquino has been apparently siding with the Malaysians in this issue?
"THE FAILURE of the United Nations to prevent the US-Iraq war was lamentable. But history has just repeated itself. The League of Nations, the UN's predecessor, also had the same failure.
Formed after the end of World War I -- curiously with the United States never becoming a member even if President Woodrow Wilson was its chief founder -- the League in its early years settled a number of disputes and prevented several wars. But these were between small countries. It, however, failed to control the Axis and Allied Powers. After Japan invaded Manchuria in 1933, the league condemned the aggression but did not impose sanctions; Japan withdrew in 1933. Also withdrawing in 1933, Germany began to rearm, while Italy invaded and annexed Ethiopia in 1935. The League imposed economic sanctions but allowed Italy to get the supplies it needed most, until Italy withdrew in 1937. The league expelled Russia for its 1939 aggression against Finland, but then World War II had already begun.
There have been notable UN achievements, the first being the peaceful lifting of the Berlin Blockade in 1945. In 1947, the UN prevented a possible Balkan war. In 1949, it stopped the fighting between India and Pakistan over Kashmir, and also settled the Indonesian-Dutch War. The Korean War in 1950-53 marked the first time an international organization had recommended action that halted a military aggressor. In the Middle East, hostilities were stopped through UN efforts. The first effort ended the dispute between Israel and the Arab states in 1948. The second, following Egypt's seizure of the Suez Canal in 1956 and the eruption of the Egypt-Israel war, culminated in a ceasefire and the withdrawal of all troops from the Canal area and the Sinai peninsula. The UN again prevented an imminent and bigger Middle East conflict in 1967.
But UN efforts have been likewise marked by monumental failures. They failed to prevent the Vietnam War. in which the United States sided with South Vietnam and Communist China and the USSR with North Vietnam. The UN also failed to halt the advance of Russian tanks during the Hungarian Revolt in 1956. The only thing the UN could do then was to pass a resolution denouncing Russia.
During the Cuban Crisis in 1962, it was not the UN but US President John F. Kennedy who forced an arrogant Nikita Khrushchev to back down. And now, bereft of a UN imprimatur, the United States has invaded Iraq.
The above makes one conclusion inescapable: the UN is good only for petty wars; it is downright inutile when the world's superpowers are involved. Whether, like the League of Nations, the UN must bow out as a world peace maker, is the greatest dilemma that now haunts mankind."
As things now are, nobody knows how the Sabah standoff would end. Even as, pursuant to the UN's desire, in fact, already a mandate, for a tripartite peaceful dialogue between Malaysia, the Philippines and the Sultanate of Sultan to begin, the Malaysian forces remain arrogant and defiant as they continue to militarily pursue the Sultan's men into the Sabah hinterlands. Nothing has yet been heard from the UN since it announced its order for a ceasefire which, in turn, Malaysia had simply sneezed at. The curious question now aches for an equally curious answer: Has the UN really outlived its usefulness.as a peace keeper or is it rather simply because Philippine President Benigno Aquino has been apparently siding with the Malaysians in this issue?
Miyerkules, Pebrero 27, 2013
A POTENTIALLY WORSE HEADACHE THAN SCARBOROUGH SHOAL
Hindi available ang buod na ito.
Mag-click dito para tingnan ang post.
Mag-subscribe sa:
Mga Post (Atom)