Saturday, July 21, 2012

Bury the Past, Bury the Sex "-Scandal" Videos

PANAWAGAN ho sa lahat ng may account sa mga social networking sites katulad ng Facebook, lalo na sa mga kababaihan na makiisa at tumulong tayo para makabangon muli ang mga biktima ng Sex Scandal Videos. Lalagyan n'yo lamang ho ng "-Scandal" ang inyong mga apelido sa  (display name ng) mga accounts ninyo at malaking tulong na. Dahil ho dadami ang mga pahina sa Web ng mga babae na may 'Scandal' na nakakabit ay matatabunan ang mga totoo (at hindi kaaya-ayang) mga sex scandal videos at ang mangyayari ay mahihirapan nang makita ito ng mga sa internet.

Kailangan din hong kumilos ang publiko dahil marami talaga yata ang mga kriminal de bboy sa kabastusan na ikakalat ang mga pribadong bagay at ipapahamak ng labis ang kapwa kumita o makinabang lamang. Kung hindi bboy.ramong halimaw na sindikato ay mga indibidwal na walang konsensya. May ilang babae rin ho sigurong may kinalaman sa kasuka-sukang pagpapakalat ng ilang sex videos subalit karamihan yata ay mga chauvinist na lalaki. Gawa pa nga ng sindikato at least dati ay paibigin ang mga biktimang babae, kukunan ang pagtatalik at iiskandaluhin, gagawa ng video na ibebenta.

Tama ho ba naman ipakita ang pagka-kama at mga pribadong bahagi ng katawan lalo na ng babae ng walang pahintulot? Akala mo naman ang mga na mga lalaking iyan ay hindi inilabas ang kalahati ng pinagmulan ng kanilang katawan mula sa ari ng tatay nila, ipinasok sa ari ng nanay nila at iniluwal ng buo sa huli rin. Kung ang mga magulang ba nila, lalo na ang nanay nila, ang iniskandalo noong sila pala ang ginagawa ay ayos kaya sa kanila yon????  :)

Para sa mga taga-Facebook, mapalitan ho ang inyong account names, click lamang ho kayo dito:

Maraming, maraming salamat ho sa mga susuporta sa proyektong ito ng samahang GABRIELA para sa kababaihan at lahat ng mga biktima ng sex scandal videos. :)



Original Photo Credits:



  Licencia de Creative Commons Reposts are licensed to the respective authors. Otherwise, posts by Jesusa Bernardo are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Philippines.

Monday, July 16, 2012

Pagpupugay kay MAITA GOMEZ: Aktibista para sa Kalayaan ng Kababaihan at ng Taumbayan

by Prof. Jose Maria Sison
Founding Chairman
Communist Party of the Philippines

JULIE and I wish to express our most heartfelt condolences to the children and other relatives of Maita Gomez; and to all her comrades and friends. All of us are deeply saddened by her unexpected demise.

Until her cardiac arrest, we had thought that she had many more years to serve the people in their struggle for national liberation and democracy and the women in their struggle for gender equality and for their full participation in all social endeavors. Nevertheless, her life is full of significant and outstanding achievements in fulfilling her revolutionary commitment and in rendering service to the people and the women’s liberation movement.

Since the resurgence of the anti-imperialist and anti-feudal movement in the Philippines in the 1960s, the patriotic and progressive forces have always taken a special interest in the development of the women’s movement and in the increased participation of women in the struggle for national liberation and democracy.

We are enlightened by the writings and deeds of revolutionary women leaders like Clara Zetkin and Aleksandra Kollontai and inspired by the heroic examples of Gabriela Silang, Melchora Aquino and other revolutionary Filipino women leaders. We are guided by Mao’s teaching that the women hold up half of the sky. The activists of the Student Cultural Association of the University of the Philippines, the Women’s Bureau of Kabataang Makabayan and the women in the labor unions, peasant associations and professional circles carried forward the progressive role of women.

As cadres of the national democratic movement, we were elated by the emergence of Malayang Kilusan ng Bagong Kababaihan (Makibaka) from the Women’s Bureau and women members of Kabataang Makabayan and the dramatic ways by which Makibaka demonstrated the necessity and importance of the role of women in the struggle to achieve the radical transformation of society in all major respects.

Makibaka and its leading figure Lorena Barros succeeded in drawing to the progressive movement women who were nationally prominent. They included beauty queens who won in prestigious pageants and were known to be exceptionally intelligent. Among them was Maita Gomez, Miss Philippines of 1967. They used their celebrity status to advantage in denouncing not only the reactionary character of beauty contests but also the entire ruling system. They spoke on major issues affecting women and the entire people.

Maita was inspired and energized by the First Quarter Storm of 1970. She wanted to be a revolutionary. And she availed of the opportunities in sight for learning about the revolution. Thus, she was drawn towards Makibaka. But she had more comprehensive and intensive studies on Marxism-Leninism and Philippine society and revolution in the Humanist League of the Philippines which was a small and laid-back group in the University of the Philippines, under the influence of the Cultural Bureau of the Communist Party of the Philippines.

After the First Quarter Storm of 1970, in which women youth activists mobilized themselves in large numbers, Lorena Barros came to our mountain camp in Barrio Dipogo in Isabela to report on developments in the women’s movement and to discuss plans for Makibaka. She was proud of how effective were Maita and other beauties of national renown in propagating the patriotic and progressive stand on national issues. Their celebrity status drew attention to the issues.

When martial law was proclaimed by the Marcos regime in order to impose a fascist dictatorship on the people, Maita decided to go underground in Manila. She was brought eventually to a guerrilla zone in Southern Tagalog. She was brought back to Manila when her presence in the guerrilla zone drew a lot of attention and posed security problems. Thus, it was decided that she would do underground staff work in Baguio City.

The house she was in was raided by the enemy and she was arrested. Through the National Liaison Committee of the Party, I came to know her plan to escape from Camp Olivas and I monitored how she actually escaped, with the help of a military officer who brought her out of the camp with him. Then some comrades in charge of accommodating Maita became concerned about the behavior of the officer. A further plan was undertaken to take her away. I learned later that when the officer refused to let her go she had to disable him so that she could escape.

I can relate only what I came to know about her from organs of the Party. I leave to others to narrate in more detail how she stayed in the urban underground for a while after her escape and then how she was redeployed together with her beloved Joey Decena to a guerrilla zone in Central Luzon where they bore arms, marched and lived as guerrilla fighters and where he died as a martyr in a battle. When she fell sick, she was brought to Manila for treatment and recovery. Sometime afterwards, she was arrested and became a political prisoner for sometime.

While I was in prison, I learned that Maita was released. She subsequently joined the legal movement against the Marcos fascist dictatorship in the 1980s. She co-founded the Gabriela in 1984. This emerged the largest patriotic and progressive alliance of women’s organizations. She became one of the principal leaders of the Women for the Ouster of Marcos and Boycott (WOMB) in 1985. She co-founded in 1986 the first political party of women in Philippine history, the Kababaihan para sa Inangbayan (KAIBA).

Julie met Maita in 1983 and they became friends as they worked together in the movement to oust the Marcos fascist dictatorship. The three of us met at her Ermita apartment after I was released from military detention in 1986. We became barkada, attending many public meetings and social gatherings together. On many occasions, we exchanged ideas about women and the revolutionary movement. She was then engaged in women’s studies as an activist, scholar and teacher at St. Scholastica. We had become very close comrades and friends by the time Julie and I left for abroad for our global university lecture tour at the end of August in 1986.

From abroad, I learned that she had serious differences with Popoy Lagman with regard to the 1986 and 1987 elections. She drew away from his organizational sway. But she stayed committed to the principles of the revolutionary movement. I sent word to her to stay firm in order to encourage her. She welcomed the Second Great Rectification Movement and became more active in the national democratic movement. I leave to others to narrate how she spoke and fought in the service of the people from the 1990s to the time of her death.

I met Maita for the last time in May 2009 in Amsterdam. She was winding up her work with the IBON Foundation as an economic research consultant. And she was happy that in the previous month she was elected co-chairperson of the Makabayan Coalition and that Gabriela which she had co-founded celebrated its 25th anniversary and all its glorious achievements. Our conversation was wide ranging, covering so many serious ones and funny ones. It lasted from about 8 pm to 4 am. She was optimistic about how the patriotic and progressive forces would advance further in the legal democratic movement and in the anticipated elections of 2010.

We are all proud of our beloved Comrade Maita Gomez as an outstanding freedom fighter. She has bequeathed to us and future generations a rich legacy of writings and activism in the service of women and the entire people. We shall always love and remember her because of her hard work, intelligence, sacrifices and all her positive contributions to the national democratic movement.###

(May pahintulot ng muling paglimbag mula kay Ka Joma Sison)



Sison, Jose Maria.  FIGHTER FOR THE LIBERATION OF WOMEN AND THE PEOPLE: A Tribute to Maita  Gomez. 13 July 2012.

Original Photo credits: 

c/o Prof. Joma Sison's Facebook account (Mon Ramirez, Joms Salvador-Scandal, & Amihan-Euza)


 Licencia de Creative Commons Reposts are licensed to the respective authors. Otherwise, posts by Jesusa Bernardo are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Philippines.

Wednesday, July 4, 2012

STOP Imperialist War against Syria

by Prof. Jose Maria Sison
International League of Peoples’ Struggle

WE, the International League of Peoples’ Struggle, condermn in the strongest terms the duplicitous scheme of the US and NATO in instigating, funding and arming the so-called Syrian National Council and Free Syrian Army to seek the violent overthrow of the Assad government in Syria and at the same time pushing a “peace plan” and then a “transitional government” under the auspices of the UN in order to politically outmaneuver the Assad government and the anti-imperialist and democratic forces. source (US official): “intervention will happen.
It is not a question of ‘if’ but ‘when’.”
Rebels work side by side with NATO undercover troops

The US and NATO are hell-bent on effecting a regime change by escalating the war efforts of the mercenary “rebel forces” and exerting various economic and political pressures with the use of the UN and puppet regimes in the region in preparing for an all-out imperialist war of aggression as in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. The Western corporate media are part and parcel of the imperialist war machine in moulding international public opinion to justify this criminal conspiracy.

The imperialist powers headed by the US detest the Assad government for asserting national sovereignty and independence, particularly against the US-Zionist combine, and want to replace said government with a puppet regime closely aligned with the imperialists’ hegemonic policy in the region. Burhan Ghallioun, a leading member of the imperialist funded Syrian National Council has promised to open up Syria to the West, end Syria’s strategic alliance with Iran which includes support for the Lebanese and Palestinian resistance to Israel and bring Syria closer to the arch-reactionary Arab puppet regimes.

Turkey is taking the lead as the US proxy in the war against the Assad government. It is providing the mercenary Free Syrian Army with rear bases close to the Syrian border where French and British special forces are providing training to “rebel” fighters. Weapons seized from the arsenals of the late Muammar Gaddafi are being brought in to the military bases in Turkey by unmarked NATO planes. The so-called Free Syrian Army is funded by governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. These two countries are playing the same shameful role they played in the criminal imperialist operation against the Gaddafi government.

Thousands in Pro-Assad Rally
US, France arm Syrian rebels with anti-aircraft missiles
The Turkish foreign minister, Ahmet Davitoglu, has said in public that Turkey is ready to attack Syria as soon as there is agreement among the Western governments to do so. The naked aggression would be justified by the so-called “responsibility to protect” doctrine that has now become the standard pretext of the imperialists in trampling on the national sovereignty of countries.

The Western corporate media has stepped up its campaign of spreading lies about so-called atrocities by the Assad government. The famous “Homs massacre” attributed by Western governments and echoed by the Western media to the Syrian Army has turned out to be the handiwork of the armed “rebels”. A rebel commander Abu Rami has admitted to Spiegel Online that his death squads had executed more than 200 people in the city of Homs.

Just before Kofi Annan made his scheduled visit to Syria, news spread of a massacre of 108 people in the city of Houla on May 25 that included women and children. Western governments were quick to condemn the Assad government and expelled Syrian diplomats from their countries. The UN Security Council without any investigation similarly denounced the Syrian government. It later turned out that 700 armed fighters of the mercenary Free Syrian Army had carried out the massacre of families suspected of being loyal to Assad.

UN Security Council condemned Assad on false Houla Massacre info
Annan in a public speech has called the Houla massacre the “tipping point.” The US and NATO have used the massacre in Houla to work more blatantly than ever before for the overthrow of Assad. They are no longer hiding the fact that the CIA is now active in southern Turkey delivering weapons and communications equipment to the mercenary Free Syrian Army.

Turkey has started to make provocations that could produce the pretexts for outright aggression. The shooting down by Syrian air defenses of a Turkish military jet that the Turkish government subsequently admitted to have “accidentally strayed” into Syrian airspace is now being used by the US and NATO in their sabre-rattling and war preparations.

The International League of Peoples’ Struggle (ILPS) resolutely supports the broad masses of the people and the anti-imperialist and democratic forces of Syria in their struggle against the US and NATO for their ongoing intervention in Syria and their preparations for a naked war of aggression against the people and government of Syria.

We call on all member organizations of ILPS, all progressive forces and all people of goodwill to mobilize and organize protest actions against the criminal actions of the imperialists that have already caused so much destruction and suffering in Syria and are tearing that country apart.
US and NATO, Hands off Syria!
Stop imperialist war!
Down with imperialism and all forms of reaction!
Assert national independence and sovereignty!
Long live the international solidarity of peoples!

(May pahintulot ng muling paglilimbag mula kay Ka Joma Sison)



Sison, Joma. STOP Imperialist War against Syria. 1 July 2012. Jose Maria Sison website.

Photo Credits:

 Licencia de Creative Commons Reposts are licensed to the respective authors. Otherwise, posts by Jesusa Bernardo are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Philippines.

Sunday, June 24, 2012

History of the Philippines based on Flag Colors

Said to be the first official flag of the underground-society-turned-revolutionary government Katipunan (KKK), led by Supreme President Andres Bonifacio y de Castro. The three letter Ks in white centered on a red cloth stood for Kataastasang Kagalanggalangang Katipunan ng Manga Anak nang Bayan (loosely translates into "Most High & Most Sacred Society of the Children of the Land").

An early version of the flag of the Katipunan  It has the three (3) white letter Ks arranged in an equilateral triangle on a red cloth. It should be noted that leaders of the KKK had their differing war standards.

Flown from August 1896 until possibly the Fil-Am War
Arguably the first official flag of the Philippines-in-revolution. This flag was Bonifacio's war standard that was raised during the Cry of Pugadlawin when revolutionaries tore their cedulas (residence certificates), signalling the call to sever colonial ties with Spain. The Katipunan transformed into a revolutionary government on August 24, 1896 with Bonifacio as President and forming a military arm organized to forcibly attain independence from Spain through the Himagsikan. The Katipunan flag was unfurled two days later in Balintawak, shortly before the launching of the general uprising.

Supposedly the first official revision of the Katipunan flag when military leaders at the 1897 Naic Assembly adopted a design of mythological sun having eight rays but retaining the white-and-red colors.

Flown from 1898 to about 1907; possibly 1919 to about 1936
Design of the flag adopted by Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo (although the exact shade of blue is contested). The blue, red, yellow and white flag has an equilateral triangle on the left that encases the Sun and three stars. First raised during the June 12, 1898 proclamation of Philippine Independence. Note the mythological sun of the Naic Assembly flag is retained.

Flown from about 1904-1907
Flag of the Republika ng Katagalugan, a government established and led by Gen. Macario Sakay during the protracted Philippine-American War (1899-1914), with areas of influence covering Southern Luzon. The Republika ng Katagalugan was largely based on the original Katipunan, with Sakay being a Katipunero who worked under Bonifacio, and as such, reflected in the design of this flag that incorporated the letter K and the simple sun design of Bonifacio's war standard, also in red and white colors. 


American Colonial Era

Flown from 1899 (Philippine-American War) -  about 1946
  • The flag of the United States was taught to be the flag of the Filipinos during the American colonial rule. Captured officers of the Philippine Republic and other freedom fighters were made to swear by it. In class, Filipino children were taught the the Bald Eagle flag was their flag. After the imperialist U.S. government tricked Sakay into surrendering and had him executed, it passed the Flag Law of 1907, Act No. 1696, outlawed the display or unfurling of Filipino flags, including that of the Malolos (Philippine) Republic and flags, banners, emblems, and symbols of the KKK. When the flag law was lifted in 1919, the U.S. (Star Spangled) banner was flown side by side with the Philippine flag until 1946. 

Flown from about 1936* - Present
This is largely the present design of the flag as decreed by Manuel L. Quezon, President of the American-sponsored Commonwealth government, with the issuance of Executive Order No. 23 in 1936. Note that the mythological sun was replaced with a "solid golden sunburst without any markings." This flag was first used by the Philippines as a sovereign nation when the U.S. "granted" independence on July 4, 1946. 

According to section 4 of Republic Act No. 8491 issued in 1998,  The flag of the Philippines shall be blue, white and red with an eight-rayed golden-yellow sun and three five-pointed stars, as consecrated and honored by the people. Earlier in 1997, the blue in the national flag was changed from navy blue to royal blue, according to Flag Bulletin No. 180. Except for the exact shade of blue, the present flag has retained all specifications found in the 1936 flag decree. 

*The Philippine Flag was flown side by side with the American flag from 1936 to 1946 during the U.S.-sponsored Commonwealth government



 Licencia de Creative Commons Reposts are licensed to the respective authors. Otherwise, posts by Jesusa Bernardo are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Philippines.

Monday, June 18, 2012

Rizal at Bonifacio: Ang Pagwawangis at Paglilihis

ni Gurong  Daniel Mendoza Anciano

HINDI SAPAT para sa isa ang espasyo ng pedestal na maaring pagluklukan para sa isang natatanging pambansang bayani na ngayon ay okupado ni Jose Rizal. Sa kabila nito, ang kaangkupan ni Rizal sa pangingibabaw sa pantheon ng kabayanihan ay matagal ng panahon na binabatikos ng mga taong may higit na pagpapahalaga sa bayaning si Andres Bonifacio. Ang tunggalian ng mga mga maka-Rizal at maka Bonifacio ay hindi lamang nakapaloob sa kahalagahan ng nagawa nila para sa ating bayan kundi higit sa lahat ay ang kaangkupan ng dinadalang pilosopiya at reseta ng bawat isa bilang lunas na aksiyon sa mga sakit ng ating lipunan. Sa anumang pagsusuri ng buhay ng dalawang bayani ay malimit na ipakita ang kanilang pagkakaiba at paglalayo, ngunit sa isang malalimang pagsusuri ng kanilang buhay ay makikita ang napakaraming pagwawangis na kinulayan ng matingkad na paglilihis.
Kapwa sila isinilang sa unang hati ng dekada 60 ng nakalipas na siglo, nabuhay at nakisalamuha sa panahon ng kolonyalismo ng Espanya. Nagsagawa sila ng epektibong aksiyon upang ituwid ang tiwaling lipunang kanilang kinamulatan at sa dakong huli ang kanilang nagawa, ang naghatid sa dayuhang pamahalaan sa dapithapon ng kolonyalismo. Isinilang man sila sa iisang panahon ngunit pinag-ibayo naman sila ng pagkakataon. Isinilang si Rizal sa isang bahay na bato sa lalawigan, nagmula sa pangkat ng gitnang uri na noon ay nagsisimulang maging asertibo sa kanilang paghiling ng kapantayan na makilahok sa bumibilis na gulong ng kalakalan. Lumaki si Rizal sa pagkalinga ng kaniyang mga magulang (na naunahan pa niya sa kamatayan) at mga nakakatandang kapatid, partikular na dito si Paciano, na nagsilbing anino sa likuran ng bawat mapagpasiyang hakbang ni Rizal. Taliwas si Bonifacio, isinilang siya sa kalunsuran sa isang tipikal na bahay kubo sa maralitang distrito ng Tondo, nagmula sa mababang pangkat ng mga tao sa lipunan na tuwirang nakadarama ng diin ng pang-aapi, inhustisya, at pagsasamantala. Agad na inulila ng mga magulang at maagang naatangan ng pananagutan na mag-aruga at gumabay sa kaniyang mga nakakabatang kapatid sa pagtahak sa maunos na landas ng buhay.
Kapwa makabuluhan ang kanilang mga nagawa at kaisipan na naiambag sa ating lipunan at kasaysayan. Sa kabila ng kapwa nilang maikling buhay, muli't muling hinahalungkat ng mga iskolar ang kahalagahan at kabuluhan ng dalawa para sa mga henerasyong dumadaan. Sa kabilang kapwa makabuluhan buhay, ang batis ng pambiograpiya ay pinagwangki naman sila. Ang buhay ni Rizal ay halos detalyado sa lahat ng aspekto na ipinapakita ng kaniyang daan-daang dokumento at sangkaterbang litrato na ngayon ay nakasinop sa mga aklatan at arkibo. Ang pagbabatayan sa buhay ni Bonifacio ay ang ilang pira-pirasong dokumento na nagsasaad ng kaniyang mga huling taon, mga tagpi-tagping kuwento ng kaniyang mga naging kasamahan at nag-iisang larawan na tangi lamang kababakasan ng mukha ng taong nanguna sa pinakamapangahas at pinakamapagpasiyang pagkilos ng sambayan sa ating kasaysayan.
Kapwa sila uhaw sa karunungan at pala-aral sa kalagayan ng lipunan. May mga pagkakataon na nagkatulad pa sila ng mga aklat na binasa at nakapukaw ng kanilang kamalayang panlipunan. Ang magkatulad na pagkauhaw sa kaalaman ay hindi naman pinapagparayaan ng magkatulad na kapalaran, labis silang pinag-agwat sa hagdanan ng pormal na kaalaman. Si Rizal ay nagtapos ng lisensiyado sa dalawang kurso: Una ay sa Medisina; at pangalawa sa Piliospiya at Letra sa isang unibersidad ng Espanya. Si Bonifacio sa kabilang dako ay bahagyang natapos ang primarya at ang karagdagang kaalaman ay natamo niya sa dalawang larangan: Una ay sa kalsadang kaniyang ginagalawan; at ang ikalawa sa trabahong kaniyang pinasukan. Sa kabila ng magkaibayong antas ng edukasyon ng dalawa, sa panahong ang bayan ay naghanap ng magiging karibal ni Rizal sa luklukan ng pambansang kabayanihan hindi ang kaniyang mga kapantay sa kaalamang pormal ang itinapat sa kaniya kundi si Bonifacio na ang pormal na edukasyon ay halos nakasubsob sa ilalim ng pormal na paaralan.
Kapwa sila naging aktibong alagad ng Kilusang Propaganda sa panahon na malayo pa sa hinagap ang posibilidad ng isang himagsikan. Sa iisang kilusan na kinasasapian ngunit magka-agwat sila sa aspekto ng kalikasan ng pagkilos at heograpiya ng ginagalawan. Aktibo at nasa rurok ng kasikatan si Rizal sa Kilusang Propaganda sa pamamagitan ng kaniyang pagsulat ng dalawang nobelang panlipunan at mga artikulo sa La Solidaridad na noon ay nakabase sa Europa. Ang partisipasyon ni Bonifacio sa propaganda ay tahimik, hindi pansin, at nakapaloob lamang sa Maynila at limitado lamang sa pamumudmod ng mga babasahin ng propaganda sa kaniyang mga kakilala at ilang mga mag-aaral ng Unibersidad ng Santo Tomas.
Kapwa sila alagad ng literaturang nagbabandila ng protesta, naghahasik ng pagkamuhi sa kalagayang pinananatili ng kolonyal na sistema at nananawagan sa isang pagbabagong panlipunan. Sa kabila nito ay makikita ang paglalaot ng kanilang mga paraan, lawak, istilo, wika, at layunin. Si Rizal sa malaking bahagi ng kaniyang panulat ay nasa anyo ng nobela at mga artikulong may maka-iskolar na pagtrato, ginamit ang wikang Espanyol, at makikitahan ng kapinuhang panliteratura. Hinikayat ni Rizal ang kaniyang mga mambabasa na itaboy ang dilim ng panatismo at pamahiin sa pamamagitan ng liwanag ng karunungan at abutin ang kapantayang kultural at intelekwal sa ating mga mananakop upang maging isang mabisang sandata sa isang ebolusyong panlipunan. Sentro ng pagbatikos ni Rizal ang frailocracia na noon ay nagsisilbing moog ng pyudal na kaisipan at humahadlang sa pagdaloy ng liberalismo at reporma sa kolonyal na gobyerno. Si Rizal bilang isang repormista ay nakikita pa ang posibilidad na masulsihan pa ang ang naagans na retaso ng kolonyalismo. Ganap ang kataliwasan ni Bonifacio, ginamit niya ang wikang Tagalog sa kaniyang maiikling artikulo na sinasabi ng ilan na "magaspang" at "hubad sa bulaklak ng retorika." Sa kabila ng "kababawan" at "hindi repinado" ng kaniyang sulatin ay tuwiran niyang hinikayat ang sambayanang Pilipino sa pag-aaring ganap ng isang higit na agresibong aksiyon upang patirin ang kadena ng kolonyalismo na mariing sumasakal sa buhay at kaisipan ng kaniyang mga kababayan. Kay Bonifacio ay walang pagkakaiba ang frailocracia at ang kolonyal na burukrasya, hindi ang pagsusulsi ng agnas na retaso ng kolonyalismo ang dapat na maging katugunan kung hindi ang paghahangad ng bagong retasong panlipunan na hahabiin ng mga kamay ng mga taong lalahok sa himagsikan.
Kapwa laman ng isipan ng dalawa ang armadong opsiyon sa pagbabagong mukha ng lipunan at pinaglaro nila ito sa kanilang mga kaisipan. Ang magkaparehong pagmumuni ng armadong pakikibaka sa isipan ay inilapat nila sa magkaibang kinalalagyan. Ang armadong opsiyon ni Rizal ay makikitang dinala ng kaniyang mga tauhang sina Elias at Simoun, pinaglaruan niya ang katumpakan at kahinaan ng armas bilang kasangkapan sa pagbabagong anyo ng lipunan, ngunit natakot si Rizal na ang himagsikan sa kaniyang isipan ay malipat at maganap sa mismong lipunan, kaya ito ay kaniyang kinulong at kinitil pa sa pahina ng panitikan. Para kay Bonifacio, bigo ang ebolusyonaryong bisyon na ibinabandila ng mga repormista at ang pagsasakatotohanan sa lipunan ng isang rebolusyon ang tanging landas na tatahakin ng sambayan sa pagtatamo ng kanilang inaadhiang kasarinlan.
Kapwa naimpluwensiyahan sila ng martiyo ng GOMBURZA noong 1872 at kinikilala nila ang binhi ng tatlong paring martir sa pagsibol ng kolektibong nasyonalismo ng sambayang Pilipino, ngunit ang paraan ng paghanga ay isinagawa sa magkaibang paraan. Ang Noli Me Tangere ay isang nobelang pang-inbestiga kung papaanong ang repormista ay isinangkot sa krimen na ang mga prayle ang tunay na nasa likuran. Dinakila ni Rizal ang GOMBURZA sa paghahandog nito ng kaniyang El Filibusterismo. Nag-inbestiga rin si Bonifacio sa tunay na pangyayari sa kaso ng GOMBURZA noong kaniyang direktang litisin at ipabitay ang mga nabihag na prayle sa Cavite. Dinakila rin ni Bonifacio ang GOMBURZA sa pamamagitan ng paggamit na nasabing panitik bilang senyales ng isa sa mga pangkat ng Katipunan.
Kapwa sila pulitiko na humarap sa magkahiwalay na halalan na isinagawa ng kanilang mga kababayan na nagbunga ng kanilang paghiwalay sa mga dating kasamahan. Si Rizal ay natalo sa hinihinging mayorya sa halalang ginanap ng mga repormistang paisano sa pagpili ng kanilang magiging pinuno sa Madrid, ito ang simula ng alitang Rizal at Marcelo del Pilar. Si Bonifacio ay natalo sa ginanap na unang halalang pampangaluhun na ginanap sa Tejeros na nagbunga ng kaniyang paghiwalay kay Emilio Aguinaldo at sa huli ay ang pagpaslang sa kaniya ng mga dating kasamahan.
Kapwa mahalaga sa dalawa ang unang linggo ng Hulyo 1892. Noong Hulyo 3, 1892 (Linggo) nagtagpo sa una at huling pagkakataon sina Rizal at Bonifacio ng itatag ng huli ang La Liga Filipina. Simbolikal ang pagtatagpo na ito nagsilbing parang isang transisyon ng ng dalawang historikal na nilalang sa sentro ng politikang kontra kolonyal. Ang pagtatag ni Rizal ng La Liga Filipina ay sinundan ng pagpapatapon sa kaniya sa Dapitan at panimula ng kaniyang pagkakahimbing pulitikal. Noong Hulyo 7, 1892, itinatag ni Bonifacio ang Katipunan na hudyat ng kaniyang pangingibabaw sa larangan ng kontra kolonyal na pakikibaka.
Kapwa sila pinuno ng Kilusang Katipunan, pamumuno na may magkaibang katayuan at kalikasan. Si Bonifacio, ang supremo ang aktibong nagpakilos, nagpalaganap, nagpalakas, at naghanda ng kilusan para sa ilulunsad na himagsikan. Samanatalang si Rizal na noon ay walang kamalay-malay sa mga kaganapan sa Kamaynilaan, ang inilagay na pangulong pandangal ng samahan.
Kapwa sila biktima ng puwersang panlipunan na kanilang pinasimulan sa pamamagitan ng pagbabayad ng kanilang mga buhay. Ang repormistang si Rizal na ang mapanuring panulat ay nakagising sa kaniyang mga kababayan sa pangangailangan ng pagbabago sa pamamagitan ng mapayapang pamamaraan ay pinaratangan na nasa likod ng himagsikan. Si Bonifacio naman na nagsindi ng mitsa ng himagsikan ay pinagbintangan ng kaniyang mga kasamahan ng "pagtataksil" laban sa rebolusyon na kaniyang pinamunuan at pinasimulan.
Kapwa sila mga biktima ng mga hukumang hubad sa kredibilidad. Ngunit ang pinakamalaking kablintunaan ay si Rizal na nanalig hanggang sa huling sandali ng kaniyang buhay sa posibilidad ng reporma mula sa mga dayuhang kapangayrihan ay nilitis ng bengatibong korte militar ng Espanya. Samantalang si Bonifacio na naglagak ng pagtitiwala sa kakakayahan ng mga kaniyang mga kababayan sa pagpapalaya ng bayan ay nilitis ng makiling na korte militar ng gobyernong rebolusyonaryo ng mga Pilipino.
Kapwa sila nagsalo sa iisang tulang pahimakas. Isinulat ni ni Rizal sa Kuta ng Santiago ang kaniyang Mi Ultimo Adios sa bisperas ng bitayan. Pagkatapos ng martiryo ni Rizal, ang kaniyanga asawa na si Josephine ay nagtungo sa Cavite, dito ay hiniram ni Bonifacio ang orihinal na tula ni Rizal at isinalin ito sa wikang Tagalog. Kung mayroon mang maangkin si Bonifacio na kaganapan para sa kaniya sa nasabing tula ay ang hanay na nagpapahiwatig ng ganito.
Kung ang libingan ko'y limot na ng lahat
at walang krus at batong mabakas
bayaang linangin ng taong masipag
lupa'y asarolin at ikalat

Kapwa sila biktima ng malagim na bitayan sa huling hati ng dekada 90 ng nakalipas na daantaon. Magkatulad na kamatayan sa magkabalintunang lugar na kinaganapan. Si Rizal na isinilang sa lalawigan ay hayagang binitay sa pampublikong lugar sa kalunsuran. Si Bonifacio na isinilang sa kalunsuran ay palihim na binitay sa paanan ng bundok sa lalawigan.

"The Martyrdom of Rizal" (1964) ni Carlos "Botong"  Francisco       -     "Ang Wakas ni Andres Bonifacio" (1963) ni Carlos Valino, Jr.
Kapwa sila biktima ng inhustisya sa panahon ng kanilang buhay at sa kasalukuyan, ang kanilang kamatayan ay ibinabalot pa rin sa misteryo ng kasaysayan. Magkaibang salarin na hindi matatawaran ang impluwensiya hanggang sa kasalukuayan. Ang salarin ni Rizal ay pinagtatakpan ng simbahan at ang salarin ni Bonifacio ay pinagtatakpan ng mga inapong maimpluwensiya pa rin sa pamahalaan.
Kapwa ginugunita ng bayan ang kanilang ala-ala sa pamamagitan ng pambansang tanging araw na magkaiba ang pinag-uukulan. Si Rizal sa araw ng kaniyang kamatayan, samantalang si Bonifacio sa araw naman ng kaniyang kamatayan. Mapansin din sana ang insidente ng pagkakataon, ang buwan ng Nobyembre (30) na kapanganakan ni Bonifacio ay sinusundan ng Disyembre (30) na buwan ng kamatayan ni Rizal. Ang buwan ng Mayo (10) na buwan ng kamatayan ni Bonifacio ay sinusundan ng buwan ng Hunyo (19) na kapanganakan ni Rizal.


Ang may-akda ay guro ng Kasaysayan ng Pilipinas sa Cavite State University, Indang, Cavite.
Inilithala sa kanyang orihinal na porma sa FILIPINO MAGASIN (FILMAG) noong 1997.

"Ang Wakas ni Andres Bonifacio" ni Carlos Valino Jr.
ay nanalo sa  1963 Andres Bonifacio Centennial Art Contest. Ang larawan ay kinopy ni Prop Michael Chua sa aklat na Tragedy of the Revolution (akda ni Adrian E. Cristobal) subali't ito ay masusulyapan ng buo ngayon sa Bulwagang Katipunan ng Manila City Hall.

"The Martyrdom of Rizal" ni Carlos "Botong" Francisco na nilikha noong 1964 ng naging National Artist for Painting1964 Republic of the Philippines Cultural Heritage awardee ay sinasabing nasa private collection ngayon.

 Licencia de Creative Commons Reposts are licensed to the respective authors. Otherwise, posts by Jesusa Bernardo are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Philippines.

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

PALAYAIN ang mga BILANGGONG POLITIKAL: Pagsaludo sa SELDA sa 27 Taong Pakikibaka

by Prof. Jose Maria Sison
Political Prisoner, 1977-86
Chairperson, International League of Peoples’ Struggle
11 June 2012

AS A former political prisoner and member of SELDA (Samahan ng Ex-Detainees Laban sa Detensyon at Aresto) and as Chairperson of the International League of Peoples’ Struggle (ILPS), I salute and congratulate the SELDA, its current officers and all members for their struggle for the democratic rights and freedom of all the political prisoners since the founding of SELDA on December 4, 1984.

I am proud to say that even while I was still a political prisoner I was consulted about the founding of SELDA. Since then, SELDA has become the most outstanding organization in the Philippines in defending the rights of political prisoners, working for their release and mobilizing moral and material support for them and their families before and after said release.

Known all over the world is the great success of SELDA in pursuing the human rights litigation against the Marcos estate in the US court system and in documenting the victimization of close to 10,000 Filipinos who suffered extrajudicial killings, forced disappearance, torture and illegal detention during the Marcos fascist dictatorship.

Without the work of SELDA, the case against Marcos would not have succeeded. But certain elements have sought to deny the role of SELDA and make a scam for their political and material benefit, going to the extent of excluding 2000 documented victims (including prominent political prisoners and former officers of SELDA) and replacing them with fake claimants in order to spite SELDA.

Year in and year out, there is a bill in the Philippine reactionary congress intended to indemnify and rehabilitate political prisoners and victims of human rights violations under the Marcos fascist regime. But in various ways, such a bill has been sabotaged and fallen short of enactment. SELDA is thus challenged to find ways of effecting a just legislation for the benefit of the victims of human rights violations under the Marcos fascist regime that participated in litigation against Marcos in the US.

It is ironical that the reactionary government which has continued the Marcos policies of puppetry to imperialist powers, corruption, plunder and human rights violations and which has never done justice to the victims of human rights violations from the time of Marcos to the present is posing as the possible dispenser of justice and the possible provider of resources for indemnifying and rehabilitating the victims and their families.

In the course of the GRP-NDFP peace negotiations, I have warned several times that the failure to do justice to the victims of the Marcos regime compounds the injustice to them and their families and serves as strong cause for revolution. But from one reactionary regime to another, we have seen the ceaseless exploitation and oppression of the people and the infliction of the worst human rights violations on those activists who seek the national and social liberation of the people.

The reason for the existence and further development of SELDA is the continuance of human rights violations and the need to fight for the basic democratic rights and fundamental freedoms of the people. And it is fine that among the human rights organizations, SELDA is focused on defending the political prisoners and seeking their release and rehabilitation.

The SELDA is commendable for seeking the release of political prisoners in the time of every reactionary regime. It must be credited for the release of political prisoners, usually done in significant number at the early part of every reactionary regime. But today we are confronted by the vicious regime of Aquino who delayed the release of the Morong 43 despite the strong domestic and international public clamor and who now appears to relish the indefinite detention of hundreds of political prisoners (356 at the current count).

These political prisoners are being detained in violation of the International Bill of Rights, the International Humanitarian Law, the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law and the Hernandez political offense doctrine. On the charge sheets, they are accused of participating in the rebellion of the revolutionary forces of the people and yet they are detained and penalized for common crimes. Among the political prisoners are those protected by the GRP-NDFP Joint Agreement on Safety and Immunity Guarantees (JASIG). Yet they are not released, thus causing the paralysis of the GPH-NDFP peace negotiations.

It is of the highest importance that SELDA demand and work for the release of the political prisoners, including those very few protected by JASIG. It is a matter of justice and adherence to human rights that the political prisoners must be released immediately. It is also a matter of improving the conditions and atmosphere for negotiating a just peace. A regime that relishes the indefinite imprisonment of political prisoners is perverse and cannot be trusted.

The Aquino regime claims to be different from the Arroyo regime. But in fact the Aquino regime is not different. It is hell-bent on continuing the Arroyo policies of puppetry,, plunder and gross human rights violations. It is keeping the political prisoners of the Arroyo regime and it is adding its own. It is increasing the number of those unjustly arrested, imprisoned , tortured and murdered by its military and police forces under Oplan Bayanihan.

SELDA has the noble mission of defending the rights of the political prisoners and seeking their release. This mission must be fulfilled if we are to become a better and stronger nation. SELDA must activate and muster the support of all former political prisoners and their friends. The high positions of respect and influence of a considerable number of former political prisoners must be combined with mass mobilization in order to obtain the freedom of all the current political prisoners.

SELDA carries forward a just cause that enjoys abundant support in the country and abroad. We are gratified that whatever are the odds, the SELDA is doing the best it can in order to obtain justice and indemnification for political prisoners and other victims of human rights violations. We must stand in solidarity with the SELDA and support all its efforts in fulfilling its noble mission. ###

(May permiso upang kopyahin at pamahagi)



Sison, Joma. FREE THE POLITICAL PRISONERS: Salute to SELDA for more than 27 years of struggle. 11 Hunyo 2012.


 Licencia de Creative Commons Reposts are licensed to the respective authors. Otherwise, posts by Jesusa Bernardo are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Philippines.

Tuesday, June 5, 2012

Tungkol sa Paghatol kay Corona ng Dilaw na Kamada

Interview of Prof. Jose Maria Sison
Chief Political Consultant
Negotiating Panel
National Democratic Front of the Philippines

By Gerg Cahiles
Reporter of Solar News

Ka Joma, I would like to get your insights on Corona’s removal from the SC through impeachment.

Here are some questions:

1. What is your analysis on the removal of Corona from the SC? What do you think are the factors why the Aquino regime is very eager on this  matter?

Answer: The removal of Corona is a manifestation and offshoot of the conflict between the Aquino yellow gang in power and the Arroyo gang. It is more specifically about Noy Aquino punishing Corona for the Supreme Court decision on Hacienda Luisita. Most importantly, it is strategically about taking over the Supreme Court and dominating the  reactionary government.

2. What will be the next step of the Aquino administration, especially that they are already pushing to control all the branches of the government?

Answer: The Corona trial and conviction show that the Aquino regime now controls all three branches of the reactionary government. And the regime is going to tighten its control in several ways, especially through the forthcoming 2013 elections. Take note that Aquino controls not only his ruling Liberal Party but also the party and coalition UNA of his close buddy Binay and his uncle Peping Cojuangco. Aquino and Cojuangco now monopolize political power and the opportunities to accumulate far more wealth than ever before. There is no other significant reactionary force trying to oppose the regime.

3. Your reaction on: Aquino administration using all its machineries, including the media, to depose Corona and other enemies of their administration.

Answer: It was money and media manipulation that made Noynoy president and demolish his opponents. Once more he has used money, media and government machinery to demolish Corona and force him to make mistakes in his legal defense. What is most dangerous about the Aquino yellow gang is that it can use the military as well as money and the media to attack and suppress not only any intra-systemic opposition but also the patriotic and progressive forces.

4. Did the US intervene in Corona’s removal from office?

Answer: The US has special interest in keeping Aquino in power because he serves US interests. But I do not think that the US had to intervene in the removal of Corona. Noy Aquino and the yellow gang in the media and in government could very well do the job of destroying Corona.

5. How will the Aquino government choose the next Chief Justice of the Supreme Court?

Answer: The Judicial & Bar Council is supposed to recommend the eplacement of Corona. Any president controls this body and chooses from the list of recommendees it submits formally.

6. What else should we expect from the Aquino regime after Corona’s removal? Will they still do something to stop the distribution of Hacienda Luisita?

Answer. It is still possible for the Aquino regime to reverse or undercut the Supreme Court decision on Hacienda Luisita. The farm workers are vulnerable to the machinations of a cacique president. But the Aquinos and Cojuangcos do not have to blatantly cast away the previous Supreme Court decision. Anyway, they can make bigger money  elsewhere, such as in the infrastructure and energy projects, military purchases, mining, new plantations and so on.

7. What should be done by the people to stop Aquino from controlling all the government branches?

Answer: The patriotic and progressive forces should be vigilant and militant. They should expose and oppose by all possible means the Aquino regime’s puppetry to the US imperialism, corruption, plunder and human rights violations. They should arouse, organize and mobilize the masses. They should not be misled or confused by Aquino’s daily manipulation of the media and should not be intimidated by his use of  the military.

(May pahintulot ng pagpaskil mula kay Ka Joma Sison)



Cahiles, Greg. On the Conviction of Corona and Related Matters.  (Panayam kay Prop. Jose Maria Sison).

Photo credits:

 The Daily Tribune.

 Licencia de Creative Commons Reposts are licensed to the respective authors. Otherwise, posts by Jesusa Bernardo are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Philippines.

Thursday, May 10, 2012

Si Bonifacio bilang Pinunong Militar

ni Dok Zeus Salazar

Apat ang magkakaugnay na kaisipan ang nabuo ng taal na katalinuhan o henyong pulitiko-militar ng Supremo ng Katipunan, gamit ang, at umaasa sa, sariling lakas at karanasannglahi sa pakikibaga-alalaumbaga:
1) Hindi sa paghihingi, o pagmamakaawaya na gawaran, ng reporma makakamtan ang kaligtasan ng lahi kundi sa isang himagsikang magpapalit sa mismong rehimeng kolonyal, isang paghihimagsik na mabilisang magpapatalsik sa banyaga sa pamamagitan ng pagpugot ng mismo ulo ng kapanyarihan...

2) Ang pagpugot sa ulo ng rehimeng kolonyal (o paggapi sa Maynila upang mapasakamay ito ng Katagalugan) ay sa pamamagitan ng sambayanan-i.e., pagsasama-sama ng mga bayan...

3) Sakaling "malaginlin" (mabigo) ito, may mga nakahanda nang mga mapag-aatrasa ang mga naghihimagsik - ang mga "real," ang naging katawagan sa dating mga "ilihan"...

4) Maramihan, ang mga real/ilihan ang siyang magiging lunsaran ng mga atake sa mga sentrong militar ng Kastila sa mga bayan hanggang sa Maynila mismo, baitang na matatawag na "gerilya" nguni't sa loob ng isang mas malawakang adhikain/istratehiyang....


Si Bonifacio bilang Pinunong Militar - akda ni Dok Zeus Salazar


 Reposts are licensed to the respective authors. Otherwise, posts by Jesusa Bernardo are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Philippines.

Monday, April 23, 2012

Joma Sison on Philippine Sovereignty, Red China & the Bald Eagle

By Prof. Jose Maria Sison
Chairperson, International League of Peoples’ Struggle
April 20, 2012
 (Reply to Questions from Renato Reyes, BAYAN Secretary General)

Renato Reyes (RR): I hope that you can answer briefly the following questions re China, Philippines and the assertion of national sovereignty. We have an all-leaders meeting this Saturday and we are trying to get views on how to deal with the issue of China’s incursions on Philippine territory, the Aquino regime’s response and US intervention.

Photo from the University of Texas at Austin
Jose Maria Sison (JMS): First of all, as a matter of principle, the Filipino people must assert their national sovereignty and Philippine territorial integrity over the issue of Spratlys (Kalayaan) and other islands, reefs and shoals which are well within the 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ) defined by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). According to the Philippine reactionary government, it submitted on time to the UN the necessary scientific and technical grounds to define the Philippine 200-mile EEZ under UNCLOS.

The UNCLOS is the strongest legal basis for the definition of the territorial sea and EEZ of the Philippine archipelago.. Also, archaeological evidence shows that the islands, reefs and shoals at issue have been used by inhabitants of what is now the Philippines since prehistoric times. But the Philippine reactionary government muddles the issue and undermines its own position by making historical claims that date back only to a few decades ago when pseudo-admiral Cloma made formal claims to the Kalayaan group of islands.

Chinese historical claims since ancient times amount to an absurdity as this would be like Italy claiming as its sovereign possession all areas previously occupied by the Roman empire. The name China Sea was invented by European cartographers and should not lead anyone to think that the entire sea belongs to China. In the same vein, neither does the entire Indian Ocean belong to India.

RR 1: How do we view the incursions and aggressive behavior of China in territories claimed by the Philippines? Is this aggressiveness proof that China has imperialist ambitions and should be criticized as an imperialist power? What is the relationship between China’s revisionist regime and its apparent desire to flex its muscles in the region?

JMS: The Filipino people and progressive forces must oppose what may be deemed as incursions and what may appear as aggressive behavior of China with regard to the territories belonging to the Philippines. But so far China’s actions and actuations manifest assertiveness rather than outright military aggression. The Philippine reactionary government should desist from self-fulfilling its claim of China’s aggression by engaging in an anti-China scare campaign.

The Filipino people and progressive forces must consciously differentiate their position from that of the Aquino regime, its military subalterns and its Akbayan special agents who pretend to be super patriots against China but are in fact servile to the interests of US imperialism and are using the anti-China scare campaign to justify the escalation of US military intervention in the Philippines and US hegemony in the Asia-Pacific region.

At any rate, China must not violate Philippine national sovereignty and territorial integrity, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Code of Conduct it agreed to with the ASEAN. The apparently aggressive or assertive acts and words of China are in consonance with its own premise of national sovereignty and territorial integrity as well as with the bourgeois character of the Chinese state that may indicate an imperialist tendency or ambitions.

The Chinese state is blatantly a capitalist state. Only occasionally does it claim to be socialist so as to cover up its capitalist character as the revisionists in power systematically did in the past. Whatever is its character, the Chinese state must not infringe or threaten to infringe Philippine sovereignty and territorial integrity. When it does, it opens itself to criticism and opposition by political and diplomatic action.

RR 2: On the other hand, would criticism of China serve the US ploy of increasing its military presence in the region by supporting the claim that China is indeed a major threat to Philippine sovereignty? Would such criticism serve to support the claim that China is indeed a major threat while obfuscating the US continuous undermining and violation of Philippine sovereignty? How important is it that the Left join in the assertion of Philippine sovereignty against incursions by China?

VFA "Balikatan," April 2012
JMS: Criticism and opposition to any actual incursion by China is consistent with the assertion of national sovereignty and does not serve the US ploy so long as we expose at the same time why and how the Aquino regime’s posture against alleged incursions by China are meant to serve US goals in the region.

We must be alert to and oppose the malicious efforts of the US and the Aquino regime to hype China as an imperialist aggressor in order to allow the No. 1 imperialist power to further entrench itself militarily in the Philippines and realize its strategy of encircling China and enhancing its hegemony over East Asia and entire Asia-Pacific region. You should take critical notice of the fact that the agents of US imperialism like Aquino, his military sidekicks and his Akbayan hangers-on are presenting themselves as superpatriots against China while they allow the US to increase the presence of military forces and activities under the Visiting Forces Agreement, the Balikatan exercises and various other pretexts.

It is a matter of principle to invoke national sovereignty and territorial integrity against China’s claims on certain islands, reefs and shoals that belong to the Philippines. But we should expose and oppose the US and the Aquino regime for actively undertaking what are obviously anti-China provocations and propaganda aimed at justifying the escalation of US military intervention and further entrenchment of US forces in the Philippines, as part of the strategic scheme of the US to preserve and strengthen its hegemony over the Asia-Pacific region, particularly East Asia.

Further, the US imperialists are increasing their pressure on China to privatize its state-owned enterprises, to restrain its bourgeois nationalist impulses, to yield further to US economic and security dictates and to further promote the pro-US or pro-West bourgeois forces within China. In comparison to the Philippines, China is a far larger country for imperialist exploitation and oppression. Having more economic and political interests in China than in the Philippines, the US is using the Philippines as a staging base for actions aimed at pressuring and influencing China rather than protecting the Philippines from China.

The US-RP Mutual Defense Treaty does not contain an automatic retaliation provision. The US has used this treaty as the basis for the Visiting Forces Agreement and for the escalation of US military intervention in the Philippines. But in case of attack from any foreign power, the Philippines has no basis for expecting or demanding automatic retaliation from the US. The treaty allows the US to act strictly in its national interest and use its constitutional processes to bar the Philippines from demanding automatic retaliation against a third party that attacks the Philippines.

The US and China can always agree to cooperate in exploiting the Philippines. In fact, they have long been cooperating in exploiting the Philippines. The Chinese comprador big bourgeoisie in both the Philippines (Henry Sy, Lucio Tan and the like) and China (within the bureaucracy and outside) are trading and financial agents of the US and other imperialist powers.

RR 3: The Aquino government has availed of diplomatic venues to resolve the dispute. Meanwhile, the Chinese incursions continue. The Philippines is a weak country militarily and has no capability for securing its territory. What would be the requirements for the Philippines to be able to effectively assert its sovereignty (not limited of course to questions of territory)? Briefly, how can the Philippines develop a credible external defense?

JMS: Rather than entertain hopes that the Aquino regime would defend Philippine sovereignty and territorial integrity, the Filipino people and progressive forces must resolutely and militantly expose and oppose the puppetry, shameless mendicancy and the hypocrisy of the regime in pretending to be for national sovereignty and territorial integrity against China while inviting and welcoming increased US military intervention in the Philippines and using the country as a base for strengthening US hegemony in the Asia Pacific region.

Only the Filipino people and revolutionary forces can gain the capability to secure, control and defend their territory by fighting for and achieving national and social liberation in the first place from US imperialist domination and from such reactionary regimes of the big compradors and landlords like the Aquino regime.
Otherwise the US and their puppets will always be the bantay salakay at the expense of the people.

When the Filipino people and revolutionary forces come to power, they will certainly engage strongly among others in metal manufacturing, ship building and fishing in close connection with securing the Philippine territorial sea and exclusive economic zone.They shall have internal political-military strength and socio-economic satisfaction. And they shall develop international solidarity and use diplomatic action against any foreign power that violates Philippine sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Photo from IBON via
At the moment, the US and Aquino regime are engaged in a calibrated anti-China propaganda campaign in order to justify and allow the US to control the Philippines and East Asia militarily. We are being subjected to an anti-China scare aimed at further strengthening the dominance of US imperialism and the domestic rule of its reactionary puppets like Aquino. Right now, we must give the highest priority to fighting these monsters.

The Filipino people and the progressive forces must complain to the entire world against any incursive act of China and at the same time against the maneuvers of the US and its Filipino puppets to use the anti-China campaign to further oppress and exploit the Filipino nation and people. By the way, the Aquino regime blows hot and cold against China. In fact, it is vulnerable to China’s manipulation of Philippine exports to China like some semimanufactures and agricultural and mineral products.

When the Filipino people and revolutionary forces win, they shall be able to bring up through official representatives the issues concerning the UNCLOS to the UN General Assembly and the Hamburg-based International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea. They can encourage the cooperation of certain countries like Russia and Norway to avoid unwelcome impositions from US, UK and Netherlands in the exploration and development of oil and gas in the areas of the Philippines.

Even at this time, approaches can be made to China to avoid confrontations and tensions over the territories that belong to the Philippines and to engage in all-round cooperation for mutual benefit, especially for the advance of national independence, the industrial development of the Philippines and the termination of the extremely oppressive and exploitative US hegemony over East Asia, which victimizes both the Philippines and China.

RR 4: What approaches would you like the Philippines to make towards China? Were such approaches taken into account in the 2011 NDFP proposal to the Aquino regime for an alliance and truce? In this regard, what can the Left do in view of the rabid servility of the Aquino regime to the US.

JMS: China has been known for its policy of dealing diplomatically solely with the state (rather than with the revolutionary forces) in any country and for its flexibility in considering the needs and demands of that state or country. It is not as imposing and as aggressive as the US in diplomatic and economic relations with other countries. It tries to comply with what it professes, such as the principles of independence, non-interference, equality and cooperation for mutual benefit.

Thus, the National Democratic Front of the Philippines has proposed to the Aquino regime strategic alliance and truce in the context of peace negotiations. It has challenged the Aquino regime to make a general declaration of common intent with the NDFP to assert national independence and end unequal treaties and agreements; expand democracy through empowerment of the workers and peasants; carry out national industrialization and land reform; foster a patriotic, scientific and pro-people culture; and adopt an independent foreign policy for world peace and development.

A key part of the NDFP proposal is for the Philippines to approach China and other countries for cooperation in the establishment of key industrial projects for the national industrialization of the country. Certainly, it would be greatly beneficial for the Filipino people that the Philippines is industrialized and ceases to be merely an exporter of raw materials, semi-manufactures and migrant workers, mostly women.

But the US agents in the Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process and in Akbayan and Aquino himself supplied information on the NDFP proposal to the US embassy and Washington. They proceeded to cook up the anti-China scare campaign in order to undercut the proposal and serve US imperialist interests. It would be absurd for BAYAN, Bayan Muna and MAKABAYAN to join the rabidly pro-Aquino Akbayan or even compete with it in the anti-China scare campaign that draws away attention from US imperialism as well as justifies US military intervention and aggression in the Philippines and the whole of East Asia and the Asia-Pacific.

The people should know that the agents of US imperialism in the Aquino regime have used various malicious and cruel tactics to block the road to a just peace. The tactics include the abduction, torture and extrajudicial killing of NDFP consultants in violation of JASIG and the continued imprisonment of hundreds of political prisoners in violation of CARHRIHL.

RR 5: How would you describe the contradictions between the US and China? On one hand, the US is wary of the rise of China as a military power and has sought to encircle China, yet on the other hand, the US economy is closely linked to China’s. and China is said to be the biggest creditor of the US.

JMS: There is unity and struggle between two capitalist powers in the relationship between the US and China. The US is not yet really worried about China having the military strength that can be projected outside its borders. It is more worried about China’s military strength being able to defend China, fend off US imperialist dictates and threats and combat separatist forces in Taiwan, Tibet and Xinjiang.

The US strategy of encirclement is calculated to keep China as a friendly partner in the exploitation of the Chinese and other peoples. The US and China have already more than three decades of being close partners in promoting and benefiting from the neoliberal policy of globalization. The super-exploitation of the Chinese working people, China’s trade surpluses and huge indebtedness of the US to China are matters well within the negotiable relations of two capitalist powers, which would rather go on taking advantage of the working people rather than go to war against each other.

The efforts of China to find its own sources of energy and raw materials and markets and fields of investment can be at times irritating or even infuriating to the US (when the conflicts of interest occur as in Iran, Sudan, Libya and Syria). But the capitalist powers can settle their relations with each other at the expense of the working people and underdeveloped countries, until the crisis of the world capitalist system further worsens to the point that a number of capitalist powers accelerate their aggressiveness and even become fascist in their home grounds. ###

(Reprinted with permission from Mr. Joma Sison)


Sison, Jose Maria. ON PHILIPPINE SOVEREIGNTY, US & CHINA . 20 April 2012.


 Licencia de Creative Commons Reposts are licensed to the respective authors. Otherwise, posts by Jesusa Bernardo are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Philippines.

Friday, March 30, 2012

Mga Kuwento at ang Pagdakila ni Ka Joma kay Horacio "Boy" R. Morales, Jr.

by Prof. Jose Maria Sison
Founding Chairman,Communist Party of the Philippines
Chief Political Consultant
NDFP Negotiating Panel

Horacio "Boy" R. Morales, Jr.
By way of honoring Horacio “Boy” Morales, I wish to recall his relations with the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), the National Democratic Front of the Philippines and the New People’s Army and his contributions to the revolutionary movement within the range of my personal knowledge and on the basis of reports of comrades.

The first time I became aware of Boy’s connections to the revolutionary movement was in 1975 when he sent to me a letter through Jimmy S., a staffer of the CPP National Liaison Committee (NLC). His letter proposed certain kinds of projects that could be undertaken to improve the people’s livelihood and advance the revolution.

Jimmy S. also informed me that Boy was being developed to become a member of the CPP by certain comrades in the Development Academy of the Philippines, that he knew and encouraged the formation of NDF cells and the recruitment of CPP members in the DAP and allowed the use of DAP vehicles and facilities by the NDF, CPP and NLC.

Before I became aware of Boy’s involvement in the revolutionary movement, I had always thought of him as a key member of the so-called Paeng Salas’ boys. His first letter to me was followed by another one with a copy of the so-called Countryside Development, which had been prepared by Sixto Roxas. He wrote to me that the CPP could probably improve the plan and use it.

My communications with Boy ceased in 1976. But I continued to monitor what he and others were doing in DAP through Jimmy S. and other comrades.

When I was in prison, I learned that Boy had dramatically defected to the revolutionary movement on the very night that he was to receive the TOYM award. The news raised my spirit. I was proud of what he did.

The account of Alan Jazmines covers well the initiation of Boy into the life of the New People’s Army and the people in the countryside and his eventual assignment to the NDF. It was while working for the NDF that Boy was arrested and detained.

After the downfall of the Marcos fascist dictatorship in 1986, Boy joined me in the Preparatory Commission of the Partido ng Bayan. We met and talked many times. We were often in the same forums, seminars and conferences. Boy helped in establishing the Partido ng Bayan. He subsequently ran as one of its senatorial candidates.

In connection with his work in PRRM and other engagements, he made frequent trips to The Netherlands from 1988 onwards. Thus, we had several opportunities of discussing the Philippine situation and what is to be done, especially in the legal mass movement and in the field of socio-economic development. He was always receptive to advice on projects beneficial to the people.

Rep. Jose V. Yap brought Boy along in meetings to explore the holding of peace negotiations between the Manila government and the NDF from 1989 onwards. Boy was around to help the delegation of the Ramos government when The Hague Joint Declaration, the framework agreement for peace negotiations, was negotiated and signed in 1992. When Howard Dee became chairman of the GRP negotiating panel in 1994, he diminished the possibility for Boy to help in the peace negotiations.

Boy was always willing to help the patriotic and progressive forces even when he increased his work for certain bourgeois presidential candidates and even when he became Secretary of Agrarian Reform under the Estrada administration. He was one of two major government officials who encouraged Estrada to do what Ramos had failed to do, sign the Comprehensive Agreement for Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law in 1998.

Boy was never arrogant towards anyone in the revolutionary movement even when he held his high position in government. He was approachable and helpful. After Estrada fell, he continued to be in touch with me and arranged my dialogues with certain personages. I am told that he cooperated enthusiastically with the progressive forces in opposing and isolating the Arroyo regime and seeking its ouster.

Boy had a high capacity for achievement and expressed his political views clearly, honestly and modestly. Even when he had views different from those of the revolutionary forces, he never sought to impose his views on the whole or any part of the revolutionary movement and certainly he never attacked the movement for not accepting his views on certain issues. He was ever ready to find a common ground and contribute what he could to the revolutionary movement. ###

(Reprinted with permission from Mr. Joma Sison)



Sison, Jose Maria.  IN HONOR OF HORACIO “BOY” R. MORALES, Jr. 17 March 2012.

Raw Photo Credit:


 Licencia de Creative Commons Reposts are licensed to the respective authors. Otherwise, posts by Jesusa Bernardo are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Philippines.

total pageviews since july 2010