Pinoys are truly a unique people. In fact, they belong to a special class of people. With all their “weirdness”, Pinoys are a people “touched by God”.

In my global “wandering”, I have discovered three prominent characteristics that are typically Pinoy. First is the sense of family and clan “connectedness”. They may find themselves in the remotest part of any continent or in the middle of the oceans, they may live in strange foreign lands for years and even centuries, yet they would remain Pinoys at heart. Pinoys will always find their “home” - in their hearts and blood. “Pinoy kami at Pinas ang bayan”!

Today there are two powerful instruments that strengthen this Pinoy “interconnectedness”. The first is the fast and cheap communication facility through “texting” or SMS (which I believe is a wonderful invention of Filipinos). And the second is the now world-famous “balikbayan” boxes. At airports everywhere in the world, these “balikbayan” boxes – accompanied or not - all go “home” to the Philippines as if the whole world is being “delivered” to the motherland, box by box.

The movement is two-way. As the whole world is “delivered” to the Philippines, Pinoys also “import” their “kin & kith” to work abroad with or without legal papers. In no time, they build a small “barangay” or network of “kinsfolk” and “townsfolk” in their adopted land.

Second to family and clan is the Pinoys’ patient work and discipline. You find Pinoys doing all kinds of jobs and odd jobs. They work patiently and with great discipline and loyalty wherever they are. They are NOT beggars and they pay their taxes. In many places, they have to work double jobs and work on the weekend! They need to do so, because they support the whole tribe back home. They obey rules and they are good citizens notwithstanding the Philippine notoriety of “palusot” and connection. But the real miracle that amazes the world is the fact that they, notwithstanding the difficulties and loneliness they endure, are happy. There is always a smile in their faces and there is laughter in their hearts. They can even make jokes out of their tragedies. Pinoys are a happy people and the Philippines is a happy nation even in moments of passing insanity.

The third Pinoy characteristic is their simple faith and colorful tradition. Filipinos everywhere are known for their strong belief and traditions. The Visayans bring their Santo Nino; the Tagalogs their Nazareno; Bicolanos their Virgen de Penafrancia; the Ilocanos their Santa Lucia; the Pampangos their Apo Pedro and Santiago, and Zamboangenos their Nuestra Senora del Pilar; etc. In foreign lands, they, too, read their “pasyon”; make their “visita iglesia” and celebrate the “misas de gallo”. They have owned their Castilian faith and heritage. The Pinoy faith and tradition have become not only their soul, but also the bulwark of strength against adversities and challenges, in those unfriendly foreign lands.

Through time, the people, institutions, nations, communities, and individuals endure and are recognized, because of their fidelity to the values and traditions they stand for. And to Pinoys, these three values stand out and are admired. If people admire Mother Theresa or Oscar Romero or Martin Luther King Jr. or Desmond Tutu or Nelson Mandela, they do so, not because of their achievements but for the values and beliefs they stood for. They believed and lived the values they espoused with integrity and with no embarrassment.

This reminds me of a story from Stephen Covey’s famous book, First Things First, with slight modification. Once there was a man/woman who began his/her career step by step. He/she first defined his/her goal; then came up with a workable plan charting his/her career and moved up, step by step, into that proverbial ladder of his/her career. Finally, he/she reached the top of the ladder - believing that it would be his/her greatest glory - but only to discover, in his/her total dismay that his/her ladder was leaning on the wrong wall!

More than ever before, there is a need to “re-appreciate” and perhaps even “re-construct” the stories of successes and failures, of power and wealth in the present age now labeled as both “post modernism” and “post ideologies”. I turn to Gil Bailie (cf. Violence Unveiled: Humanity at the Crossroads: 1996) for the apt description of this age. He takes the person of Bernard (a character in Virginia Woolf’s novel, The Waves) to depict the modern person. In the novel, Bernard says: “I have made up thousand stories. I have filled up innumerable notebooks with phrases to be used when I have found the true story, the one story to which all the phrases refer, but I have never yet found that story.”

I believe that Pinoys, notwithstanding their difficulties, have found the way to the writing of the needed story line that the world needs. It is there in the story of the family, tribe and clan. It is a “kindredness” shaped not only by blood, but also by the “ili” (Ilocano term that means community and domain). That story line is also rooted in faith and traditions that shape and form their values that lay the foundational set of virtues to move together forward in achieving their goals for their families, clans and for humankind. Pinoys are darn good and proud of their story (no matter how “corny’). And they share it with the world with a smile in their faces and laughter in their hearts.

The world has Pinoys in great abundance and the Philippines continues to “export” them by the millions! Experts tell us that about 14 million Pinoys work outside as OFWs. They are found almost everywhere - in the desert of Sahara or in the glaciers of the South and North polar regions. They are also in the middle of the great oceans and in the middle of “nowhere” including the pirate-infested Somalian Sea. Everywhere you go, you find Pinoys who are diligently and patiently at work - making to whole world work! The truth of the matter is the fact that the Philippines would have been a classic case of a “failed state” without the 18 or so billion dollars annual remittance by the OFWs.

The Pinoy story line is thus being told and repeated by millions of Pinoy workers and civil servants across borders and cultures. I have seen them in the five continents and at seas who, in season and out of season, make the global system work. A few years back, a short message in the internet came across my attention that specifically pointed to their global contribution. The title of the message was “When Pinoys went on strike”. The UN had to close down, because it could not operate without Filipinos who manage the secretariat and the general services, including the janitorial and computer network. Many oil wells will simply cease pumping oil, because they need Filipinos to keep them open and operational. The economy of Hong Kong, Singapore and most of Europe would stop if all Pinoy nannies and domestics go on strike. The crisis will be surely felt in hospitals, clinics, nursing homes and other health facilities without Pinoy doctors, nurses, technicians and caregivers.

Pinoys are heath workers – doctors, nurses and caregivers – of the world. They, too, are the domestic helpers of the world. They are engineers, technicians, mariners and people who do all kinds of odd jobs. Wherever they are, they bring their smile and laughter as they tell the stories of their families, place and patron saints. To me, this is the story line that the world needs badly! Here lies the true Pinoy contribution to the new emerging social order!

The current financial tsunami inundating the world stock markets following the collapse of financial giants does affect the Philippines, regardless of the denials and counter claims by government and local financial experts. The Philippines is extra-vulnerable and sensitive to any financial movements and shocks, particularly in the US economy. In the first place, our financial system is merely a “footnote” in the overall financial system that dominates the world. London, New York and Tokyo constitute the three pillars of the present world financial system that makes and unmakes nations and the world order. No doubt, the Philippine financial system is not only “jittery” in the face of this collapse but also “tottering” as more revelations of exposures unfold.

The collapse of Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG and HBOS (to name a few) is a simple indicator of the nearing collapse of the western financial system that now threatens the whole world. The biggest consideration is a bailout of the financial system that seems to disintegrate before our very eyes. Is this a classic case of simply “postponing” the inevitable collapse of the western financial system similar to the total collapse of the USSR almost 20 years ago?

The New York Times (September 21, 2008) speaks of the $700 billion bailout proposed by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson as “bold” action to meet the current financial crisis. There are some sectors that disagree and criticize the planned bailout. In lieu of the bailout they propose a radical "freeze” of all the speculative paper, for purposes of auditing. The Economic Intelligence Review (EIR) goes against any kind of bailout on the basis that if government does, it loses control over the situation. The EIR claims that "The nation is being screwed. These guys don't have anything coming to them. Poor people have been denied health care because of these swine. Let's start frog marching them off to jail, where they belong."

EIR claims that Paulson's bank bailout is not bold and innovative action to the financial crisis but the “biggest swindle being pulled against the people and taxpayers”. The plan, presented by Treasury Secretary Paulson and supported by Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, President George W. Bush and a group of international bankers, would transfer most of the enormous losses incurred of the global financial system, from the books of the banks to the Federal government, and the U.S. taxpayers.

This scheme is being marketed to a frightened public as a "bold'' plan to "solve'' the financial crisis once and for all. It is really the biggest theft in history, an act of monumental stupidity which will destroy everything in its path - the economy, the nation, and the people. "This is the biggest swindle ever pulled,'' EIR said. “It is absolute insanity. The public is being duped.”

The proponents of the “freeze” solution say that nothing Paulson has said is true – “it is all lies designed to dupe Congress and the American people into believing that this gigantic ‘rip-off’ is both necessary and in the public interest, when neither is true.” The lies began well before Paulson, when we were told that finance, not production, was the road to wealth. For the past four decades, we have seen the systematic dismantling of American industry and agriculture, and the turning of our economy into a giant casino. Our banking system has been turned over to the speculators, and we have watched a relatively small portion of our population get rich - some obscenely so - while a growing portion fell into poverty, and others were pushed over the edge. Every protection put into law to stop such looting has been systematically repealed, including the Glass-Steagall Act which forbade commercial banks from engaging in investment banking. Now that system has collapsed, and we are being told that the people must bail out the crooks.

The final phase of this collapse began last year, with the mythical "subprime crisis,'' a deliberate misnomer. Then this "subprime crisis'' somehow morphed into a "credit crunch,'' infecting an "otherwise healthy'' banking system. It was, from start to finish, a lie carefully constructed to support the ultimate demand for a bailout.

According to EIR, here's what really happened. It all started with the banking system. The banks built up a huge derivatives bubble in the 1990s, a pyramid scheme which constantly needed more money fed into its maw to keep it going. One of the prime sources of fuel was mortgages, which were used to spawn mortgage-backed securities and even wilder forms of casino chips like CDOs. The more mortgage money came in, the larger the profits that could be made from speculating in the securities, yielding more money for new mortgages. It was this securities machine which drove housing prices - and the mortgages on those houses - into the stratosphere. However, the machine worked so well that it drove housing prices beyond the reach of many Americans, so, in order to keep the mortgages flowing in, the banks began to relax loan standards, and in the end were selling homes to people who could not afford them, just to keep the game going. It finally got to the point that prices were so high, that even with the lax lending standards they couldn't keep the game going, and the whole house of cards collapsed. The subprime loans collapsed first because they were the shakiest, made at the top of market, so the banks painted the subprime lenders and borrowers as the villains, as a way of covering up their own role. It was a classic "blame the little guy'' scam.

Now we see Paulson asserting that the banks have been infected by this "housing crisis'' and that in order to protect the American people we must launch the biggest bank bailout in history. But it was Paulson, a former investment banker, and his investment banking buddies and their predecessors, who created this mess in the first place, and are now demanding that they be saved from the consequences of their folly, and handing the bill to the people they have been victimizing for decades. The foxes are demanding that the chickens pay for cleaning up the blood in the chicken coop.

(The analysis being quoted here are taken from EIR & Lyndon LaRouche’s critique of the present financial tsunami.)

When the smoke of “battle” fades away, civilians, inevitably, become victims. “Collateral damage” is the euphemistically invented label to “sanitize” the cruelties of war. Tragically, people have begun using the label thereby unconsciously or consciously they have become partners in the cover up of these great human tragedies.

“Collateral damage” when used to described human casualties can never be justified. Human lives are NOT simple numbers in the equation. This language and culture violate the fundamental belief in the sacredness of life in whatever form or shape regardless of culture, belief and ethnicity. The moment we remain silent over that EVIL that people, liberation movements and governments perpetrate in the name of “collateral damage”, we become contradictions to any pro life advocacy. We lose our integrity and we have compromised our belief in the sacredness of life.

The traditional moral theology of “just cause” and “just war” with their corresponding “fine balancing” over the so called proportionality between the evil done and good achieved has long been abandoned by a more scripture-base moral theology. In recent memory, the popes have always stood against war, capital punishment, nuclear weapons, hunger & poverty, euthanasia and abortion. There is, simply, no selective pro life advocacy when it comes to the sacredness of life else we become modern days hypocrites (Pharisees and “munafiqun”).

We remember this fundamental belief every time we are confronted by “casualties” of war. If people do notice, most of the Ten Commandments are in the negative imperatives. They simply indicate that there are NO EXCEPTIONS as the language clearly indicates. But people and experts of the Law began to introduce exceptions thus “traditional” understanding of the Law has begun “tolerating breaches” of the law. The fifth commandment states “Thou shalt not kill” yet in the past (in the present for some “medieval” churchmen clinging to medieval theology) the Church had allowed capital punishment, theories of “just cause “and “just war” and the principle of “self-defense”. Strictly Christian pacifist churches like the Quakers, the Mennonites, etc. have all renounced violence including military service as contrary to the actual teaching of Jesus Christ.

The consistency and tenacity of the Quakers and Mennonites in their pro life advocacy make them very credible. When they speak strongly against abortion they also speak with equal passion against war, capital punishment and euthanasia. Perhaps some of our noisy churchmen can learn a lesson or two from our Quaker and Mennonite brothers and sisters so that when they threaten people (susmaryosep!) “refusal” of Holy Communion for the supporters of Reproduction Bill in Congress they, too, shall threaten with the same sanction people who kill in the name of “collateral damage” and national security.

Lower degrees than our strong belief in the sacredness of life are the international conventions and protocols that proscribe attacks on non combatants. There are no if’s and but’s the attacks against civilians in Lanao Norte, North Cotabato, Saranggani and in the Municipalities of Datu Piang and Datu Saudi Ampatuan are condemnable acts. There can be NO justifications for these acts, simply because these acts are now considered crimes against humanity. It is for this reason that people who are actually engaged in war are held responsible and accountable for their acts. Governments and legitimate Liberation Fronts do subscribe to these international conventions and protocols. In our case, the Philippine Government, the National Liberation Front, the Moro national Liberation Front and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front accept the duties and obligations of these conventions and protocols. I believe that strict compliance by all parties concerned to the International Humanitarian Law (IHL) would help humanize the war.

When we speak of civilian casualties we refer to non combatants victims of conflict. But IHL also protects combatants who are “out of combat”. This means that when combatants are not actually engaged in actual combat, they are protected from arbitrary killing and “enforced disappearances”. To uphold the belief in our common humanity, these crimes need to be investigated; their perpetrators need to be brought to justice and the victims have to be indemnified.

It is tragic that the present war in Mindanao divides peoples along ethnicity and religious lines. Yet the truth of the matter is the fact that regardless of our ethnicity and religion we uphold not only the sacredness of life but also the international conventions and protocols. The imperative of our belief tells us to say NO to war. Our international duties and obligations spell in very clear and unequivocal language “the rules of engagement”.

In the name of God and in the name of our common humanity, we call on all people of goodwill to continue to reject war as an option. The late Pope John Paul II in one of his addresses in the Assisi Prayer for peace in 1986 told all peoples of diverse faiths that “Peace is not option for believers, it is a duty!”

If war need to be fought in the name of “war against lawlessness” or “war against terrorism”, we appeal to the protagonists, AFP and MILF, to strictly observe the “rules of engagements” that the Philippine Government and the MILF uphold by their avowals. By doing so, the civilians, their homes, farms, animals, fowls and crops are spared. Whether the civilians are Christians or Muslims are irrelevant. They are human beings that belong to common humanity. Civilians need to be protected and spared from military encounters or engagements AT ALL TIMES.

As said earlier, in the tradition from which I come (the Catholic tradition), we distinguish between justification in going to war, which used to be called "jus ad bellum", and the justification within war, "jus in bello". This jargon began with Cicero, but absorbed into the Christian tradition with Augustine and Aquinas and then formulated by a Dutch 17th century philosopher, Hugo Grotius. There was a list of criteria establishing the rightness of going to war. You had to have a just cause; you had to have a right of intention and it had to be legitimated by a sovereign power. Then on what could happen within the war, there had to be non-combatant immunity, there had to be a proportion between the means deployed and the end sought. There had also to be a reasonable hope of success. Discrimination and proportionality were the two main one that is discrimination between combatants and non-combatants.

This medieval theology is still studied today but simply as part of the evolution of thinking and hermeneutics of moral imperatives. No serious moral theologians aided by modern scriptural hermeneutics still uphold the validity of the medieval thought. Personally, I believe that killing civilians is wrong, whether the intention is merely to kill what might be considered combatants or not. If by dropping a bomb is foreseen to kill innocent people then the said dropping of bomb is wrong and immoral.

The on-going tragic comedy on the controversial MOA continues to unfold. The obfuscation work is both “fascinating” and “hilarious”. Simply enumerating them would give us a surreal feeling that the web of lies goes on.

1. In one of the earliest special press conference, GMA had abandoned, for all practical purposes, the MOA... Putting it in her words, the government would adopt a new approach in the peace process with the MILF. This new strategy consists of the following:

• Dialogue with the communities;
• Surrender of Ustadz Ombra Ameril Kato and Commander Bravo; and
• The process must include Disarmament, Demobilization and “Rehabilitation” (DDR).

Immediately, government officials, with little understanding of DDR, has begun mouthing DDR without even bothering to check that GMA got the last “R” wrong. The last R in DDR refers to “REINTEGRATION” not “rehabilitation”. The three letters refer to combatants and former combatants POST SETTLEMENT on the issue of disposition of combatants, former combatants and para-military groups.

2. Her Press Secretary, Jesus Dureza, begins articulating this “new approach” in various fora and press interviews. The Philippine government will no longer sign the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain “in its present form or in any other form”. The government will now negotiate with the MILF on the basis of DDR (disarmament, demobilization and “reintegration”).

3. Her legal adviser, Sergio Apostol came out to tell all sundry that the President has NOT authorized the GRP Peace Panel to “sign the MOA”. His “wetness” Apostol did not blink in uttering the said statement notwithstanding the fact that the scheduled signing of the MOA in Kuala Lumpur will be done in much fanfare with Philippine Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Malaysian Foreign Minister, OIC Special Deputy for Peace representing the OIC Secretary general, and Ambassadors from many countries that are engaged in Mindanao. The government had also invited a star-studded list of guests to witness the “signing” of the MOA.

4. In another government press conference, yet “bizarre” news came out: “the president has NOT read the MOA…” WOW! This is a real “whammy”! The said MOA was initialed no less by her Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process, Sec. Hermogenes Esperon and the Head of the Government Peace Panel, Rodolfo Garcia – two loyal generals who as “good soldiers” would never do anything unless “ordered”.

5. Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, in his many interviews, repeatedly articulated that the MOA would NOT be signed in its present form but would be subject “to further negotiation” with the MILF”.

5. Another Cabinet Secretary Cerge Remonde had also joined the chorus and began singing the tune of the new approach to the peace process – dialogue with communities, surrender of the two “rogue” MILF Commanders Kato and Bravo and DDR.

6. Now comes the Solicitor General who is tasked to take the onus of representing government in the Supreme Court on the issue of the MOA. Knowing that the MOA in its present form is indefensible and amid great oppositions from LGU’s and opposition parties that now includes the rich and the mighty Makati Business Club, continues to argue orally the shifting changes and nuances in GRP positions. The bottom line is to convince the Honorable justices that the issue is moot and academic since the government has “set aside the MOA and it would not sign the MOA in the present form or in any form”.

7. Tsk. Tsk. Tsk. The two generals were caught flat footed… The only honorable move now left for them is to RESIGN instead of continuing to defend and stand by the MOA when their “bosses” and above all their PRINCIPAL claims that she has NOT only read the MOA but also she has NOT authorized anyone or the Peace panel to sign the MOA that has already been “initialed” by the duly authorized representatives of the Philippine Government on the 27th July 2008 in KL.

8. The latest is the announcement from Malacanan that says: “Government Peace Panel Scrapped.”

The above tells us that we have here a classic case of too many chefs… Everyone pokes his/her finger in the brewing pot and each one spins his/her opinion or lie in an attempt to outdo their Principal “puppeteer”.

In the last blog, I spoke of the “good news” about the MOA… To complete the picture allow me to also touch on the “bad News” about the MOA.

The first bad news and perhaps the biggest is the fact that the controversial MOA is now ASSOCIATED with a very unpopular government and presidency that lacks any credibility. Surveys and “readings” of social climate tell us that this Government and the sitting President no longer enjoy any social capital and credibility. Her actions are suspect and motives questioned. Whether this is true or not is all beside the point and irrelevant! Any peace agreements - Aceh, Southern Sudan, and the Good Friday Agreement (to name a few) are negotiated by credible and popular governments and Presidents/Prime Ministers. Leaders and governments have to consolidate all the social capital they can muster to “sell” the peace agreement and to build a peace constituency. NO PEACE AGREEMENT IS POPULAR! It is the leaders and governments’ popularity and credibility that shall carry the burden of "selling" the agreement. Ultimately, people vote and agree not on the document but on their leaders and governments that are trusted. This trust or social capital is crucial in the approval or rejection of any peace agreement.

The second negative news is the fact that all these adverse reactions had been foreseen and predicted. The hysteria and fears go beyond bounds (and rightly so), because of the utter lack of GRP's transparency and consultation. The government violated the cardinal principle of shared "stakeholdership" in the peace process. Congress should have been on board; so also the affected LGU's, other major stakeholders and other Moro gate keepers. The MILF claims that they have consulted their constituency. I wonder if the GRP can, equally, claim the same without blinking.

The third bad news is “cultural” and narrow legalism that is expressed in the infamous slogan: "It is just a piece of paper." This is, definitely, a bad news! The MOA is NOT a simple piece of paper. We are being very narrow and parochial if the MOA is viewed solely from a legal perspective - plain and simple! The MOA represents not only the aspiration but also the struggle of the Bangsamoro peoples. It is a result of long and patient years of attempts to find lasting solution to the reality of unpeace. It represents the blood & flesh, aspirations & dream, hard work & study of thousands, nay hundreds of thousands. The attitude and culture behind the phrase "it is just a piece of paper" tell us everything and all! Is this the reason that GMA can simply dismiss the whole MOA by a simple press conference? Peacemaking is NOT a popularity contest... and perhaps this is the reason why Jesus tells us... "Blessed are the peacemakers, they are called sons and daughters of God" (Matthew 5: 9).

To top it all is the “militarism” following the "TRO" is not only bad news but TRAGIC NEWS. Military actions, especially the attacks against civilians have put the MOA in the back burner once again. Militarism and military adventurism have further consolidated the existing prejudices and adverse positions.

What we need most in these times of unpeace is a SPACE – a sort of “cooling period” not only to let our emotions and anger to subside but also to retrieve our reason and objectivity. I believe the Supreme Court is privileged to give us that much needed space. The Supreme Court needs stay the TRO to address the fears of peoples and yet it should not rule, at this time, on the substance of the MOA that would only further polarize the country. I believe that the TRO shall provide the impartial space to debate and discuss the MOA on a rational and more objective way with the hope that the debates and discussion will lead to its fine tuning that would, in time, result to a national consensus needed for a sustainable peace.