The Holy Father (Papa Ratzi), although he disguises this by a benign and less assertive demeanor – realizing he doesn’t possess the dynamic charisma and Polish chutzpah of his predecessor and mentor, the late Pope John Paul II – is a clone of Papa Karol Wojtyla.
In sum, His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, Germanic though he is, carries on the conservative hardline policies of Pope John Paul II, including the idea that Holy Mother Church must meddle relentlessly in everything regarding "morality" (which more or less encompasses everything whether political or the use of that devil’s instrument the Condom).
Is it true that when La Gloria complained to the Pope about the meddling of bishops in the Philippines in state matters, His Holiness gave her a copy of his own Papal encyclical, "Deus Caritas Est" (God is Love)?
It contained a bit of double-talk (forgive the sacrilegious allegation) in which the Vicar of Christ on Earth declared that "the Church cannot and must not take upon herself the political battle to bring about the most just society possible. She cannot and must not replace the State."
However, the line immediately following insisted: "Yet at the same time she cannot and must not remain on the sidelines in the fight for justice. She has to play her part through rational argument and she has to reawaken the spiritual energy without which justice which will always demand sacrifice, cannot prevail and prosper." Hello.
As the Protestants sing in their famous hymn: "Onward Christian soldiers, marching as to war. ." The Pope is calling for war against everything deemed evil, from cheating to finagling and other shenanigans – all, of course, in the cause of advancing morality and justice, etc.
On cue, the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines asserted yesterday (a Pastoral Letter follows?) that allegations of poll fraud and corruption against GMA must be pursued relentlessly, as our reporter Eduardo Punay reported, expressing support to the impeachment complaints filed again La Presidenta by opposition groups, and Caloocan Bishop Deogracias Iñiguez. The Separation of Church and State has been a dead letter, anyway, in our Constitution for many years now – and Cha Cha won’t be able to be implemented in my estimation or get rid of clerical meddling anyway.
If "impeachment" through Congress fails, "ex-communication" perhaps?
If you’ll recall, when he was imprisoned in Fort Santiago, counting the days before his Execution, Jose Rizal’s Jesuit professors and confessors from his school days at the Ateneo badgered, cajoled him, and prayed over him night and day to get our hero to "retract."
When the late Father Horacio de la Costa, S.J., the most brilliant Jesuit historian and former Provincial and this writer were supposed to collaborate on a book about the Filipino people (we both never got beyond a few paragraphs of Chapter One before the great Father Skeezix (his fond nickname) died, he told me that in his research, he had discovered Rizal never retracted.
On his way to the execution ground at Bagumbayan field (the Luneta), nonetheless, Rizal spotted the tower of the Ateneo de Manila in Intramuros. He sighed, "I spent the happiest years of my life there!"
Oh well. The Bishops, to our sorrow, will never stop meddling. They don’t just wish to save our souls, they want to save everything (according to their version of things).
Once upon a time, the saintly Torquemada and the Spanish bishops were foursquare behind the Spanish Inquisition which burned heretics at the stake.
Who have they staked out for burning here?
It stated: "Exactly a year ago from today, we tendered our collective irrevocable resignation from the Arroyo cabinet and asked President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to make the supreme sacrifice and voluntarily relinquish her office."
It went on: "Today, we stand united – with deeper concern and firmer resolve – that our conviction has not changed."
There was a lot more stuff including scoldings, advice on what must be done, and hortatory statements condemning GMA’s "heavy-handed militarist approach…" and assailing the Arroyo administration for unsheathing "another diversionary ploy by raising the Communist bogey" which will "only escalate the conflict and lead to the dislocation of and injuries and death to not only insurgents, but in most cases to journalists, church workers, peasant leaders, legitimate activists, and helpless and innocent civilians."
There are many more paragraphs but why should I give this guys a free plug?
What struck me, though, is that the so-called "Hyatt 10" manifesto didn’t carry the signature of any of them.
By sheer coincidence, I bumped into one of the Hyatt 10’s most prominent ex-Cabinet members, former Finance Secretary Cesar Purisima in the Taipan room of the Tower Club that same day, where I had invited Prof. David Paraiso of Los Angeles, an old friend and IT expert, to lunch. (Paraiso gets consulted by Georgetown University, The Pentagon, and is now working alongside Kaiser Permanente in the US.)
I asked ex-Secretary Purisima about that strong advertisement which had appeared the same morning. His face wrinkled into a frown. He retorted, "Wala akong pakialam d’yan!" He reiterated that he didn’t have anything to do with it.
Didn’t the Ad proclaim, "Today, we stand united…"? If so, that was Big Lie number one.
Is it now, the "Hyatt 9" – or even less? Did not former Department of Agrarian Reform Secretary Rene Villa (although he seemed embarrassed when confronted by reporters) go with La Presidenta to Spain – he did insist he was only in the business delegation. In effect, however, did that subtract him from the list of "united," thus making the remainder the "Hyatt 8"?
Not long after their dramatic resignation on television, two other officials in the 10 had confidentially told intimate friends that they regretted what they did, because they were disappointed in Vice President Noli de Castro’s lack of gumption in grabbing the opportunity to take over the Presidency. Did the two return to the defiant fold, or did they quietly opt out? If they returned, then let them come out with their signatures to the Manifesto. But I suspect, it is now the "Hyatt 6". If so, that big bold advertisement was a gross deception.
Sanamagan. How did the manufacturers of that declaration believe they could get away with it – never mind the contents of the so-called "statement"? Oh well. As P.T. Barnum once famously said: "There’s one born every minute." Meaning suckers like you and me.
There are many who may believe things are gospel truth because they were published in a newspaper. (Veteran journalists know this ain’t necessarily so.)
Lo and behold, Hinky-Dinky Soliman yesterday came out on the front page of the same newspaper having been asked the valid question by one of its reporters: "Is the so-called Hyatt 10 still 10-strong?"
To which La Soliman, her hair doubtless streaked in blue or ochre, haughtily replied that the Hyatt 10 was not only "intact" but also "more than 10 already." She cited Nini Quezon-Avanceña, National Artist Bienvenido Lumbera, Bishop Deogracias Iñiguez and "more than 200 other persons" who filed or signed impeachment complaints against La Arroyo.
Wait a minute, Dinky-Baby. That begs the question: Where are the original Hyatt 10 who supposedly issued that new manifesto? I recall the day when the now virulently anti-Gloria Corazon "Dinky" Doo Soliman tearfully begged GMA to let her keep her job as Social Welfare Secretary when it was going to be given to Vice President Kabayan.
GMA relented, and Noli gallantly backed out. But that’s all in the past.
Who did write that manifesto then? Some parts sounded, but it’s only perhaps my jaundiced opinion, like it had been scripted by somebody from Bayan Muna, or the National Democratic Front.
Lenin once remarked that "a lie told often enough becomes the truth." Adolf Hitler’s Fascist master of propaganda, Goebbels theorized that people were more inclined to believe a "big lie" than a "small lie."
La GMA, of course, must be called to task for many things, and if it gets to Congress, have the new "impeachment" move voted on by the House of Representatives in a legal manner. If the impeachment musters enough votes, then it could go up to the Senate. But what the heck. You cannot fight GMA with lies, and still have the gall to call her "a cheat."
There are so many Kims in Korea. The immediate past President of South Korea elected in 1998 was my old friend, Kim Dae-jung (who wanted "reunification" with North Korea). His successor and nominee, President Roh Myung-hoon, who was elected narrowly in the 2002 elections – it must be said on a groundswell of anti-US sentiment among younger voters – is following Kim Dae-jung’s "sunshine policy" towards Kim Jong-il and North Korea – I wonder where he stands now in this crisis?
Mind you, President Roh’s father-in-law was slapped in jail following the Korean War for his alleged pro-North Korean sentiments. Mr. Roh is surely considering the possibility that if push comes to shove, the North Koreans could unleash artillery and rocket barrages, or even chemical weapons bombardments (they have plenty of that deadly stuff) which might pulverize or poison Seoul’s 12 million people, only a few miles from the DMZ, in a matter of minutes – IF these missiles and shells get through the South’s sophisticated anti-missile and other state-of-the-art defenses.
Speaking of Kims, Kim Dae-jung’s immediate predecessor was also one of my old friends, ex-President Kim Young Sam (who hates Dae-jung), a staunch anti-Communist who detested Pyongyang’s Kim Jong-il.
Confused by those names?
There are only 270 surnames to go around, as Breen points out, the 75 million or more Koreans around the world (including those TNT in the Philippines), and many of those are obscure. The most common are Kim, Park, and Lee. It was only 100 years ago that all Koreans were required to have a full name, so they chose names for themselves, some inventing names for simplicity, or to associate themselves with powerful families or the upper classes.
One-quarter, it’s said, are named Kim, another quarter Lee, Park, Choi or Chung.
US Asst. Secretary of State is now in Seoul, trying to mobilize a diplomatic response of Kim’s nuclear-rattling – such as convince a reluctant China (one of Pyongyang’s sponsors) to get Six Nation talks in Beijing restarted so as to diffuse the crisis. The Six Nations – including China, Russia, Japan, South Korea, and of course America – held their first round of talks with Pyongyang in August 2003, the Chinese had to coerce Kim’s government to the negotiating table – but have stalled.
The US is not taking any chances. Right now, the powerful USS "Enterprise" and its Carrier Battle Group is steaming at full speed from the Persian Gulf to the vicinity.
Also steaming at full tilt to the area is the Aegis-type cruiser, USS "Mustin" with the most high-tech equipment, one of whose capabilities is to track and destroy 100 missiles at the same time.
Gee? Is this war? The US claims it’s just a routine redeployment. There exists an OPLAN 5027 designed to repel a North Korean attack.
However, to strike at Kim Jong-il and Pyongyang, as Dubya Bush who loathes that bozo ("Axis of Evil," remember?), might dearly love to do would get China into the fight, too. China is bound (as veteran journalist Jasper Becker points out) by a 1961 treaty to come to the defense of North Korea if it is attacked, and certainly the People’s Liberation Army would rush to prevent US troops once again (like MacArthur’s forces) crossing the Yalu River – or a suspicious democracy, if Kim is overthrown, being established just across the Chinese border.
It cannot be forgotten that during the Korean War (started by Kim Jong-il’s daddy Kim Il-sung with an invasion of the South), between 1950 and 1953, some 33,000 Americans died, 3,000 other United Nations troops from other countries were slain, including troops from Britain, Turkey, France, Australia, Canada – and the Philippines. (The Philippine PEFTOK fought gallantly there, losing men, but standing up for democracy. Today, thanks to mealy-mouthed government policy, we’ve become a nation of wimps, not even capable of keeping a bunch of literal Boy Scouts in Iraq). South Korea lost 58,809 men. North Koreans killed came to about 215,000 men. China, which came to the help of the North Koreans, bugles-blowing, alarmed that Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s troops had crossed the Yalu – on a perilous headlong offensive that might have threatened even Beijing itself – lost a fantastic 400,000 men. The fatalities included the son of China’s leader Mao Zedong, who have gone into the fray.
Surely, nobody wants a repeat of that collision.
But North Korea is a rough state which has already provided nuclear and missile technology to Libya (when it was out of the pale, now a "friend" of the US), Iraq, Iran and Pakistan.
The best book about the current subject was written by the above-mentioned Jasper Becker, who worked as a foreign correspondent for 20 years, including eleven years based in Beijing. He has skipped in and out of North Korea, covered the South extensively.
It is a must read. Entitled "Rogue Regime": Kim Jong-il and the Looming Threat of North Korea," Oxford University press, 2005 it is brilliant and tears aside the veil of secrecy about the terrible Kims, pater et fil, who caused the deaths of over seven million Koreans, three million civilians in the Korean War, by some estimates three million of their own people in famine, and at least a million of the political prisoners they seized over the past 50 years. Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il were as evil as Stalin and as murderous. In fact, Stalin and the Soviets had first installed Kim Il-sung in power – reluctantly and whimsically, it must be added.
How do you deal with such a crazy leader like Kim Jong-il? That is the question plaguing all of us – yes, we’re in the neighborhood – today.