daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Asian Forums > Philippine Forums > Around the Philippines > Photography, Heritage and Architecture

Photography, Heritage and Architecture Participate in the FPC, the weekly Filipino Photo Contest



Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 7th, 2008, 10:31 PM   #3541
Animo
I'm Watching You
 
Animo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,571
Likes (Received): 141

Torture

By Ambeth Ocampo
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 01:40:00 11/07/2008

Whenever you see traffic policemen or enforcers lying in wait or hiding midway along a one-way street, one word comes to mind: “kotong.” One would assume that prevention should be the option rather than punishment, but then that does not generate income. If a traffic enforcer stands at the beginning of a one-way street and waves the unsuspecting or stubborn motorist the correct way, there is no need for a ticket, fine and seminar. No need for a bribe.

Erring motorists flagged down by corrupt traffic cops or deputized “alalay” [aides] used to be asked the odd question, “Sino’ng abogado mo?” [Who is your lawyer?] The clueless ask why they need a lawyer for a minor traffic infraction, so the corrupt cop then makes clear that the question is a polite way of asking for a bribe. The “lawyers” refer to various faces on the different denominations in our paper money. It is a way for the motorist to make an offer or haggle for a comfortable amount.

Remember nobody takes coins, so the heroes of the 19th century—Rizal, Mabini, Bonifacio—cannot act as “abogado.” Thus, Quezon means P20, Sergio Osmeña is worth P50, Manuel Roxas P100 and, God forbid, Aquino has a face value of P500. At today’s rate, Quezon and Osmeña will get you nothing, except a traffic ticket. Roxas might get you off the hook if you are lucky. Aquino often does the trick but, if you intend to haggle, then use Macapagal, who is worth P200. If you want a “Get out of jail” card like those in the famous board game Monopoly, you will need three “lawyers”: Abad Santos, Lim and Escoda who are on the P1,000-bill. Estrada is on the P2,000-bill but these limited-edition bills, while legal tender, are best kept for numismatic collectors and are probably worth more than their face value.

Looking at the “ube” ice cream colored Roxas bill recently, I remembered the controversy it sparked when it was first issued. Rabid nationalists objected to the American Stars and Stripes on our money. Why, they argued, is a foreign flag on our currency?

It was a valid point that missed two bits of history. First, if you take the trouble to read the Declaration of Independence from Spain that our founding fathers read from the window of Emilio Aguinaldo’s home in Kawit, Cavite on June 12, 1898, you will find that the colors of our flag—red, white and blue—are mentioned. Every school child knows the symbolism for these colors: red for bravery, white for purity, and blue for peace. There seems to be nothing assigned to yellow or gold, the colors of the eight-pointed sun and the three stars. Nationalists will be disappointed to discover that according to the 1898 Declaration of Independence, the red, white and blue in our flag, our national symbol, were based on the same colors as those in the American flag! Little wonder the author of that text was never given an important office in the First Republic.

Second, if you look at the Roxas bill, there is no text to explain the context of the offensive flag. It is presumed that everyone knows that the two flags on the bill come from a significant scene in Philippine history. On July 4, 1946 when the United States recognized the independence of the Philippines, the American flag that flew over the islands for almost 50 years was finally lowered, and our flag was raised—proof that we were, finally, a free and independent nation. On that day, Emilio Aguinaldo, a living relic of the Philippine Revolution, was quoted as saying, “Isinauli lamang nila ang kalayaang ating nakamit noong 1898.” [“They only returned the freedom we had won in 1898.”]

Aguinaldo was still alive when President Diosdado Macapagal moved our Independence Day from July 4 to June 12. The Philippine-American War puts this part of our history in context.

In the San Francisco Presidio exhibit “War and Dissent” is a disturbing picture showing the use of “water cure” on a Filipino being interrogated by American soldiers. The procedure is simple: Water (salty or dirty) is forced down a prisoner’s mouth, and then when the victim’s stomach is full and bloated, someone jumps on it, forcing the water out. This is repeated until the victim spills the beans. I have read the transcripts of US congressional investigations on this and was horrified that sometimes this torture was done under medical supervision so that the victim was pushed to his limits but kept alive. Despite being a century old, this painful part of the Philippine-American War gains renewed resonance because of the use of torture in our times, in later wars.

To be fair and balanced though, there is an old photograph of small models showing the various forms and types of torture used by the Spaniards on Filipinos during their watch. Torture was used by all sides in those wars. A disgusted Apolinario Mabini denounced its use, and said it was more humane to carry out a swift execution than slow torture.

The Philippine-American War has long been swept under the rug. To study it makes us realize that history does not repeat itself. We have not progressed much in the past century. History does not move by itself, rather it is we who repeat.

What one should learn from history is not the names, dates and places better used for game shows and crossword puzzles. The real challenge is to recognize and break the historical cycle.

* * *

Comments are welcome at aocampo@ateneo.edu.
Animo no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old November 7th, 2008, 10:31 PM   #3542
Animo
I'm Watching You
 
Animo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,571
Likes (Received): 141

Torture

By Ambeth Ocampo
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 01:40:00 11/07/2008

Whenever you see traffic policemen or enforcers lying in wait or hiding midway along a one-way street, one word comes to mind: “kotong.” One would assume that prevention should be the option rather than punishment, but then that does not generate income. If a traffic enforcer stands at the beginning of a one-way street and waves the unsuspecting or stubborn motorist the correct way, there is no need for a ticket, fine and seminar. No need for a bribe.

Erring motorists flagged down by corrupt traffic cops or deputized “alalay” [aides] used to be asked the odd question, “Sino’ng abogado mo?” [Who is your lawyer?] The clueless ask why they need a lawyer for a minor traffic infraction, so the corrupt cop then makes clear that the question is a polite way of asking for a bribe. The “lawyers” refer to various faces on the different denominations in our paper money. It is a way for the motorist to make an offer or haggle for a comfortable amount.

Remember nobody takes coins, so the heroes of the 19th century—Rizal, Mabini, Bonifacio—cannot act as “abogado.” Thus, Quezon means P20, Sergio Osmeña is worth P50, Manuel Roxas P100 and, God forbid, Aquino has a face value of P500. At today’s rate, Quezon and Osmeña will get you nothing, except a traffic ticket. Roxas might get you off the hook if you are lucky. Aquino often does the trick but, if you intend to haggle, then use Macapagal, who is worth P200. If you want a “Get out of jail” card like those in the famous board game Monopoly, you will need three “lawyers”: Abad Santos, Lim and Escoda who are on the P1,000-bill. Estrada is on the P2,000-bill but these limited-edition bills, while legal tender, are best kept for numismatic collectors and are probably worth more than their face value.

Looking at the “ube” ice cream colored Roxas bill recently, I remembered the controversy it sparked when it was first issued. Rabid nationalists objected to the American Stars and Stripes on our money. Why, they argued, is a foreign flag on our currency?

It was a valid point that missed two bits of history. First, if you take the trouble to read the Declaration of Independence from Spain that our founding fathers read from the window of Emilio Aguinaldo’s home in Kawit, Cavite on June 12, 1898, you will find that the colors of our flag—red, white and blue—are mentioned. Every school child knows the symbolism for these colors: red for bravery, white for purity, and blue for peace. There seems to be nothing assigned to yellow or gold, the colors of the eight-pointed sun and the three stars. Nationalists will be disappointed to discover that according to the 1898 Declaration of Independence, the red, white and blue in our flag, our national symbol, were based on the same colors as those in the American flag! Little wonder the author of that text was never given an important office in the First Republic.

Second, if you look at the Roxas bill, there is no text to explain the context of the offensive flag. It is presumed that everyone knows that the two flags on the bill come from a significant scene in Philippine history. On July 4, 1946 when the United States recognized the independence of the Philippines, the American flag that flew over the islands for almost 50 years was finally lowered, and our flag was raised—proof that we were, finally, a free and independent nation. On that day, Emilio Aguinaldo, a living relic of the Philippine Revolution, was quoted as saying, “Isinauli lamang nila ang kalayaang ating nakamit noong 1898.” [“They only returned the freedom we had won in 1898.”]

Aguinaldo was still alive when President Diosdado Macapagal moved our Independence Day from July 4 to June 12. The Philippine-American War puts this part of our history in context.

In the San Francisco Presidio exhibit “War and Dissent” is a disturbing picture showing the use of “water cure” on a Filipino being interrogated by American soldiers. The procedure is simple: Water (salty or dirty) is forced down a prisoner’s mouth, and then when the victim’s stomach is full and bloated, someone jumps on it, forcing the water out. This is repeated until the victim spills the beans. I have read the transcripts of US congressional investigations on this and was horrified that sometimes this torture was done under medical supervision so that the victim was pushed to his limits but kept alive. Despite being a century old, this painful part of the Philippine-American War gains renewed resonance because of the use of torture in our times, in later wars.

To be fair and balanced though, there is an old photograph of small models showing the various forms and types of torture used by the Spaniards on Filipinos during their watch. Torture was used by all sides in those wars. A disgusted Apolinario Mabini denounced its use, and said it was more humane to carry out a swift execution than slow torture.

The Philippine-American War has long been swept under the rug. To study it makes us realize that history does not repeat itself. We have not progressed much in the past century. History does not move by itself, rather it is we who repeat.

What one should learn from history is not the names, dates and places better used for game shows and crossword puzzles. The real challenge is to recognize and break the historical cycle.

* * *

Comments are welcome at aocampo@ateneo.edu.
Animo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 10:31 PM   #3543
Animo
I'm Watching You
 
Animo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,571
Likes (Received): 141

Torture

By Ambeth Ocampo
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 01:40:00 11/07/2008

Whenever you see traffic policemen or enforcers lying in wait or hiding midway along a one-way street, one word comes to mind: “kotong.” One would assume that prevention should be the option rather than punishment, but then that does not generate income. If a traffic enforcer stands at the beginning of a one-way street and waves the unsuspecting or stubborn motorist the correct way, there is no need for a ticket, fine and seminar. No need for a bribe.

Erring motorists flagged down by corrupt traffic cops or deputized “alalay” [aides] used to be asked the odd question, “Sino’ng abogado mo?” [Who is your lawyer?] The clueless ask why they need a lawyer for a minor traffic infraction, so the corrupt cop then makes clear that the question is a polite way of asking for a bribe. The “lawyers” refer to various faces on the different denominations in our paper money. It is a way for the motorist to make an offer or haggle for a comfortable amount.

Remember nobody takes coins, so the heroes of the 19th century—Rizal, Mabini, Bonifacio—cannot act as “abogado.” Thus, Quezon means P20, Sergio Osmeña is worth P50, Manuel Roxas P100 and, God forbid, Aquino has a face value of P500. At today’s rate, Quezon and Osmeña will get you nothing, except a traffic ticket. Roxas might get you off the hook if you are lucky. Aquino often does the trick but, if you intend to haggle, then use Macapagal, who is worth P200. If you want a “Get out of jail” card like those in the famous board game Monopoly, you will need three “lawyers”: Abad Santos, Lim and Escoda who are on the P1,000-bill. Estrada is on the P2,000-bill but these limited-edition bills, while legal tender, are best kept for numismatic collectors and are probably worth more than their face value.

Looking at the “ube” ice cream colored Roxas bill recently, I remembered the controversy it sparked when it was first issued. Rabid nationalists objected to the American Stars and Stripes on our money. Why, they argued, is a foreign flag on our currency?

It was a valid point that missed two bits of history. First, if you take the trouble to read the Declaration of Independence from Spain that our founding fathers read from the window of Emilio Aguinaldo’s home in Kawit, Cavite on June 12, 1898, you will find that the colors of our flag—red, white and blue—are mentioned. Every school child knows the symbolism for these colors: red for bravery, white for purity, and blue for peace. There seems to be nothing assigned to yellow or gold, the colors of the eight-pointed sun and the three stars. Nationalists will be disappointed to discover that according to the 1898 Declaration of Independence, the red, white and blue in our flag, our national symbol, were based on the same colors as those in the American flag! Little wonder the author of that text was never given an important office in the First Republic.

Second, if you look at the Roxas bill, there is no text to explain the context of the offensive flag. It is presumed that everyone knows that the two flags on the bill come from a significant scene in Philippine history. On July 4, 1946 when the United States recognized the independence of the Philippines, the American flag that flew over the islands for almost 50 years was finally lowered, and our flag was raised—proof that we were, finally, a free and independent nation. On that day, Emilio Aguinaldo, a living relic of the Philippine Revolution, was quoted as saying, “Isinauli lamang nila ang kalayaang ating nakamit noong 1898.” [“They only returned the freedom we had won in 1898.”]

Aguinaldo was still alive when President Diosdado Macapagal moved our Independence Day from July 4 to June 12. The Philippine-American War puts this part of our history in context.

In the San Francisco Presidio exhibit “War and Dissent” is a disturbing picture showing the use of “water cure” on a Filipino being interrogated by American soldiers. The procedure is simple: Water (salty or dirty) is forced down a prisoner’s mouth, and then when the victim’s stomach is full and bloated, someone jumps on it, forcing the water out. This is repeated until the victim spills the beans. I have read the transcripts of US congressional investigations on this and was horrified that sometimes this torture was done under medical supervision so that the victim was pushed to his limits but kept alive. Despite being a century old, this painful part of the Philippine-American War gains renewed resonance because of the use of torture in our times, in later wars.

To be fair and balanced though, there is an old photograph of small models showing the various forms and types of torture used by the Spaniards on Filipinos during their watch. Torture was used by all sides in those wars. A disgusted Apolinario Mabini denounced its use, and said it was more humane to carry out a swift execution than slow torture.

The Philippine-American War has long been swept under the rug. To study it makes us realize that history does not repeat itself. We have not progressed much in the past century. History does not move by itself, rather it is we who repeat.

What one should learn from history is not the names, dates and places better used for game shows and crossword puzzles. The real challenge is to recognize and break the historical cycle.

* * *

Comments are welcome at aocampo@ateneo.edu.
Animo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 11:57 PM   #3544
gee
Polyglot
 
gee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Cebu-Munich-Taipei
Posts: 728
Likes (Received): 0

For those who are interested in WWII, some documents of the Records of War Crime Tribunal can be read online through National Archives of Japan Digital Archives: http://www.digital.archives.go.jp/index_e.html

here's a sample:

gee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 11:57 PM   #3545
gee
Polyglot
 
gee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Cebu-Munich-Taipei
Posts: 728
Likes (Received): 0

For those who are interested in WWII, some documents of the Records of War Crime Tribunal can be read online through National Archives of Japan Digital Archives: http://www.digital.archives.go.jp/index_e.html

here's a sample:

gee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 11:57 PM   #3546
gee
Polyglot
 
gee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Cebu-Munich-Taipei
Posts: 728
Likes (Received): 0

For those who are interested in WWII, some documents of the Records of War Crime Tribunal can be read online through National Archives of Japan Digital Archives: http://www.digital.archives.go.jp/index_e.html

here's a sample:

gee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2008, 03:25 AM   #3547
Asturiano
Registered User
 
Asturiano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 270
Likes (Received): 16

Philippines-American War 1899- 1902

Taken from "La revolucion Filipina" conclucion of the fall of the revolution by Apolinario Mabini.
In spite of all these obstacles, Luna would have succeeded in imposing and maintaining discipline if Aguinaldo had supported him with all the power of his prestige and authority, but the latter was also beginning to grow jealous, seeing Luna slowly gain ascendancy by his bravery, audacity, and military skill. All those affronted by his actuations were inducing Aguinaldo to believe that Luna was plotting to wrest from him the supreme authority. After the Calumpit bridge had fallen to the American forces, due mainly to the scarcity of ammunition, Luna came to see me in San Isidro and entreated me to help him convince Mr. Aguinaldo that the time had come to adopt guerrilla warfare. I promised to do what he wanted, while making it clear to him that I doubted I would get anywhere because my advice was hardly heeded in military matters inasmuch as, not being a military man but a man of letters, my military knowledgeability must be scant, if not nonexistent. I could not keep my promise because after our meeting I did not get to see Mr. Aguinaldo until after some time when he came expressly to seek my advice on whether or not it would be expedient to reorganize the cabinet. Unable to overcome my sense of propriety even in those circumstances, I answered in the affirmative, and, having relinquished office to my successor, Don Pedro A. Paterno, in the first days of May 1899, 1 left for the town of Rosales near Bayambang. Some weeks later Mr. Aguinaldo sent a telegram asking Luna to see him in Cabanatuan for an exchange of views, but when Luna arrived in Cabanatuan he met not Aguinaldo but death by treachery plotted by the very same soldiers whom he had disarmed and court-martialed for abandonment of their post and disobedience to his orders ( he did not find Aguinaldo at home and was treacherously murdered by the soldiers who were on sentry duty there ). Colonel Francisco Roman, who accompanied Luna, died with him. While Luna was being murdered. Mr. Aguinaldo was in Tarlac taking over command of the forces which the deceased had organized. Before his death Luna had his headquarters in Bayambang, and had reconnoitered Bangued to determine if it met the conditions for an efficacious defense in case of a retreat; what is more, he was already beginning to transport there the heavier pieces of ordnance. Notwithstanding, Aguinaldo established his government in Tarlac, wasting his time on political and literary activates, a negligence which General Otis exploited by landing his infantry in San Fabian while his cavalry, wheeling through San Jose and Umingan, took San Quintin and Tayug, thus cutting all of Mr. Aguinaldo's lines of retreat and giving the deathblow to the Revolution.

Until now I cannot believe that Luna was plotting to wrest from Mr. Aguinaldo the high office he held although Luna certainly aspired to be prime minister instead of Mr. Paterno, with whom Luna disagreed because the former's autonomy program was a violation of the fundamental law of the State and as such was a punishable crime. This is shown by a report in the newspaper La Independencia, inspired by Luna and published a few days before his death, which stated that the Paterno-Buencaminio cabinet would be replaced by another in which Luna would be prime minister as well as war minister. When a few days afterward Luna received Mr. Aguinaldo's telegram calling him to Cabanatuan, Luna thought perhaps that the subject of their meeting would be the new cabinet; he did not expect an attempt to assassinate him precisely at the critical juncture when the Revolution most needed his strong and skilled right arm; nor could he believe that a licit and correct ambition should inspire fear i n Mr. Aguinaldo who had named him commanding general of the Philippine army. Luna had certainly allowed himself to say on occasion that Aguinaldo had a weak character and was unfit to be a leader, but such language was only an explosive outlet for a fiery and ebullient temperament which saw its plans frustrated by the lack of necessary support. All of Luna's acts revealed integrity and patriotism combined with a zealous activity that measured up to the situation. If he was sometimes hasty and even cruel in his decisions, it was because the army was in a desperate position due to the demoralization of the troops and the lack of munitions; only acts of daring and extraordinary energy could prevent its disintegration.

The death of Andres Bonifacio had plainly shown in Mr.. Aguinaldo a boundless appetite for power, and Luna's personal enemies exploited this weakness of Aguinaldo with skillful intrigues in order to encompass Luna's ruin.

To say that if Aguinaldo, instead of killing Luna (allowing Luna to be killed), had supported him with all his power, the Revolution would have triumphed, would be presumption indeed, but I have not the least doubt that the Americans would have had a higher regard for the courage and military abilities of the Filipinos. Had Luna been alive, I am sure that Otis's mortal blow would have been parried or at least timely prevented, and Mr.. Aguinaldo's unfitness for military command would not have been exposed so clearly. Furthermore, to rid himself of Luna, Aguinaldo had recourse to the very soldiers whom Luna had punished for breaches of discipline; by doing so Aguinaldo destroyed that discipline, and with it his own army. With Luna, its most firm support, fell the Revolution, and, the ignominy of that fall bearing wholly on Aguinaldo, brought about in turn his own moral death, a thousand times more bitter than physical death. Aguinaldo therefore ruined himself, damned by his ow n deeds. Thus are great crimes punished by Providence.

To sum it up, the Revolution failed because it was badly led; because its leader won his post by reprehensible rather than meritorious acts; because instead of supporting the men most useful to the people, he made them useless out of jealousy. Identifying the aggrandizement of the people with his own, he judged the worth of men not by their ability, character and patriotism but rather by their degree of friendship and kinship with him; and anxious to secure the readiness of his favorites to sacrifice themselves for him, he was tolerant even of their transgressions. Because he thus neglected the people forsook him; and forsaken by the people, he was bound to fall like a waxen idol melting in the heat of adversity. God grant we do not forget such a terrible lesson, learnt at the cost of untold suffering.
Asturiano no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2008, 03:25 AM   #3548
Asturiano
Registered User
 
Asturiano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 270
Likes (Received): 16

Philippines-American War 1899- 1902

Taken from "La revolucion Filipina" conclucion of the fall of the revolution by Apolinario Mabini.
In spite of all these obstacles, Luna would have succeeded in imposing and maintaining discipline if Aguinaldo had supported him with all the power of his prestige and authority, but the latter was also beginning to grow jealous, seeing Luna slowly gain ascendancy by his bravery, audacity, and military skill. All those affronted by his actuations were inducing Aguinaldo to believe that Luna was plotting to wrest from him the supreme authority. After the Calumpit bridge had fallen to the American forces, due mainly to the scarcity of ammunition, Luna came to see me in San Isidro and entreated me to help him convince Mr. Aguinaldo that the time had come to adopt guerrilla warfare. I promised to do what he wanted, while making it clear to him that I doubted I would get anywhere because my advice was hardly heeded in military matters inasmuch as, not being a military man but a man of letters, my military knowledgeability must be scant, if not nonexistent. I could not keep my promise because after our meeting I did not get to see Mr. Aguinaldo until after some time when he came expressly to seek my advice on whether or not it would be expedient to reorganize the cabinet. Unable to overcome my sense of propriety even in those circumstances, I answered in the affirmative, and, having relinquished office to my successor, Don Pedro A. Paterno, in the first days of May 1899, 1 left for the town of Rosales near Bayambang. Some weeks later Mr. Aguinaldo sent a telegram asking Luna to see him in Cabanatuan for an exchange of views, but when Luna arrived in Cabanatuan he met not Aguinaldo but death by treachery plotted by the very same soldiers whom he had disarmed and court-martialed for abandonment of their post and disobedience to his orders ( he did not find Aguinaldo at home and was treacherously murdered by the soldiers who were on sentry duty there ). Colonel Francisco Roman, who accompanied Luna, died with him. While Luna was being murdered. Mr. Aguinaldo was in Tarlac taking over command of the forces which the deceased had organized. Before his death Luna had his headquarters in Bayambang, and had reconnoitered Bangued to determine if it met the conditions for an efficacious defense in case of a retreat; what is more, he was already beginning to transport there the heavier pieces of ordnance. Notwithstanding, Aguinaldo established his government in Tarlac, wasting his time on political and literary activates, a negligence which General Otis exploited by landing his infantry in San Fabian while his cavalry, wheeling through San Jose and Umingan, took San Quintin and Tayug, thus cutting all of Mr. Aguinaldo's lines of retreat and giving the deathblow to the Revolution.

Until now I cannot believe that Luna was plotting to wrest from Mr. Aguinaldo the high office he held although Luna certainly aspired to be prime minister instead of Mr. Paterno, with whom Luna disagreed because the former's autonomy program was a violation of the fundamental law of the State and as such was a punishable crime. This is shown by a report in the newspaper La Independencia, inspired by Luna and published a few days before his death, which stated that the Paterno-Buencaminio cabinet would be replaced by another in which Luna would be prime minister as well as war minister. When a few days afterward Luna received Mr. Aguinaldo's telegram calling him to Cabanatuan, Luna thought perhaps that the subject of their meeting would be the new cabinet; he did not expect an attempt to assassinate him precisely at the critical juncture when the Revolution most needed his strong and skilled right arm; nor could he believe that a licit and correct ambition should inspire fear i n Mr. Aguinaldo who had named him commanding general of the Philippine army. Luna had certainly allowed himself to say on occasion that Aguinaldo had a weak character and was unfit to be a leader, but such language was only an explosive outlet for a fiery and ebullient temperament which saw its plans frustrated by the lack of necessary support. All of Luna's acts revealed integrity and patriotism combined with a zealous activity that measured up to the situation. If he was sometimes hasty and even cruel in his decisions, it was because the army was in a desperate position due to the demoralization of the troops and the lack of munitions; only acts of daring and extraordinary energy could prevent its disintegration.

The death of Andres Bonifacio had plainly shown in Mr.. Aguinaldo a boundless appetite for power, and Luna's personal enemies exploited this weakness of Aguinaldo with skillful intrigues in order to encompass Luna's ruin.

To say that if Aguinaldo, instead of killing Luna (allowing Luna to be killed), had supported him with all his power, the Revolution would have triumphed, would be presumption indeed, but I have not the least doubt that the Americans would have had a higher regard for the courage and military abilities of the Filipinos. Had Luna been alive, I am sure that Otis's mortal blow would have been parried or at least timely prevented, and Mr.. Aguinaldo's unfitness for military command would not have been exposed so clearly. Furthermore, to rid himself of Luna, Aguinaldo had recourse to the very soldiers whom Luna had punished for breaches of discipline; by doing so Aguinaldo destroyed that discipline, and with it his own army. With Luna, its most firm support, fell the Revolution, and, the ignominy of that fall bearing wholly on Aguinaldo, brought about in turn his own moral death, a thousand times more bitter than physical death. Aguinaldo therefore ruined himself, damned by his ow n deeds. Thus are great crimes punished by Providence.

To sum it up, the Revolution failed because it was badly led; because its leader won his post by reprehensible rather than meritorious acts; because instead of supporting the men most useful to the people, he made them useless out of jealousy. Identifying the aggrandizement of the people with his own, he judged the worth of men not by their ability, character and patriotism but rather by their degree of friendship and kinship with him; and anxious to secure the readiness of his favorites to sacrifice themselves for him, he was tolerant even of their transgressions. Because he thus neglected the people forsook him; and forsaken by the people, he was bound to fall like a waxen idol melting in the heat of adversity. God grant we do not forget such a terrible lesson, learnt at the cost of untold suffering.
Asturiano no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2008, 03:25 AM   #3549
Asturiano
Registered User
 
Asturiano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 270
Likes (Received): 16

Philippines-American War 1899- 1902

Taken from "La revolucion Filipina" conclucion of the fall of the revolution by Apolinario Mabini.
In spite of all these obstacles, Luna would have succeeded in imposing and maintaining discipline if Aguinaldo had supported him with all the power of his prestige and authority, but the latter was also beginning to grow jealous, seeing Luna slowly gain ascendancy by his bravery, audacity, and military skill. All those affronted by his actuations were inducing Aguinaldo to believe that Luna was plotting to wrest from him the supreme authority. After the Calumpit bridge had fallen to the American forces, due mainly to the scarcity of ammunition, Luna came to see me in San Isidro and entreated me to help him convince Mr. Aguinaldo that the time had come to adopt guerrilla warfare. I promised to do what he wanted, while making it clear to him that I doubted I would get anywhere because my advice was hardly heeded in military matters inasmuch as, not being a military man but a man of letters, my military knowledgeability must be scant, if not nonexistent. I could not keep my promise because after our meeting I did not get to see Mr. Aguinaldo until after some time when he came expressly to seek my advice on whether or not it would be expedient to reorganize the cabinet. Unable to overcome my sense of propriety even in those circumstances, I answered in the affirmative, and, having relinquished office to my successor, Don Pedro A. Paterno, in the first days of May 1899, 1 left for the town of Rosales near Bayambang. Some weeks later Mr. Aguinaldo sent a telegram asking Luna to see him in Cabanatuan for an exchange of views, but when Luna arrived in Cabanatuan he met not Aguinaldo but death by treachery plotted by the very same soldiers whom he had disarmed and court-martialed for abandonment of their post and disobedience to his orders ( he did not find Aguinaldo at home and was treacherously murdered by the soldiers who were on sentry duty there ). Colonel Francisco Roman, who accompanied Luna, died with him. While Luna was being murdered. Mr. Aguinaldo was in Tarlac taking over command of the forces which the deceased had organized. Before his death Luna had his headquarters in Bayambang, and had reconnoitered Bangued to determine if it met the conditions for an efficacious defense in case of a retreat; what is more, he was already beginning to transport there the heavier pieces of ordnance. Notwithstanding, Aguinaldo established his government in Tarlac, wasting his time on political and literary activates, a negligence which General Otis exploited by landing his infantry in San Fabian while his cavalry, wheeling through San Jose and Umingan, took San Quintin and Tayug, thus cutting all of Mr. Aguinaldo's lines of retreat and giving the deathblow to the Revolution.

Until now I cannot believe that Luna was plotting to wrest from Mr. Aguinaldo the high office he held although Luna certainly aspired to be prime minister instead of Mr. Paterno, with whom Luna disagreed because the former's autonomy program was a violation of the fundamental law of the State and as such was a punishable crime. This is shown by a report in the newspaper La Independencia, inspired by Luna and published a few days before his death, which stated that the Paterno-Buencaminio cabinet would be replaced by another in which Luna would be prime minister as well as war minister. When a few days afterward Luna received Mr. Aguinaldo's telegram calling him to Cabanatuan, Luna thought perhaps that the subject of their meeting would be the new cabinet; he did not expect an attempt to assassinate him precisely at the critical juncture when the Revolution most needed his strong and skilled right arm; nor could he believe that a licit and correct ambition should inspire fear i n Mr. Aguinaldo who had named him commanding general of the Philippine army. Luna had certainly allowed himself to say on occasion that Aguinaldo had a weak character and was unfit to be a leader, but such language was only an explosive outlet for a fiery and ebullient temperament which saw its plans frustrated by the lack of necessary support. All of Luna's acts revealed integrity and patriotism combined with a zealous activity that measured up to the situation. If he was sometimes hasty and even cruel in his decisions, it was because the army was in a desperate position due to the demoralization of the troops and the lack of munitions; only acts of daring and extraordinary energy could prevent its disintegration.

The death of Andres Bonifacio had plainly shown in Mr.. Aguinaldo a boundless appetite for power, and Luna's personal enemies exploited this weakness of Aguinaldo with skillful intrigues in order to encompass Luna's ruin.

To say that if Aguinaldo, instead of killing Luna (allowing Luna to be killed), had supported him with all his power, the Revolution would have triumphed, would be presumption indeed, but I have not the least doubt that the Americans would have had a higher regard for the courage and military abilities of the Filipinos. Had Luna been alive, I am sure that Otis's mortal blow would have been parried or at least timely prevented, and Mr.. Aguinaldo's unfitness for military command would not have been exposed so clearly. Furthermore, to rid himself of Luna, Aguinaldo had recourse to the very soldiers whom Luna had punished for breaches of discipline; by doing so Aguinaldo destroyed that discipline, and with it his own army. With Luna, its most firm support, fell the Revolution, and, the ignominy of that fall bearing wholly on Aguinaldo, brought about in turn his own moral death, a thousand times more bitter than physical death. Aguinaldo therefore ruined himself, damned by his ow n deeds. Thus are great crimes punished by Providence.

To sum it up, the Revolution failed because it was badly led; because its leader won his post by reprehensible rather than meritorious acts; because instead of supporting the men most useful to the people, he made them useless out of jealousy. Identifying the aggrandizement of the people with his own, he judged the worth of men not by their ability, character and patriotism but rather by their degree of friendship and kinship with him; and anxious to secure the readiness of his favorites to sacrifice themselves for him, he was tolerant even of their transgressions. Because he thus neglected the people forsook him; and forsaken by the people, he was bound to fall like a waxen idol melting in the heat of adversity. God grant we do not forget such a terrible lesson, learnt at the cost of untold suffering.
Asturiano no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2008, 08:19 AM   #3550
Maxxclip
Maximus Expelliarmus
 
Maxxclip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,691
Likes (Received): 5

TEODORO ASEDILLO: Magiting na Guro, Lider-Manggagawa, Bayani

Sinaliksik at sinulat ni Gregorio V. Bituin Jr.

Isa sa pinakamagiting na bayani sa kasaysayan ng kaguruan at ng uring manggagawa sa Pilipinas si Teodoro Asedillo. Mula sa angkan ng dating katipunerong si Antonio Asedillo, isinilang siya noong Hulyo 1883 sa Longos (ngayon ay Kalayaan), sa lalawigan ng Laguna.

Mula taong 1910 hanggang 1921, si Maestro Asedillo ay naglingkod bilang guro sa mababang paaralan ng Longos, kung saan itinuro niya ang lahat ng aralin sa maghapong pagpasok sa klase ng mga mag-aaral sa elementarya. Siya’y naangat bilang head teacher ngunit nagpatuloy siyang nagturo sa mga batang nasa ikatlo at ikaapat na baytang. Kilala siya sa kahusayan sa pagtuturo. Isang disiplinaryan, ayaw niya sa mga estudyanteng nagbubulakbol, di nagsisikap matuto, at nagsasayang lang ng oras.

Sakop ng Amerika ang Pilipinas sa panahong yaon, at isa sa pinagtuunan ng pansin ng mga Amerikanong kolonisador ay ang Department of Public Instruction (DPI) sa kanilang kampanya ng pasipikasyon (pwersahang pagpayapa) at asimilasyon (sapilitang pagpapalunok sa atin ng sarili nilang kultura). Sa pamamagitan ng Philippine Commission Act No. 74 (Enero 1901), iniatas ni Gobernador-Heneral Elwell Otis ang mga sumusunod na polisiya: (a) sentralisadong sistema ng batayang edukasyon; (b) paggamit sa Ingles bilang wikang panturo at komunikasyon; at (k) pagtatatag ng isang kolehiyong normal para sa maramihang pagsasanay ng magiging mga guro. Ang paggamit ng wikang Pilipino’y mahigpit na ipinagbawal, at yaong gumagamit nito’y pinarurusahan. Walang Pilipinong pinahintulutang mamuno sa DPI, hanggang sa panahong itatag ang pamahalaang Komonwelt.

Ang mga pangyayari at kalagayang ito ang nagtulak sa unang paghihimagsik ni Asedillo. Pinili niyang gamitin ang wikang Pilipino sa halip na wikang Ingles. Iminulat niya ang mga mag-aaral sa kagitingan at aral ng mga bayaning Pilipino, habang tinuruan din niya ang mga mag-aaral ng awiting makabayan. Hindi rin niya ginamit ang mga aklat na sinulat ng mga dayuhang awtor. Dahil dito, siya’y kinasuhan ng insubordinasyon o pagsuway sa kautusan ng kagawaran noong 1923. Ipinagtanggol niya ang sarili at ikinatwirang hindi dapat ipilit sa mga batang Pilipino ang kulturang banyaga sa kanilang karanasan at pang-unawa. Ngunit siya’y natalo at natanggal sa pagtuturo.

Ang pamilyang Asedillo ay naghirap ng husto. Noong sumunod na taon, ang una niyang asawang si Honorata Oblea ay namatay sa tuberculosis. Naiwan sa kanya ang anak nilang si Pedro. Muli siyang nakapag-asawa noong 1925, kay Eustaquia Pacuribot.

Nagkatrabahong muli si Asedillo nang hirangin siya ng alkalde sa bayang San Antonio bilang hepe ng pulisya roon. Naging bantog siya bilang hepe at marami ang nadakip na kriminal at bandido. Ngunit nang magpalit ang administrasyon sa bayang iyon matapos ang isang halalan, nabiktima siya ng pang-iintriga, natanggal siya bilang hepe, at pinalitan ng isang malakas sa bagong mga opisyal.

May malawakang pagkabalisa noon ang mga magbubukid at manggagawa dahil sa kawalan ng katarungang panlipunan at sa malaking agwat sa pagitan ng mayayaman at mahihirap bunga ng pyudalismo. Dahil dito, naitatag ang Katipunan ng mga Anakpawis sa Pilipinas (KAP) noong 1929. Sumapi sa KAP si Asedillo nang siya’y nagkatrabaho bilang magsasaka sa taniman ng kape. May limang layunin ang KAP: (a) mapagkaisa ang mga manggagawa at magbubukid sa makauring pamumuno ng KAP; (b) labanan ang mala-kolonyalismong pinaiiral ng imperyalismong Amerikano sa Pilipinas; (c) itaguyod at paunlarin ang kabuhayan ng mga anakpawis; (d) kamtin ang tunay na kasarinlan ng Pilipinas at itatag ang isang tunay na pamahalaan ng taongbayan; at (e) makipag-isa sa kilusang mapagpalaya sa iba’t ibang panig ng daigdig. Patakaran ng KAP sa pag-oorganisa ang pagtatayo ng mga unyon ng mga manggagawa, pagtatatag ng partido pulitikal ng mga manggagawa, at pagtataguyod ng makauring pakikibaka.

Lumaganap ang KAP sa buong Kamaynilaan, sa Timog Luzon at Gitnang Luzon. Inatasan ng pamunuan ng KAP si Asedillo na lumuwas sa Maynila upang mag-organisa ng mga manggagawa partikular sa unyon ng La Minerva Cigar and Cigarette Factory sa Tondo. Ang kanyang mag-iina ay naiwan sa Laguna.

Sa La Minerva, hindi pinakinggan ng pangasiwaang kapitalista ang hinaing ng mga manggagawa kaya’t naglunsad ng welga sina Asedillo noong 1934. Dinahas ng magkasanib na pwersa ng konstabularya at Manila Police Department ang mga manggagawa. Namatay ang limang manggagawa at nasugatan ang marami pang iba nang salakayin ng Konstabularya ang piketlayn. Sa welgang iyon ay pinagtangkaan siyang arestuhin ng Konstabularya dahil isa siya sa mga namuno doon, pero nakawala siya at tumakas papuntang Laguna, ang kanyang probinsya. Nang mabalitaan sa pahayagan ng isang opisyal na taga-Laguna na nagawi noon sa Maynila ang welgang pinangunahan ni Asedillo sa La Minerva, isinumbong nito sa pulisya’t militar na si Asedillo ay “komunista”.

Kasabay ng welga sa La Minerva ang pag-aalsa naman ng mga Sakdalista na pinangunahan ng makatang si Benigno Ramos. Layunin ng mga Sakdalista ang (a) pagtuligsa sa sistema ng edukasyong kolonyal na pinangangasiwaan ng mga gurong Amerikanong Thomasites; (2) pagtutol din sa pagtatatag ng mga baseng militar at mga instalasyon ng Amerika sa Pilipinas; at (3) ang paglaban sa dominasyon ng mga Amerikano sa ekonomya at likas na kayamanan ng ating bansa. Umabot sa 50,000 ang kasapi ng Sakdalista sa Timog at Gitnang Luzon.

Naganap ang sunud-sunod na pag-aalsa ng mga magbubukid noong Mayo 2, 1935. May 150 magsasaka ng San Ildefonso, Bulacan, ang sumalakay sa munisipyo, na pawang armado ng itak at paltik. Ibinaba nila ang mga bandila ng Amerika at Pilipinas, at itinaas ang pulang watawat ng Sakdalista. Sanlibong pesante naman ang sumalakay sa Presidencia ng Tanza at Caridad, Cavite, gayundin sa Cabuyao at Sta. Rosa, Laguna. Subalit sa ganting-salakay ng konstabularya noong Mayo 3 ay nasugpo ang mga pag-aalsa. May 50 pesante ang nagbuwis ng buhay, ilandaan ang nasugatan at may limandaang nadakip at napiit.

Nang mawasak ang unyon at mapatay ang ilang welgista sa La Minerva, nang masawi at makulong ang mga nag-alsang Sakdalista, nagpasyang tumakas ni Asedillo sa tumutugis na pulisya’t militar. Bumalik siya sa Laguna kung saan may base ng magsasaka ang KAP. Muli siyang nag-organisa. Napagtanto niyang hindi na maaari ang parlamentaryong paraan lamang ng protesta. Hindi na libro, plakard at araro ang hawak-hawak, kundi baril, bilang isang mandirigma ng masa. Ipinakita niya ang kahusayan sa pamumuno, at nagsagawa sila ng repormang agraryo, pinababa ang buwis o upa sa lupa.

Sumanib si Asedillo sa mga pwersa ni Nicolas Encallado, na kilala sa tawag na Kapitan Kulas, at beterano ng Rebolusyon at pakikidigma laban sa pananakop ng Estados Unidos. Madalas magdaos ng pulong si Asedillo sa mga baryo upang ipaliwanag ang mga layunin ng KAP at makapangalap ng mga tao para sa layunin nito. Itinaguyod din niya ang pagtutol sa pagbabayad ng buwis. Nilibot din niya ang mga baryo sa Laguna at karatig na lalawigan ng Quezon, noo’y Tayabas, upang mangalap ng magsasaka at mapaanib sa KAP.

Naging alamat si Asedillo sa mga lugar na pinaglalabas-masukan niya noon sa Laguna at Tayabas. Siya’y katulad ni Robin Hood na ang kinukuha sa mayayaman ay ibinibigay sa mahihirap. Sinasabing araw na araw ay ligtas siyang nakakapaglakad sa mga kalye ng pinagmulan niyang bayan, at pinakakain siya ng taumbayan at pinatutuloy sa kanilang bahay.

Kahit sa maikling panahon, mahusay niyang ginamit ang mga taktikang gerilya, kaya’t nakaiwas sa rekonsentrasyon at lambat-bitag ng mga tropa ni Tenyente Jesus Vargas. Natiis niya ang desperadong pagbihag sa kanyang mag-iina. Sadyang hindi matawaran ang kagitingan at determinasyong ipinamalas ni Asedillo sa mga kasamahan niya.

Noong Nobyembre 1935, pagkaraan ng mahigpit na paghahanap ng mga tropa at ahente ng gubyerno kina Asedillo at Encallado, natagpuan nila ang pinagtataguan ni Asedillo sa Cavinti, Laguna. Sa labanang nangyari, napatay si Asedillo at ang dalawa niyang badigard. Pagkaraa’y inilibot ng Konstabularya sa bayan-bayan ang bangkay ni Asedillo na tadtad ng bala. Ang buong ngitngit ng kaaway ay ipinadama kahit sa kanyang luray na bangkay. Kinaladkad sa mga poblasyon, sa harap ng mga presidencia ng mga bayang kanyang kinilusan, upang ipagyabang na patay na si Asedillo. Si Asedillo ay itinulad kay Kristong ipinako sa krus hanggang sa mamatay.



Ang tanging “krimeng” ginawa niya ay ang pagtatanggol sa mga manggagawa at magsasaka na ipaglaban ang hustisyang panlipunan, at krimen sa mga gurong Thomasites na tagapaghasik ng kulturang kolonyal na kanyang sinuway at tinuligsa. Ang halimbawa ni Asedillo ay isang halimbawang dapat tularan at hindi dapat ibaon sa limot. Ang kanyang kasaysayan ay dapat maikwento at magbigay inspirasyon sa mga manggagawa ngayon, sa mga guro, at sa mga kabataan.

Sa bawat yugto ng pagsasamantala, may isinisilang na tulad nina Andres Bonifacio, Macario Sakay, Teodoro Asedillo, Filemon Lagman, at marami pang mula sa uring manggagawa ang ayaw magpaalipin at ayaw manatiling alipin. Ang mga halimbawa nila ay magtitiyak na patuloy pang isisilang ang mga bagong Asedillo na magtatanggol sa mga api at maghahangad ng isang lipunang may pagkakapantay-pantay at walang magsasamantala ng tao sa tao.

mula sa panulat ni Gregorio V. Bituin Jr.
Maxxclip no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2008, 08:19 AM   #3551
Maxxclip
Maximus Expelliarmus
 
Maxxclip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,691
Likes (Received): 5

TEODORO ASEDILLO: Magiting na Guro, Lider-Manggagawa, Bayani

Sinaliksik at sinulat ni Gregorio V. Bituin Jr.

Isa sa pinakamagiting na bayani sa kasaysayan ng kaguruan at ng uring manggagawa sa Pilipinas si Teodoro Asedillo. Mula sa angkan ng dating katipunerong si Antonio Asedillo, isinilang siya noong Hulyo 1883 sa Longos (ngayon ay Kalayaan), sa lalawigan ng Laguna.

Mula taong 1910 hanggang 1921, si Maestro Asedillo ay naglingkod bilang guro sa mababang paaralan ng Longos, kung saan itinuro niya ang lahat ng aralin sa maghapong pagpasok sa klase ng mga mag-aaral sa elementarya. Siya’y naangat bilang head teacher ngunit nagpatuloy siyang nagturo sa mga batang nasa ikatlo at ikaapat na baytang. Kilala siya sa kahusayan sa pagtuturo. Isang disiplinaryan, ayaw niya sa mga estudyanteng nagbubulakbol, di nagsisikap matuto, at nagsasayang lang ng oras.

Sakop ng Amerika ang Pilipinas sa panahong yaon, at isa sa pinagtuunan ng pansin ng mga Amerikanong kolonisador ay ang Department of Public Instruction (DPI) sa kanilang kampanya ng pasipikasyon (pwersahang pagpayapa) at asimilasyon (sapilitang pagpapalunok sa atin ng sarili nilang kultura). Sa pamamagitan ng Philippine Commission Act No. 74 (Enero 1901), iniatas ni Gobernador-Heneral Elwell Otis ang mga sumusunod na polisiya: (a) sentralisadong sistema ng batayang edukasyon; (b) paggamit sa Ingles bilang wikang panturo at komunikasyon; at (k) pagtatatag ng isang kolehiyong normal para sa maramihang pagsasanay ng magiging mga guro. Ang paggamit ng wikang Pilipino’y mahigpit na ipinagbawal, at yaong gumagamit nito’y pinarurusahan. Walang Pilipinong pinahintulutang mamuno sa DPI, hanggang sa panahong itatag ang pamahalaang Komonwelt.

Ang mga pangyayari at kalagayang ito ang nagtulak sa unang paghihimagsik ni Asedillo. Pinili niyang gamitin ang wikang Pilipino sa halip na wikang Ingles. Iminulat niya ang mga mag-aaral sa kagitingan at aral ng mga bayaning Pilipino, habang tinuruan din niya ang mga mag-aaral ng awiting makabayan. Hindi rin niya ginamit ang mga aklat na sinulat ng mga dayuhang awtor. Dahil dito, siya’y kinasuhan ng insubordinasyon o pagsuway sa kautusan ng kagawaran noong 1923. Ipinagtanggol niya ang sarili at ikinatwirang hindi dapat ipilit sa mga batang Pilipino ang kulturang banyaga sa kanilang karanasan at pang-unawa. Ngunit siya’y natalo at natanggal sa pagtuturo.

Ang pamilyang Asedillo ay naghirap ng husto. Noong sumunod na taon, ang una niyang asawang si Honorata Oblea ay namatay sa tuberculosis. Naiwan sa kanya ang anak nilang si Pedro. Muli siyang nakapag-asawa noong 1925, kay Eustaquia Pacuribot.

Nagkatrabahong muli si Asedillo nang hirangin siya ng alkalde sa bayang San Antonio bilang hepe ng pulisya roon. Naging bantog siya bilang hepe at marami ang nadakip na kriminal at bandido. Ngunit nang magpalit ang administrasyon sa bayang iyon matapos ang isang halalan, nabiktima siya ng pang-iintriga, natanggal siya bilang hepe, at pinalitan ng isang malakas sa bagong mga opisyal.

May malawakang pagkabalisa noon ang mga magbubukid at manggagawa dahil sa kawalan ng katarungang panlipunan at sa malaking agwat sa pagitan ng mayayaman at mahihirap bunga ng pyudalismo. Dahil dito, naitatag ang Katipunan ng mga Anakpawis sa Pilipinas (KAP) noong 1929. Sumapi sa KAP si Asedillo nang siya’y nagkatrabaho bilang magsasaka sa taniman ng kape. May limang layunin ang KAP: (a) mapagkaisa ang mga manggagawa at magbubukid sa makauring pamumuno ng KAP; (b) labanan ang mala-kolonyalismong pinaiiral ng imperyalismong Amerikano sa Pilipinas; (c) itaguyod at paunlarin ang kabuhayan ng mga anakpawis; (d) kamtin ang tunay na kasarinlan ng Pilipinas at itatag ang isang tunay na pamahalaan ng taongbayan; at (e) makipag-isa sa kilusang mapagpalaya sa iba’t ibang panig ng daigdig. Patakaran ng KAP sa pag-oorganisa ang pagtatayo ng mga unyon ng mga manggagawa, pagtatatag ng partido pulitikal ng mga manggagawa, at pagtataguyod ng makauring pakikibaka.

Lumaganap ang KAP sa buong Kamaynilaan, sa Timog Luzon at Gitnang Luzon. Inatasan ng pamunuan ng KAP si Asedillo na lumuwas sa Maynila upang mag-organisa ng mga manggagawa partikular sa unyon ng La Minerva Cigar and Cigarette Factory sa Tondo. Ang kanyang mag-iina ay naiwan sa Laguna.

Sa La Minerva, hindi pinakinggan ng pangasiwaang kapitalista ang hinaing ng mga manggagawa kaya’t naglunsad ng welga sina Asedillo noong 1934. Dinahas ng magkasanib na pwersa ng konstabularya at Manila Police Department ang mga manggagawa. Namatay ang limang manggagawa at nasugatan ang marami pang iba nang salakayin ng Konstabularya ang piketlayn. Sa welgang iyon ay pinagtangkaan siyang arestuhin ng Konstabularya dahil isa siya sa mga namuno doon, pero nakawala siya at tumakas papuntang Laguna, ang kanyang probinsya. Nang mabalitaan sa pahayagan ng isang opisyal na taga-Laguna na nagawi noon sa Maynila ang welgang pinangunahan ni Asedillo sa La Minerva, isinumbong nito sa pulisya’t militar na si Asedillo ay “komunista”.

Kasabay ng welga sa La Minerva ang pag-aalsa naman ng mga Sakdalista na pinangunahan ng makatang si Benigno Ramos. Layunin ng mga Sakdalista ang (a) pagtuligsa sa sistema ng edukasyong kolonyal na pinangangasiwaan ng mga gurong Amerikanong Thomasites; (2) pagtutol din sa pagtatatag ng mga baseng militar at mga instalasyon ng Amerika sa Pilipinas; at (3) ang paglaban sa dominasyon ng mga Amerikano sa ekonomya at likas na kayamanan ng ating bansa. Umabot sa 50,000 ang kasapi ng Sakdalista sa Timog at Gitnang Luzon.

Naganap ang sunud-sunod na pag-aalsa ng mga magbubukid noong Mayo 2, 1935. May 150 magsasaka ng San Ildefonso, Bulacan, ang sumalakay sa munisipyo, na pawang armado ng itak at paltik. Ibinaba nila ang mga bandila ng Amerika at Pilipinas, at itinaas ang pulang watawat ng Sakdalista. Sanlibong pesante naman ang sumalakay sa Presidencia ng Tanza at Caridad, Cavite, gayundin sa Cabuyao at Sta. Rosa, Laguna. Subalit sa ganting-salakay ng konstabularya noong Mayo 3 ay nasugpo ang mga pag-aalsa. May 50 pesante ang nagbuwis ng buhay, ilandaan ang nasugatan at may limandaang nadakip at napiit.

Nang mawasak ang unyon at mapatay ang ilang welgista sa La Minerva, nang masawi at makulong ang mga nag-alsang Sakdalista, nagpasyang tumakas ni Asedillo sa tumutugis na pulisya’t militar. Bumalik siya sa Laguna kung saan may base ng magsasaka ang KAP. Muli siyang nag-organisa. Napagtanto niyang hindi na maaari ang parlamentaryong paraan lamang ng protesta. Hindi na libro, plakard at araro ang hawak-hawak, kundi baril, bilang isang mandirigma ng masa. Ipinakita niya ang kahusayan sa pamumuno, at nagsagawa sila ng repormang agraryo, pinababa ang buwis o upa sa lupa.

Sumanib si Asedillo sa mga pwersa ni Nicolas Encallado, na kilala sa tawag na Kapitan Kulas, at beterano ng Rebolusyon at pakikidigma laban sa pananakop ng Estados Unidos. Madalas magdaos ng pulong si Asedillo sa mga baryo upang ipaliwanag ang mga layunin ng KAP at makapangalap ng mga tao para sa layunin nito. Itinaguyod din niya ang pagtutol sa pagbabayad ng buwis. Nilibot din niya ang mga baryo sa Laguna at karatig na lalawigan ng Quezon, noo’y Tayabas, upang mangalap ng magsasaka at mapaanib sa KAP.

Naging alamat si Asedillo sa mga lugar na pinaglalabas-masukan niya noon sa Laguna at Tayabas. Siya’y katulad ni Robin Hood na ang kinukuha sa mayayaman ay ibinibigay sa mahihirap. Sinasabing araw na araw ay ligtas siyang nakakapaglakad sa mga kalye ng pinagmulan niyang bayan, at pinakakain siya ng taumbayan at pinatutuloy sa kanilang bahay.

Kahit sa maikling panahon, mahusay niyang ginamit ang mga taktikang gerilya, kaya’t nakaiwas sa rekonsentrasyon at lambat-bitag ng mga tropa ni Tenyente Jesus Vargas. Natiis niya ang desperadong pagbihag sa kanyang mag-iina. Sadyang hindi matawaran ang kagitingan at determinasyong ipinamalas ni Asedillo sa mga kasamahan niya.

Noong Nobyembre 1935, pagkaraan ng mahigpit na paghahanap ng mga tropa at ahente ng gubyerno kina Asedillo at Encallado, natagpuan nila ang pinagtataguan ni Asedillo sa Cavinti, Laguna. Sa labanang nangyari, napatay si Asedillo at ang dalawa niyang badigard. Pagkaraa’y inilibot ng Konstabularya sa bayan-bayan ang bangkay ni Asedillo na tadtad ng bala. Ang buong ngitngit ng kaaway ay ipinadama kahit sa kanyang luray na bangkay. Kinaladkad sa mga poblasyon, sa harap ng mga presidencia ng mga bayang kanyang kinilusan, upang ipagyabang na patay na si Asedillo. Si Asedillo ay itinulad kay Kristong ipinako sa krus hanggang sa mamatay.



Ang tanging “krimeng” ginawa niya ay ang pagtatanggol sa mga manggagawa at magsasaka na ipaglaban ang hustisyang panlipunan, at krimen sa mga gurong Thomasites na tagapaghasik ng kulturang kolonyal na kanyang sinuway at tinuligsa. Ang halimbawa ni Asedillo ay isang halimbawang dapat tularan at hindi dapat ibaon sa limot. Ang kanyang kasaysayan ay dapat maikwento at magbigay inspirasyon sa mga manggagawa ngayon, sa mga guro, at sa mga kabataan.

Sa bawat yugto ng pagsasamantala, may isinisilang na tulad nina Andres Bonifacio, Macario Sakay, Teodoro Asedillo, Filemon Lagman, at marami pang mula sa uring manggagawa ang ayaw magpaalipin at ayaw manatiling alipin. Ang mga halimbawa nila ay magtitiyak na patuloy pang isisilang ang mga bagong Asedillo na magtatanggol sa mga api at maghahangad ng isang lipunang may pagkakapantay-pantay at walang magsasamantala ng tao sa tao.

mula sa panulat ni Gregorio V. Bituin Jr.
Maxxclip no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2008, 08:19 AM   #3552
Maxxclip
Maximus Expelliarmus
 
Maxxclip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,691
Likes (Received): 5

TEODORO ASEDILLO: Magiting na Guro, Lider-Manggagawa, Bayani

Sinaliksik at sinulat ni Gregorio V. Bituin Jr.

Isa sa pinakamagiting na bayani sa kasaysayan ng kaguruan at ng uring manggagawa sa Pilipinas si Teodoro Asedillo. Mula sa angkan ng dating katipunerong si Antonio Asedillo, isinilang siya noong Hulyo 1883 sa Longos (ngayon ay Kalayaan), sa lalawigan ng Laguna.

Mula taong 1910 hanggang 1921, si Maestro Asedillo ay naglingkod bilang guro sa mababang paaralan ng Longos, kung saan itinuro niya ang lahat ng aralin sa maghapong pagpasok sa klase ng mga mag-aaral sa elementarya. Siya’y naangat bilang head teacher ngunit nagpatuloy siyang nagturo sa mga batang nasa ikatlo at ikaapat na baytang. Kilala siya sa kahusayan sa pagtuturo. Isang disiplinaryan, ayaw niya sa mga estudyanteng nagbubulakbol, di nagsisikap matuto, at nagsasayang lang ng oras.

Sakop ng Amerika ang Pilipinas sa panahong yaon, at isa sa pinagtuunan ng pansin ng mga Amerikanong kolonisador ay ang Department of Public Instruction (DPI) sa kanilang kampanya ng pasipikasyon (pwersahang pagpayapa) at asimilasyon (sapilitang pagpapalunok sa atin ng sarili nilang kultura). Sa pamamagitan ng Philippine Commission Act No. 74 (Enero 1901), iniatas ni Gobernador-Heneral Elwell Otis ang mga sumusunod na polisiya: (a) sentralisadong sistema ng batayang edukasyon; (b) paggamit sa Ingles bilang wikang panturo at komunikasyon; at (k) pagtatatag ng isang kolehiyong normal para sa maramihang pagsasanay ng magiging mga guro. Ang paggamit ng wikang Pilipino’y mahigpit na ipinagbawal, at yaong gumagamit nito’y pinarurusahan. Walang Pilipinong pinahintulutang mamuno sa DPI, hanggang sa panahong itatag ang pamahalaang Komonwelt.

Ang mga pangyayari at kalagayang ito ang nagtulak sa unang paghihimagsik ni Asedillo. Pinili niyang gamitin ang wikang Pilipino sa halip na wikang Ingles. Iminulat niya ang mga mag-aaral sa kagitingan at aral ng mga bayaning Pilipino, habang tinuruan din niya ang mga mag-aaral ng awiting makabayan. Hindi rin niya ginamit ang mga aklat na sinulat ng mga dayuhang awtor. Dahil dito, siya’y kinasuhan ng insubordinasyon o pagsuway sa kautusan ng kagawaran noong 1923. Ipinagtanggol niya ang sarili at ikinatwirang hindi dapat ipilit sa mga batang Pilipino ang kulturang banyaga sa kanilang karanasan at pang-unawa. Ngunit siya’y natalo at natanggal sa pagtuturo.

Ang pamilyang Asedillo ay naghirap ng husto. Noong sumunod na taon, ang una niyang asawang si Honorata Oblea ay namatay sa tuberculosis. Naiwan sa kanya ang anak nilang si Pedro. Muli siyang nakapag-asawa noong 1925, kay Eustaquia Pacuribot.

Nagkatrabahong muli si Asedillo nang hirangin siya ng alkalde sa bayang San Antonio bilang hepe ng pulisya roon. Naging bantog siya bilang hepe at marami ang nadakip na kriminal at bandido. Ngunit nang magpalit ang administrasyon sa bayang iyon matapos ang isang halalan, nabiktima siya ng pang-iintriga, natanggal siya bilang hepe, at pinalitan ng isang malakas sa bagong mga opisyal.

May malawakang pagkabalisa noon ang mga magbubukid at manggagawa dahil sa kawalan ng katarungang panlipunan at sa malaking agwat sa pagitan ng mayayaman at mahihirap bunga ng pyudalismo. Dahil dito, naitatag ang Katipunan ng mga Anakpawis sa Pilipinas (KAP) noong 1929. Sumapi sa KAP si Asedillo nang siya’y nagkatrabaho bilang magsasaka sa taniman ng kape. May limang layunin ang KAP: (a) mapagkaisa ang mga manggagawa at magbubukid sa makauring pamumuno ng KAP; (b) labanan ang mala-kolonyalismong pinaiiral ng imperyalismong Amerikano sa Pilipinas; (c) itaguyod at paunlarin ang kabuhayan ng mga anakpawis; (d) kamtin ang tunay na kasarinlan ng Pilipinas at itatag ang isang tunay na pamahalaan ng taongbayan; at (e) makipag-isa sa kilusang mapagpalaya sa iba’t ibang panig ng daigdig. Patakaran ng KAP sa pag-oorganisa ang pagtatayo ng mga unyon ng mga manggagawa, pagtatatag ng partido pulitikal ng mga manggagawa, at pagtataguyod ng makauring pakikibaka.

Lumaganap ang KAP sa buong Kamaynilaan, sa Timog Luzon at Gitnang Luzon. Inatasan ng pamunuan ng KAP si Asedillo na lumuwas sa Maynila upang mag-organisa ng mga manggagawa partikular sa unyon ng La Minerva Cigar and Cigarette Factory sa Tondo. Ang kanyang mag-iina ay naiwan sa Laguna.

Sa La Minerva, hindi pinakinggan ng pangasiwaang kapitalista ang hinaing ng mga manggagawa kaya’t naglunsad ng welga sina Asedillo noong 1934. Dinahas ng magkasanib na pwersa ng konstabularya at Manila Police Department ang mga manggagawa. Namatay ang limang manggagawa at nasugatan ang marami pang iba nang salakayin ng Konstabularya ang piketlayn. Sa welgang iyon ay pinagtangkaan siyang arestuhin ng Konstabularya dahil isa siya sa mga namuno doon, pero nakawala siya at tumakas papuntang Laguna, ang kanyang probinsya. Nang mabalitaan sa pahayagan ng isang opisyal na taga-Laguna na nagawi noon sa Maynila ang welgang pinangunahan ni Asedillo sa La Minerva, isinumbong nito sa pulisya’t militar na si Asedillo ay “komunista”.

Kasabay ng welga sa La Minerva ang pag-aalsa naman ng mga Sakdalista na pinangunahan ng makatang si Benigno Ramos. Layunin ng mga Sakdalista ang (a) pagtuligsa sa sistema ng edukasyong kolonyal na pinangangasiwaan ng mga gurong Amerikanong Thomasites; (2) pagtutol din sa pagtatatag ng mga baseng militar at mga instalasyon ng Amerika sa Pilipinas; at (3) ang paglaban sa dominasyon ng mga Amerikano sa ekonomya at likas na kayamanan ng ating bansa. Umabot sa 50,000 ang kasapi ng Sakdalista sa Timog at Gitnang Luzon.

Naganap ang sunud-sunod na pag-aalsa ng mga magbubukid noong Mayo 2, 1935. May 150 magsasaka ng San Ildefonso, Bulacan, ang sumalakay sa munisipyo, na pawang armado ng itak at paltik. Ibinaba nila ang mga bandila ng Amerika at Pilipinas, at itinaas ang pulang watawat ng Sakdalista. Sanlibong pesante naman ang sumalakay sa Presidencia ng Tanza at Caridad, Cavite, gayundin sa Cabuyao at Sta. Rosa, Laguna. Subalit sa ganting-salakay ng konstabularya noong Mayo 3 ay nasugpo ang mga pag-aalsa. May 50 pesante ang nagbuwis ng buhay, ilandaan ang nasugatan at may limandaang nadakip at napiit.

Nang mawasak ang unyon at mapatay ang ilang welgista sa La Minerva, nang masawi at makulong ang mga nag-alsang Sakdalista, nagpasyang tumakas ni Asedillo sa tumutugis na pulisya’t militar. Bumalik siya sa Laguna kung saan may base ng magsasaka ang KAP. Muli siyang nag-organisa. Napagtanto niyang hindi na maaari ang parlamentaryong paraan lamang ng protesta. Hindi na libro, plakard at araro ang hawak-hawak, kundi baril, bilang isang mandirigma ng masa. Ipinakita niya ang kahusayan sa pamumuno, at nagsagawa sila ng repormang agraryo, pinababa ang buwis o upa sa lupa.

Sumanib si Asedillo sa mga pwersa ni Nicolas Encallado, na kilala sa tawag na Kapitan Kulas, at beterano ng Rebolusyon at pakikidigma laban sa pananakop ng Estados Unidos. Madalas magdaos ng pulong si Asedillo sa mga baryo upang ipaliwanag ang mga layunin ng KAP at makapangalap ng mga tao para sa layunin nito. Itinaguyod din niya ang pagtutol sa pagbabayad ng buwis. Nilibot din niya ang mga baryo sa Laguna at karatig na lalawigan ng Quezon, noo’y Tayabas, upang mangalap ng magsasaka at mapaanib sa KAP.

Naging alamat si Asedillo sa mga lugar na pinaglalabas-masukan niya noon sa Laguna at Tayabas. Siya’y katulad ni Robin Hood na ang kinukuha sa mayayaman ay ibinibigay sa mahihirap. Sinasabing araw na araw ay ligtas siyang nakakapaglakad sa mga kalye ng pinagmulan niyang bayan, at pinakakain siya ng taumbayan at pinatutuloy sa kanilang bahay.

Kahit sa maikling panahon, mahusay niyang ginamit ang mga taktikang gerilya, kaya’t nakaiwas sa rekonsentrasyon at lambat-bitag ng mga tropa ni Tenyente Jesus Vargas. Natiis niya ang desperadong pagbihag sa kanyang mag-iina. Sadyang hindi matawaran ang kagitingan at determinasyong ipinamalas ni Asedillo sa mga kasamahan niya.

Noong Nobyembre 1935, pagkaraan ng mahigpit na paghahanap ng mga tropa at ahente ng gubyerno kina Asedillo at Encallado, natagpuan nila ang pinagtataguan ni Asedillo sa Cavinti, Laguna. Sa labanang nangyari, napatay si Asedillo at ang dalawa niyang badigard. Pagkaraa’y inilibot ng Konstabularya sa bayan-bayan ang bangkay ni Asedillo na tadtad ng bala. Ang buong ngitngit ng kaaway ay ipinadama kahit sa kanyang luray na bangkay. Kinaladkad sa mga poblasyon, sa harap ng mga presidencia ng mga bayang kanyang kinilusan, upang ipagyabang na patay na si Asedillo. Si Asedillo ay itinulad kay Kristong ipinako sa krus hanggang sa mamatay.



Ang tanging “krimeng” ginawa niya ay ang pagtatanggol sa mga manggagawa at magsasaka na ipaglaban ang hustisyang panlipunan, at krimen sa mga gurong Thomasites na tagapaghasik ng kulturang kolonyal na kanyang sinuway at tinuligsa. Ang halimbawa ni Asedillo ay isang halimbawang dapat tularan at hindi dapat ibaon sa limot. Ang kanyang kasaysayan ay dapat maikwento at magbigay inspirasyon sa mga manggagawa ngayon, sa mga guro, at sa mga kabataan.

Sa bawat yugto ng pagsasamantala, may isinisilang na tulad nina Andres Bonifacio, Macario Sakay, Teodoro Asedillo, Filemon Lagman, at marami pang mula sa uring manggagawa ang ayaw magpaalipin at ayaw manatiling alipin. Ang mga halimbawa nila ay magtitiyak na patuloy pang isisilang ang mga bagong Asedillo na magtatanggol sa mga api at maghahangad ng isang lipunang may pagkakapantay-pantay at walang magsasamantala ng tao sa tao.

mula sa panulat ni Gregorio V. Bituin Jr.
Maxxclip no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2008, 10:02 PM   #3553
Animo
I'm Watching You
 
Animo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,571
Likes (Received): 141

U.S. war with Philippines told in Presidio exhibit



Spectators view "The U.S. in the Philippines, 1898-1915," a free exhibit at the Presidio on a war that was virtually ignored by history books. (Liz Hafalia / The Chronicle)



Presidio soldiers walk through San Francisco as they prepare for the voyage to the Philippines, a photo in the exhibit at the Presidio. (The Presidio Trust / Courtesy to The Chronicle)



Randolph Delehanty, historian and curator, shows "The U.S. in the Philippines, 1898-1915," free to the public at the Presidio. (Liz Hafalia / The Chronicle)

Carl Nolte, Chronicle Staff Writer

Friday, November 14, 2008

A new exhibit in one of San Francisco's oldest buildings tells the story of America's nearly forgotten war in the Philippines, a struggle with heroes, atrocities, tragedies, and a strong anti-war movement in the United States.

San Francisco was a major port of embarkation and staging area for the war, and reminders of the battles in the Philippines are all over the city - including the magnificent Dewey monument in Union Square commemorating the American naval victory at Manila Bay in 1898.

"Monuments without memories," historian Randolph Delehanty calls the city's reminders of the Philippine war. He is the curator of a free exhibit in the Presidio on the Philippine-American War that dragged on for close to 17 years and is virtually ignored in the history books.

"Americans know nothing about this war," Delehanty said. "This is not another exhibit about the Civil War."

Delehanty's exhibit, "War and Dissent," fills nine galleries at the Presidio's Officers' Club, a building that dates to the days when the Spanish ruled not only the Philippines, but California as well.

The war started with a glorious victory over the Spanish fleet on May 1, 1898, when Commodore George Dewey gave a laconic order to the captain of the cruiser Olympia. "You may fire when ready, Gridley." Dewey said. Gridley did and the Spanish fleet in the Philippines was annihilated.

The Olympia was built at a San Francisco shipyard, and the monument to Dewey's famous victory is the centerpiece of Union Square. The Spanish-American War also helped make the United States a power in the Pacific - and produced an economic boom in San Francisco.

The colonial yoke

It began with the aim of helping rebels in Cuba free themselves from what was described as the cruel Spanish colonial yoke. But while President William McKinley backed giving Cuba its independence, he decided that the United States should keep the Philippines for itself. The other spoils of the Spanish-American War: Puerto Rico and Guam.

The Filipinos resisted trading one colonial master for another. After a tense standoff between the American army of occupation and Filipino insurgents, shooting broke out near Manila, and a long and bitter war followed.

It began as a setpiece war, with armies facing each other, and then evolved into a guerrilla struggle all over the Philippines. It didn't end until 1915, when Muslims in the southern Philippines finally gave up.

More than 4,300 U.S. troops died in the war, about the same number who have died in the war in Iraq. Filipino forces lost an estimated 16,000 to 20,000. There were many more civilian deaths.

San Francisco was a center of the war effort. American troops, mostly volunteers and later some Regular Army soldiers, came to San Francisco to be trained and shipped to the Philippines - at first to fight the Spanish and occupy the islands. Later, they fought the Filipinos.

The troops lived in tent cities in what is now the city's Richmond District. The Presidio, says Delehanty, was transformed into a major military post. More than 100,000 U.S. soldiers served in the Philippine war.

One of them, Sgt. Hiram Harlow of the 51st Iowa Volunteers, was shipped to San Francisco and later to the Philippines, where he saw combat against Filipino insurgent troops.

He kept a diary. Years later, his grandson, Allan Harlan, who lives in Sacramento, found the diary and 80-year-old photographs. He wrote to Presidio historians. "He wanted to know why his grandfather had been in the Philippines," Delehanty said.

Sgt. Harlow's old pictures - showing American troops moving in a skirmish line, scenes from villages and towns, soldiers and rebels - are the heart of the exhibition.

There are also excerpts from a book about the Lopez family, wealthy Filipino planters who had conflicting views about the war with the United States.

Some of the family's men were rebel army officers, and some urged cooperation with the Americans. "It was a complex war," Delehanty said.

There were heroes: Frederick Funston, an American general, captured Emilio Auguinaldo, the Philippine president, by a combination of guile and bravery. There was tragedy: the infant Philippine republic was torn by internal divisions, which led to its defeat.

There were also atrocities. Some were committed by Filipino troops when the war went into a guerrilla stage, but others were committed by American forces determined to fight guerrilla tactics. Anti-war forces seized on the atrocities to make a point that the war was a battle unworthy of American principles.

One congressional hearing heard evidence about American use of torture, including a method called "the water cure."

The most infamous incident involved an order by U.S. Army Gen. Jacob Smith to a Marine officer. He told him to make the island of Samar "a howling wilderness."

"I want no prisoners," Smith said. "I wish you to kill and burn and the more you kill and burn the better it will please me. I want all persons killed who are capable of bearing arms."

By this, Smith said, he meant all males over the age of 10.

These reports from a long-ago war sound familiar, and so does the reaction in the United States.

The anti-war movement


One whole gallery in the exhibit is full of material from the anti-war and anti-annexation movement in America. Opposition to the war was formidable, both on the grounds that the United States should not be a colonial power and outrage over the conduct of the war by U.S. forces in the Philippines.

Among the foes were Mark Twain, San Francisco columnist Ambrose Bierce, David Starr Jordan, the president of Stanford University, and Andrew Carnegie, the industrialist.

"We have crushed and deceived a confiding people," Mark Twain wrote. "We have turned against the weak and friendless who trusted us, we have stamped out a just and intelligent and well-ordered republic ... we have debouched America's honor."

The Democrats ran on an anti-war plank in the election of 1900, denouncing annexation of the Philippines in "an unnecessary war" that sacrificed American lives and placed the United States in the "un-American position of crushing with military force the efforts of our former allies to achieve liberty and self-government."

But the turn of the 19th century was the high tide of colonialism. The United States won the war after a long struggle, kept the Philippines, and poured resources into the islands and promised eventual independence.

The United States lost the Philippines again after the Japanese invasion in World War II, but nearly all the Filipino people stayed loyal to the American cause until American forces returned in 1944.

The United States granted Philippine independence on July 4, 1946, but the Philippine government now celebrates June 12 as its independence day, in honor of the 1898 declaration of independence that led to war with the United States.

What might have happened had the anti-war side won in the United States, and the first Philippine republic not been crushed by the United States?

"I don't know," Delehanty said. "I'm a historian, not a soothsayer. I can only tell you what did happen."

'War and Dissent'

The exhibit "War and Dissent," on the Philippine-American War, is open from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Wednesday through Sunday through February at the Officers' Club in the Presidio. Free admission.

In addition, at 7 p.m. Thursday , Bindlestiff Studio, a local theater group, presents a dramatic production on the Lopez family in the Philippines during the Philippine-American War. The program will be repeated Dec. 4 and Jan. 8.

The National Park Service is offering walks in the Presidio to see sites from the Philippine-American War this Saturday, Sunday, Wednesday and Thursday. Call (415) 561-4323 for information.

E-mail Carl Nolte at cnolte@sfchronicle.com.
Animo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2008, 10:02 PM   #3554
Animo
I'm Watching You
 
Animo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,571
Likes (Received): 141

U.S. war with Philippines told in Presidio exhibit



Spectators view "The U.S. in the Philippines, 1898-1915," a free exhibit at the Presidio on a war that was virtually ignored by history books. (Liz Hafalia / The Chronicle)



Presidio soldiers walk through San Francisco as they prepare for the voyage to the Philippines, a photo in the exhibit at the Presidio. (The Presidio Trust / Courtesy to The Chronicle)



Randolph Delehanty, historian and curator, shows "The U.S. in the Philippines, 1898-1915," free to the public at the Presidio. (Liz Hafalia / The Chronicle)

Carl Nolte, Chronicle Staff Writer

Friday, November 14, 2008

A new exhibit in one of San Francisco's oldest buildings tells the story of America's nearly forgotten war in the Philippines, a struggle with heroes, atrocities, tragedies, and a strong anti-war movement in the United States.

San Francisco was a major port of embarkation and staging area for the war, and reminders of the battles in the Philippines are all over the city - including the magnificent Dewey monument in Union Square commemorating the American naval victory at Manila Bay in 1898.

"Monuments without memories," historian Randolph Delehanty calls the city's reminders of the Philippine war. He is the curator of a free exhibit in the Presidio on the Philippine-American War that dragged on for close to 17 years and is virtually ignored in the history books.

"Americans know nothing about this war," Delehanty said. "This is not another exhibit about the Civil War."

Delehanty's exhibit, "War and Dissent," fills nine galleries at the Presidio's Officers' Club, a building that dates to the days when the Spanish ruled not only the Philippines, but California as well.

The war started with a glorious victory over the Spanish fleet on May 1, 1898, when Commodore George Dewey gave a laconic order to the captain of the cruiser Olympia. "You may fire when ready, Gridley." Dewey said. Gridley did and the Spanish fleet in the Philippines was annihilated.

The Olympia was built at a San Francisco shipyard, and the monument to Dewey's famous victory is the centerpiece of Union Square. The Spanish-American War also helped make the United States a power in the Pacific - and produced an economic boom in San Francisco.

The colonial yoke

It began with the aim of helping rebels in Cuba free themselves from what was described as the cruel Spanish colonial yoke. But while President William McKinley backed giving Cuba its independence, he decided that the United States should keep the Philippines for itself. The other spoils of the Spanish-American War: Puerto Rico and Guam.

The Filipinos resisted trading one colonial master for another. After a tense standoff between the American army of occupation and Filipino insurgents, shooting broke out near Manila, and a long and bitter war followed.

It began as a setpiece war, with armies facing each other, and then evolved into a guerrilla struggle all over the Philippines. It didn't end until 1915, when Muslims in the southern Philippines finally gave up.

More than 4,300 U.S. troops died in the war, about the same number who have died in the war in Iraq. Filipino forces lost an estimated 16,000 to 20,000. There were many more civilian deaths.

San Francisco was a center of the war effort. American troops, mostly volunteers and later some Regular Army soldiers, came to San Francisco to be trained and shipped to the Philippines - at first to fight the Spanish and occupy the islands. Later, they fought the Filipinos.

The troops lived in tent cities in what is now the city's Richmond District. The Presidio, says Delehanty, was transformed into a major military post. More than 100,000 U.S. soldiers served in the Philippine war.

One of them, Sgt. Hiram Harlow of the 51st Iowa Volunteers, was shipped to San Francisco and later to the Philippines, where he saw combat against Filipino insurgent troops.

He kept a diary. Years later, his grandson, Allan Harlan, who lives in Sacramento, found the diary and 80-year-old photographs. He wrote to Presidio historians. "He wanted to know why his grandfather had been in the Philippines," Delehanty said.

Sgt. Harlow's old pictures - showing American troops moving in a skirmish line, scenes from villages and towns, soldiers and rebels - are the heart of the exhibition.

There are also excerpts from a book about the Lopez family, wealthy Filipino planters who had conflicting views about the war with the United States.

Some of the family's men were rebel army officers, and some urged cooperation with the Americans. "It was a complex war," Delehanty said.

There were heroes: Frederick Funston, an American general, captured Emilio Auguinaldo, the Philippine president, by a combination of guile and bravery. There was tragedy: the infant Philippine republic was torn by internal divisions, which led to its defeat.

There were also atrocities. Some were committed by Filipino troops when the war went into a guerrilla stage, but others were committed by American forces determined to fight guerrilla tactics. Anti-war forces seized on the atrocities to make a point that the war was a battle unworthy of American principles.

One congressional hearing heard evidence about American use of torture, including a method called "the water cure."

The most infamous incident involved an order by U.S. Army Gen. Jacob Smith to a Marine officer. He told him to make the island of Samar "a howling wilderness."

"I want no prisoners," Smith said. "I wish you to kill and burn and the more you kill and burn the better it will please me. I want all persons killed who are capable of bearing arms."

By this, Smith said, he meant all males over the age of 10.

These reports from a long-ago war sound familiar, and so does the reaction in the United States.

The anti-war movement


One whole gallery in the exhibit is full of material from the anti-war and anti-annexation movement in America. Opposition to the war was formidable, both on the grounds that the United States should not be a colonial power and outrage over the conduct of the war by U.S. forces in the Philippines.

Among the foes were Mark Twain, San Francisco columnist Ambrose Bierce, David Starr Jordan, the president of Stanford University, and Andrew Carnegie, the industrialist.

"We have crushed and deceived a confiding people," Mark Twain wrote. "We have turned against the weak and friendless who trusted us, we have stamped out a just and intelligent and well-ordered republic ... we have debouched America's honor."

The Democrats ran on an anti-war plank in the election of 1900, denouncing annexation of the Philippines in "an unnecessary war" that sacrificed American lives and placed the United States in the "un-American position of crushing with military force the efforts of our former allies to achieve liberty and self-government."

But the turn of the 19th century was the high tide of colonialism. The United States won the war after a long struggle, kept the Philippines, and poured resources into the islands and promised eventual independence.

The United States lost the Philippines again after the Japanese invasion in World War II, but nearly all the Filipino people stayed loyal to the American cause until American forces returned in 1944.

The United States granted Philippine independence on July 4, 1946, but the Philippine government now celebrates June 12 as its independence day, in honor of the 1898 declaration of independence that led to war with the United States.

What might have happened had the anti-war side won in the United States, and the first Philippine republic not been crushed by the United States?

"I don't know," Delehanty said. "I'm a historian, not a soothsayer. I can only tell you what did happen."

'War and Dissent'

The exhibit "War and Dissent," on the Philippine-American War, is open from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Wednesday through Sunday through February at the Officers' Club in the Presidio. Free admission.

In addition, at 7 p.m. Thursday , Bindlestiff Studio, a local theater group, presents a dramatic production on the Lopez family in the Philippines during the Philippine-American War. The program will be repeated Dec. 4 and Jan. 8.

The National Park Service is offering walks in the Presidio to see sites from the Philippine-American War this Saturday, Sunday, Wednesday and Thursday. Call (415) 561-4323 for information.

E-mail Carl Nolte at cnolte@sfchronicle.com.
Animo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2008, 10:02 PM   #3555
Animo
I'm Watching You
 
Animo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,571
Likes (Received): 141

U.S. war with Philippines told in Presidio exhibit



Spectators view "The U.S. in the Philippines, 1898-1915," a free exhibit at the Presidio on a war that was virtually ignored by history books. (Liz Hafalia / The Chronicle)



Presidio soldiers walk through San Francisco as they prepare for the voyage to the Philippines, a photo in the exhibit at the Presidio. (The Presidio Trust / Courtesy to The Chronicle)



Randolph Delehanty, historian and curator, shows "The U.S. in the Philippines, 1898-1915," free to the public at the Presidio. (Liz Hafalia / The Chronicle)

Carl Nolte, Chronicle Staff Writer

Friday, November 14, 2008

A new exhibit in one of San Francisco's oldest buildings tells the story of America's nearly forgotten war in the Philippines, a struggle with heroes, atrocities, tragedies, and a strong anti-war movement in the United States.

San Francisco was a major port of embarkation and staging area for the war, and reminders of the battles in the Philippines are all over the city - including the magnificent Dewey monument in Union Square commemorating the American naval victory at Manila Bay in 1898.

"Monuments without memories," historian Randolph Delehanty calls the city's reminders of the Philippine war. He is the curator of a free exhibit in the Presidio on the Philippine-American War that dragged on for close to 17 years and is virtually ignored in the history books.

"Americans know nothing about this war," Delehanty said. "This is not another exhibit about the Civil War."

Delehanty's exhibit, "War and Dissent," fills nine galleries at the Presidio's Officers' Club, a building that dates to the days when the Spanish ruled not only the Philippines, but California as well.

The war started with a glorious victory over the Spanish fleet on May 1, 1898, when Commodore George Dewey gave a laconic order to the captain of the cruiser Olympia. "You may fire when ready, Gridley." Dewey said. Gridley did and the Spanish fleet in the Philippines was annihilated.

The Olympia was built at a San Francisco shipyard, and the monument to Dewey's famous victory is the centerpiece of Union Square. The Spanish-American War also helped make the United States a power in the Pacific - and produced an economic boom in San Francisco.

The colonial yoke

It began with the aim of helping rebels in Cuba free themselves from what was described as the cruel Spanish colonial yoke. But while President William McKinley backed giving Cuba its independence, he decided that the United States should keep the Philippines for itself. The other spoils of the Spanish-American War: Puerto Rico and Guam.

The Filipinos resisted trading one colonial master for another. After a tense standoff between the American army of occupation and Filipino insurgents, shooting broke out near Manila, and a long and bitter war followed.

It began as a setpiece war, with armies facing each other, and then evolved into a guerrilla struggle all over the Philippines. It didn't end until 1915, when Muslims in the southern Philippines finally gave up.

More than 4,300 U.S. troops died in the war, about the same number who have died in the war in Iraq. Filipino forces lost an estimated 16,000 to 20,000. There were many more civilian deaths.

San Francisco was a center of the war effort. American troops, mostly volunteers and later some Regular Army soldiers, came to San Francisco to be trained and shipped to the Philippines - at first to fight the Spanish and occupy the islands. Later, they fought the Filipinos.

The troops lived in tent cities in what is now the city's Richmond District. The Presidio, says Delehanty, was transformed into a major military post. More than 100,000 U.S. soldiers served in the Philippine war.

One of them, Sgt. Hiram Harlow of the 51st Iowa Volunteers, was shipped to San Francisco and later to the Philippines, where he saw combat against Filipino insurgent troops.

He kept a diary. Years later, his grandson, Allan Harlan, who lives in Sacramento, found the diary and 80-year-old photographs. He wrote to Presidio historians. "He wanted to know why his grandfather had been in the Philippines," Delehanty said.

Sgt. Harlow's old pictures - showing American troops moving in a skirmish line, scenes from villages and towns, soldiers and rebels - are the heart of the exhibition.

There are also excerpts from a book about the Lopez family, wealthy Filipino planters who had conflicting views about the war with the United States.

Some of the family's men were rebel army officers, and some urged cooperation with the Americans. "It was a complex war," Delehanty said.

There were heroes: Frederick Funston, an American general, captured Emilio Auguinaldo, the Philippine president, by a combination of guile and bravery. There was tragedy: the infant Philippine republic was torn by internal divisions, which led to its defeat.

There were also atrocities. Some were committed by Filipino troops when the war went into a guerrilla stage, but others were committed by American forces determined to fight guerrilla tactics. Anti-war forces seized on the atrocities to make a point that the war was a battle unworthy of American principles.

One congressional hearing heard evidence about American use of torture, including a method called "the water cure."

The most infamous incident involved an order by U.S. Army Gen. Jacob Smith to a Marine officer. He told him to make the island of Samar "a howling wilderness."

"I want no prisoners," Smith said. "I wish you to kill and burn and the more you kill and burn the better it will please me. I want all persons killed who are capable of bearing arms."

By this, Smith said, he meant all males over the age of 10.

These reports from a long-ago war sound familiar, and so does the reaction in the United States.

The anti-war movement


One whole gallery in the exhibit is full of material from the anti-war and anti-annexation movement in America. Opposition to the war was formidable, both on the grounds that the United States should not be a colonial power and outrage over the conduct of the war by U.S. forces in the Philippines.

Among the foes were Mark Twain, San Francisco columnist Ambrose Bierce, David Starr Jordan, the president of Stanford University, and Andrew Carnegie, the industrialist.

"We have crushed and deceived a confiding people," Mark Twain wrote. "We have turned against the weak and friendless who trusted us, we have stamped out a just and intelligent and well-ordered republic ... we have debouched America's honor."

The Democrats ran on an anti-war plank in the election of 1900, denouncing annexation of the Philippines in "an unnecessary war" that sacrificed American lives and placed the United States in the "un-American position of crushing with military force the efforts of our former allies to achieve liberty and self-government."

But the turn of the 19th century was the high tide of colonialism. The United States won the war after a long struggle, kept the Philippines, and poured resources into the islands and promised eventual independence.

The United States lost the Philippines again after the Japanese invasion in World War II, but nearly all the Filipino people stayed loyal to the American cause until American forces returned in 1944.

The United States granted Philippine independence on July 4, 1946, but the Philippine government now celebrates June 12 as its independence day, in honor of the 1898 declaration of independence that led to war with the United States.

What might have happened had the anti-war side won in the United States, and the first Philippine republic not been crushed by the United States?

"I don't know," Delehanty said. "I'm a historian, not a soothsayer. I can only tell you what did happen."

'War and Dissent'

The exhibit "War and Dissent," on the Philippine-American War, is open from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. Wednesday through Sunday through February at the Officers' Club in the Presidio. Free admission.

In addition, at 7 p.m. Thursday , Bindlestiff Studio, a local theater group, presents a dramatic production on the Lopez family in the Philippines during the Philippine-American War. The program will be repeated Dec. 4 and Jan. 8.

The National Park Service is offering walks in the Presidio to see sites from the Philippine-American War this Saturday, Sunday, Wednesday and Thursday. Call (415) 561-4323 for information.

E-mail Carl Nolte at cnolte@sfchronicle.com.
Animo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 18th, 2008, 11:55 PM   #3556
Animo
I'm Watching You
 
Animo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,571
Likes (Received): 141

Filipino veterans of second world war fight for US military benefits

Decades after they served, many of the veterans feel disappointed and, in some cases, betrayed by the US



For three months during the second world war, Telesforo Yague Sr and his fellow Filipino guerrillas travelled from village to village in the Philippines hiding an injured American pilot.

The pilot's plane had crashed in the mountains, and they wanted to keep him safe from occupying Japanese soldiers. So as the Japanese military were killing Filipinos for aiding Americans, the soldiers put the pilot in a hay-filled cart pulled by a water buffalo.

"They thought we were just farmers," said Yague, now 86 and living in Chicago. "We were able to save him. That guy should be very thankful."

Yague is one of 250,000 Filipino soldiers who pledged loyalty to the US during the second world war when President Franklin Roosevelt tapped the Philippines - then a US territory - to serve under the US army. About 18,000 Filipino veterans from the war are still alive.

About 6,000 live in the US, and 100 live in the Chicago area. Filipino veterans - now in their 80s and 90s - brim with pride when talking about their service to the US. But decades after they served, many feel disappointed, frustrated and, in some cases, betrayed by the US.

In September, the US House of Representatives rejected a bill that would give full military benefits to Filipino veterans in the US and overseas. Until that vote, Filipinos thought the bill had a chance because the Senate had approved it in April. A separate bill that would give veterans a lump sum was passed by the House, but is not expected to be taken up in the lame-duck Senate.

The effort is back to square one, disappointing Filipino veterans in the Chicago area.

"We've never come this far before," said Ben de Guzman, a spokesman for the National Alliance for Filipino Veterans Equity. "We have been fighting for the past 20 years just trying to get the committee to vote. I think for this to have come so close is obviously not good news for the veterans."

Benefits for Filipino veterans were taken away in 1946, when the Philippines was declared independent. De Guzman said soldiers in 67 countries have been ordered to serve under the US, and Filipinos are the only ones to be stripped of their benefits.

Nonetheless, many Filipino veterans cherish their medals and American flag pins. "This is an injustice that should be corrected," said Steve Robertson, legislative director for the American Legion.

The American Legion has supported benefits for Filipino veterans for decades, Robertson said. However, the group voiced opposition to the proposal that was rejected in September because it called for taking benefits away from some US veterans to give to Filipino veterans. Robertson said that would have set a dangerous precedent.

"We did not fight to be compensated," Yague said. "But if other people are being compensated, why not us? It is the duty of the government to help their soldiers."

Some veterans, such as Yague, receive partial disability benefits for injuries suffered during service. He received an eye injury from flying shrapnel.

But many veterans have been denied because they receive benefits for their service in the Philippine Army later in their career. Other Filipino veterans who served under the US army during the post-war reconstruction, but not during the conflict, have also been denied.

Though some veterans have lobbied to get benefits for themselves, many do not have proof of their service or their names do not appear on military lists.

"I'm disappointed," said veteran Emilio Garcera, 81, who was denied benefits four times. "For so many years, we have not been given a centavo. The sad part is that we are not recognised."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008...erans-benefits
Animo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 18th, 2008, 11:55 PM   #3557
Animo
I'm Watching You
 
Animo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,571
Likes (Received): 141

Filipino veterans of second world war fight for US military benefits

Decades after they served, many of the veterans feel disappointed and, in some cases, betrayed by the US



For three months during the second world war, Telesforo Yague Sr and his fellow Filipino guerrillas travelled from village to village in the Philippines hiding an injured American pilot.

The pilot's plane had crashed in the mountains, and they wanted to keep him safe from occupying Japanese soldiers. So as the Japanese military were killing Filipinos for aiding Americans, the soldiers put the pilot in a hay-filled cart pulled by a water buffalo.

"They thought we were just farmers," said Yague, now 86 and living in Chicago. "We were able to save him. That guy should be very thankful."

Yague is one of 250,000 Filipino soldiers who pledged loyalty to the US during the second world war when President Franklin Roosevelt tapped the Philippines - then a US territory - to serve under the US army. About 18,000 Filipino veterans from the war are still alive.

About 6,000 live in the US, and 100 live in the Chicago area. Filipino veterans - now in their 80s and 90s - brim with pride when talking about their service to the US. But decades after they served, many feel disappointed, frustrated and, in some cases, betrayed by the US.

In September, the US House of Representatives rejected a bill that would give full military benefits to Filipino veterans in the US and overseas. Until that vote, Filipinos thought the bill had a chance because the Senate had approved it in April. A separate bill that would give veterans a lump sum was passed by the House, but is not expected to be taken up in the lame-duck Senate.

The effort is back to square one, disappointing Filipino veterans in the Chicago area.

"We've never come this far before," said Ben de Guzman, a spokesman for the National Alliance for Filipino Veterans Equity. "We have been fighting for the past 20 years just trying to get the committee to vote. I think for this to have come so close is obviously not good news for the veterans."

Benefits for Filipino veterans were taken away in 1946, when the Philippines was declared independent. De Guzman said soldiers in 67 countries have been ordered to serve under the US, and Filipinos are the only ones to be stripped of their benefits.

Nonetheless, many Filipino veterans cherish their medals and American flag pins. "This is an injustice that should be corrected," said Steve Robertson, legislative director for the American Legion.

The American Legion has supported benefits for Filipino veterans for decades, Robertson said. However, the group voiced opposition to the proposal that was rejected in September because it called for taking benefits away from some US veterans to give to Filipino veterans. Robertson said that would have set a dangerous precedent.

"We did not fight to be compensated," Yague said. "But if other people are being compensated, why not us? It is the duty of the government to help their soldiers."

Some veterans, such as Yague, receive partial disability benefits for injuries suffered during service. He received an eye injury from flying shrapnel.

But many veterans have been denied because they receive benefits for their service in the Philippine Army later in their career. Other Filipino veterans who served under the US army during the post-war reconstruction, but not during the conflict, have also been denied.

Though some veterans have lobbied to get benefits for themselves, many do not have proof of their service or their names do not appear on military lists.

"I'm disappointed," said veteran Emilio Garcera, 81, who was denied benefits four times. "For so many years, we have not been given a centavo. The sad part is that we are not recognised."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008...erans-benefits
Animo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 18th, 2008, 11:55 PM   #3558
Animo
I'm Watching You
 
Animo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 9,571
Likes (Received): 141

Filipino veterans of second world war fight for US military benefits

Decades after they served, many of the veterans feel disappointed and, in some cases, betrayed by the US



For three months during the second world war, Telesforo Yague Sr and his fellow Filipino guerrillas travelled from village to village in the Philippines hiding an injured American pilot.

The pilot's plane had crashed in the mountains, and they wanted to keep him safe from occupying Japanese soldiers. So as the Japanese military were killing Filipinos for aiding Americans, the soldiers put the pilot in a hay-filled cart pulled by a water buffalo.

"They thought we were just farmers," said Yague, now 86 and living in Chicago. "We were able to save him. That guy should be very thankful."

Yague is one of 250,000 Filipino soldiers who pledged loyalty to the US during the second world war when President Franklin Roosevelt tapped the Philippines - then a US territory - to serve under the US army. About 18,000 Filipino veterans from the war are still alive.

About 6,000 live in the US, and 100 live in the Chicago area. Filipino veterans - now in their 80s and 90s - brim with pride when talking about their service to the US. But decades after they served, many feel disappointed, frustrated and, in some cases, betrayed by the US.

In September, the US House of Representatives rejected a bill that would give full military benefits to Filipino veterans in the US and overseas. Until that vote, Filipinos thought the bill had a chance because the Senate had approved it in April. A separate bill that would give veterans a lump sum was passed by the House, but is not expected to be taken up in the lame-duck Senate.

The effort is back to square one, disappointing Filipino veterans in the Chicago area.

"We've never come this far before," said Ben de Guzman, a spokesman for the National Alliance for Filipino Veterans Equity. "We have been fighting for the past 20 years just trying to get the committee to vote. I think for this to have come so close is obviously not good news for the veterans."

Benefits for Filipino veterans were taken away in 1946, when the Philippines was declared independent. De Guzman said soldiers in 67 countries have been ordered to serve under the US, and Filipinos are the only ones to be stripped of their benefits.

Nonetheless, many Filipino veterans cherish their medals and American flag pins. "This is an injustice that should be corrected," said Steve Robertson, legislative director for the American Legion.

The American Legion has supported benefits for Filipino veterans for decades, Robertson said. However, the group voiced opposition to the proposal that was rejected in September because it called for taking benefits away from some US veterans to give to Filipino veterans. Robertson said that would have set a dangerous precedent.

"We did not fight to be compensated," Yague said. "But if other people are being compensated, why not us? It is the duty of the government to help their soldiers."

Some veterans, such as Yague, receive partial disability benefits for injuries suffered during service. He received an eye injury from flying shrapnel.

But many veterans have been denied because they receive benefits for their service in the Philippine Army later in their career. Other Filipino veterans who served under the US army during the post-war reconstruction, but not during the conflict, have also been denied.

Though some veterans have lobbied to get benefits for themselves, many do not have proof of their service or their names do not appear on military lists.

"I'm disappointed," said veteran Emilio Garcera, 81, who was denied benefits four times. "For so many years, we have not been given a centavo. The sad part is that we are not recognised."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008...erans-benefits
Animo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 23rd, 2008, 04:04 AM   #3559
neyoneyo80
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 852
Likes (Received): 1



The Commonwealth Philippine President
( in Exile 1942-44)





First Family (younger brod missing ?!)
neyoneyo80 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 23rd, 2008, 04:04 AM   #3560
neyoneyo80
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 852
Likes (Received): 1



The Commonwealth Philippine President
( in Exile 1942-44)





First Family (younger brod missing ?!)
neyoneyo80 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu