What is a Case Study?

Basically, a case study is an in depth study of a particular situation rather than a sweeping statistical survey.
It is a method used to narrow down a very broad field of research into one easily researchable topic.
Whilst it will not answer a question completely, it will give some indications and allow further elaboration
and hypothesis creation on a subject.
The case study research design is also useful for testing whether scientific theories and models actually work
in the real world. You may come out with a great computer model for describing how the ecosystem of a
rock pool works but it is only by trying it out on a real life pool that you can see if it is a realistic simulation.

For psychologists, anthropologists and social scientists they have been regarded as a valid method of
research for many years. Scientists are sometimes guilty of becoming bogged down in the general picture
and it is sometimes important to understand specific cases and ensure a more holistic approach
to research.

The Argument for and Against the Case Study Research Design

Some argue that because a case study is such a narrow field that its results cannot be extrapolated to fit an
entire question and that they show only one narrow example. On the other hand, it is argued that a case
study provides more realistic responses than a purely statistical survey.
The truth probably lies between the two and it is probably best to try and synergize the two approaches. It is
valid to conduct case studies but they should be tied in with more general statistical processes.

For example, a statistical survey might show how much time people spend talking on mobile phones, but it is
case studies of a narrow group that will determine why this is so.

The other main thing to remember during case studies is their flexibility. Whilst a pure scientist is trying to
prove or disprove a hypothesis, a case study might introduce new and unexpected results during its course,
and lead to research taking new directions.
The argument between case study and statistical method also appears to be one of scale. Whilst many
'physical' scientists avoid case studies, for psychology, anthropology and ecology they are an essential tool.
It is important to ensure that you realize that a case study cannot be generalized to fit a whole population or
ecosystem.
Finally, one peripheral point is that, when informing others of your results, case studies make more
interesting topics than purely statistical surveys, something that has been realized by teachers and magazine
editors for many years. The general public has little interest in pages of statistical calculations but some
well-placed case studies can have a strong impact.
How to Design and Conduct a Case Study

The advantage of the case study research design is that you can focus on specific and interesting cases.
This may be an attempt to test a theory with a typical case or it can be a specific topic that is of interest.
Research should be thorough and note taking should be meticulous and systematic.

The first foundation of the case study is the subject and relevance. In a case study, you are deliberately
trying to isolate a small study group, one individual case or one particular population.

For example, statistical analysis may have shown that birthrates in African countries are increasing. A case
study on one or two specific countries becomes a powerful and focused tool for determining the social and
economic pressures driving this.

In the design of a case study, it is important to plan and design how you are going to address the study and
make sure that all collected data is relevant. Unlike a scientific report, there is no strict set of rules so the
most important part is making sure that the study is focused and concise; otherwise you will end up having
to wade through a lot of irrelevant information.

It is best if you make yourself a short list of 4 or 5 bullet points that you are going to try and address during
the study. If you make sure that all research refers back to these then you will not be far wrong.

With a case study, even more than a questionnaire or survey, it is important to be passive in your research.
You are much more of an observer than an experimenter and you must remember that, even in a multi-
subject case, each case must be treated individually and then cross case conclusions can be drawn.
How to Analyze the Results

Analyzing results for a case study tends to be more opinion based than statistical methods. The usual idea is
to try and collate your data into a manageable form and construct a narrative around it.

Use examples in your narrative whilst keeping things concise and interesting. It is useful to show some
numerical data but remember that you are only trying to judge trends and not analyze every last piece of
data. Constantly refer back to your bullet points so that you do not lose focus.

It is always a good idea to assume that a person reading your research may not possess a lot of knowledge
of the subject so try to write accordingly.
In addition, unlike a scientific study which deals with facts, a case study is based on opinion and is very
much designed to provoke reasoned debate. There really is no right or wrong answer in a case study.

PEOPLE POWER IN THE PHILIPPINES

In the mid-1980's a popular movement sprang up to oust the corrupt Philippine dictator
Ferdinand Marcos. As the resistance gained momentum, two key military officers defected
from the government and sequestered themselves inside a Manila military base. What followed
was an amazing example of nonviolent struggle as hundreds of thousands of ordinary Filipinos
took to the streets to protect the rebel officers from troops still loyal to Marcos.

"What the story of the Philippine revolution demonstrates is the power people can have when
they withdraw consent."

FERDINAND MARCOS

When Ferdinand Marcos was twenty years old he was arrested for conspiracy in the murder of one of his
father's political rivals. He was convicted of murder and sentenced to prison. The case was appealed before
the Philippine Supreme Court. Marcos, a young lawyer with no trial experience, represented himself and won
the appeal. He was set free.

At one time Marcos was one of the world's most powerful dictators. First elected president of the Philippines
in 1965, he pulled the strings of power like a master puppeteer. He consolidated power by manipulating
public opinion, stealing elections, perfecting the arts of political patronage and bribery. Arrests and
assassinations kept the public living in fear.

Although the Philippine constitution limited the presidency to two four-year terms, Marcos ruled for twenty
years. He achieved this by suspending the constitution (after declaring martial law), and then writing another
constitution more conducive to his ambitions. He ran the Philippines like it was his private country club,
controlling the military, the parliament, the courts, the bureaucracy, the press and several business
monopolies. He and his "cronies" got richer while the country got poorer.

ASSASSINATION

Then in 1983 Benigno Aquino decided to return to the Philippines after three years of self-imposed exile. As
a popular politician, Aquino represented the primary threat to the Marcos presidency. For his "protection," a
military escort greeted Aquino when he arrived at Manila International Airport. As he exited the plane, there
were shots. When it was over Aquino's body lay sprawled on the tarmac. The assassination of Benigno
Aquino was the match that lit the fire that would eventually consume the Marcos regime.

THE FUNERAL

The Marcos government banned TV coverage of the Aquino funeral. As a result, thousands of people showed
up, wanting to see for themselves what was going on. The funeral march turned into an eleven-hour
impromptu demonstration against Marcos.

By not allowing TV coverage, Marcos was using the old-fashioned tactics of heavy-handed repression. He
didn't understand what the elites of most modern industrial nations have learned—that there are much more
subtle (and efficient) means of controlling a population. Had he allowed, even encouraged, extensive TV
coverage and turned the whole affair into a spectacle, people may have stayed home and watched the tube
instead of going out and getting involved.
REACTION

The public reacted angrily to the Aquino murder. Rallies and other forms of resistance sprang up in cities and
towns all over the Philippines. During the next two and a half years all segments of the population, including
the upper and middle classes, joined the struggle to get rid of Marcos. Finally, yielding to pressure from his
people (and the U.S.), Marcos called for presidential elections to prove he still had widespread support.

Benigno Aquino's widow Cory, a self-described housewife, ran against Marcos. The election was marked by
widespread fraud, with Marcos' thugs beating up election workers and scrambling voter roles. The
government declared Marcos the winner.

After the election Cory Aquino spoke to a crowd of one million people at a rally in Manila. She proposed a
seven-part program of nonviolent resistance, including a one-day work stoppage and a boycott of Marcos-
controlled banks, stores and newspapers. She urged people to "experiment with nonviolent forms of protest"
and declared: "...if Goliath refuses to yield, we shall keep dipping into our arsenal of nonviolence and
escalate our nonviolent struggle." The revolution had begun.

DEFECTION

On February 22, 1986, Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile and Deputy Chief of Staff Fidel Ramos defect
from the Marcos government. Enrile and Ramos barricade themselves in the Defense Ministry headquarters in
Manila, along with a small group of sympathetic troops. They say they are prepared to die rather than
continue supporting the corrupt Marcos regime.

Marcos is not worried about the rebel officers. "They are cornered," he says. They "can be easily wiped out
with simple artillery and tank fire." He declares: "I intend to stay as President and if necessary I will defend
this position with all the force at my disposal." Unfortunately for Marcos, force is not the same as power, and
although he still has plenty of force at his disposal, the sources of his power are drying up.

RESISTANCE

Radio Veritas, an independent radio station run by the Catholic Church, calls for people to surround the
Defense Ministry and block the movement of any troops that Marcos might send. Hundreds of thousands of
people respond. They chop down trees and park buses in intersections to blockade streets leading to Camp
Crame where the small contingent of rebels has consolidated their forces. For the next four days, entire
families camp out on the streets of Manila, using their bodies to protect the rebel troops from attack.

A carnival-like atmosphere prevails. Hawkers sell peanuts and souvenirs. People sing and dance and cheer.
They talk and sleep and listen to Radio Veritas. Priests hold street masses and prayer vigils. There are
spontaneous rallies and processions.

Marcos has a plan: "We'll bide our time, but we'll disperse the civilians, protects them, take care of them,
and then we'll hit Enrile and Ramos." He sends Marines, tanks and armored personnel carriers to attack
Camp Crame.

Marcos' soldiers and weapons are met in the streets by tens of thousands of ordinary Filipinos who are
surrounding Camp Crame to protect the rebel officers.

As the tanks start forward into the crowd, people sit down in front of them.

The tanks stop.

People offer the soldiers candy and cigarettes, asking them to defect and join the rebellion. Young girls walk
among the soldiers, passing out flowers.

The blocked tanks start forward again. The people sit tight, holding their ground.
The tanks stop again.

A Marine commander threatens to start shooting. Priests and nuns kneel before the tanks, praying the
Rosary. No shots are fired. Finally the tanks turn around and withdraw as the crowd cheers.

Marcos, the power professional, knows the foundation of his authority is perception. Despite his frail health,
he lashes out against the rebels with macho bluster: "If they think I am sick, I may even want to lead the
troops to wipe out this Enrile and Ramos. I am just like an old war horse, smelling powder and getting
stronger." Enrile responds: "He can't even lead himself to the bathroom."

On February 24 Marcos imposes a dusk to dawn curfew. No one pays any attention. By now the Reagan
White House, whose support is one of the keys to Marcos' power, is openly calling for him to resign. Troops
begin to defect in increasing numbers. Seven helicopter gunships land at Camp Crame to join the rebels.

A small group of rebel soldiers in Manila take over channel four, a government-run TV station, cutting off a
Marcos speech in mid-sentence. Tens of thousands gather outside to defend the station while the
opposition begins broadcasting news updates and appeals for assistance from Enrile, Ramos and Aquino.

DEFENDING CHANNEL FOUR

When several platoons of loyalist soldiers try to take back channel four, they are surrounded by civilians. A
priest walks up and leads the crowd in the Lord's Prayer. People begin shaking the soldiers' hands and
giving them McDonalds hamburgers, doughnuts and orange soda. The tension eases. After a while the
commander agrees to withdraw his troops.

As the soldiers prepare to depart, a middle-aged woman in an Aquino T-shirt helps a machine gunner wind
belts of ammunition around his chest. "There, now you look like Rambo," she tells him. But as the soldier
bends down to pick up his gun, it accidentally discharges. Another soldier is hit in the face and killed. It is
the only violent death on February 24, the next to last day of the revolution.

VICTORY

On the 25th both Aquino and Marcos hold separate inaugurations. The Marcos inauguration is a pathetic
affair, attended by family members and a few paid guests. Behind the scenes Marcos is maneuvering to save
face, placing phone calls to influential Filipinos and begging to be allowed to stay on as an "Honorary
President," or at least to remain in the Philippines as a private citizen. He must be astonished to see his
power, which seemed so absolute only a few weeks ago, evaporate so quickly and completely.

At about nine o'clock that night, Marcos and his family sneak out the back door of Malacañang Palace and
take a boat across the Pasig River where helicopters are waiting. At Clark Air base they board a U.S. Air
Force plane headed for Guam. Marcos, who ruled for twenty years as one of the world's most powerful
dictators, is now just a sick old man fleeing his country like a frightened dog.

When Marcos' departure is announced jubilant Filipinos celebrate in the streets and flood into Malacañang
Palace. There is some fighting and retribution against citizens and troops who had been loyal to Marcos, but
it is minimal.

After violent revolutions there are always scores to settle, grudges to satisfy, revenge to extract, and the
cycle of violence continues. But because the Filipino people created major political change largely without
violence, national reconciliation was that much easier.

COMMENTARY

While the Philippine revolution deposed a powerful dictator, it left much of the old centralized power structure
unchanged. The U.S. still retained major influence through military aid and bases. The Philippine military
remained intact under Defense Minister Enrile, the same man who had gotten rich from political connections
while serving as Defense Minister under Marcos. The new President, Cory Aquino, was from a wealthy family.
The poor were still poor, and the rich were still in charge. Capitalism emerged stronger than ever.

What the story of the Philippine revolution demonstrates is the power people can have when they withdraw
consent. The same dynamics apply, no matter what the issue. Had Filipinos decided to go on and struggle
for a more equitable distribution of wealth, the abolition of the military, or a decentralized government that
was more responsive to their needs, who knows what more amazing things they might have achieved.

Aquino vs Marcos reprised

With the 2016 elections as subtext, a reprise of the decades-long war between Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino, Jr.
and Ferdinand E. Marcos, Sr. that culminated in Aquino’s assassination in 1983 is currently being fought
between their respective offspring.

Benigno “Noynoy” S. C. Aquino III and Ferdinand “Bongbong” R. Marcos, Jr. have been at loggerheads
primarily because Marcos, Jr., who has refused to even acknowledge, much less apologize for, the gross
abuses of his father’s martial law regime, could end up as vice-president of the Philippines after May this
year. While made in the context of the elections, Aquino’s statements have been closer to the truth about
martial law and EDSA 1 compared to Marcos, Jr.’s self-serving versions of his father’s rule.
The exchange has so far been merely verbal, as it was in the early stages of their fathers’ contention.

In the late 1960s, Aquino, Jr. was one of Marcos’ most effective critics from the political opposition. He was
elected as the country’s youngest senator at the age of 34 in 1967. In what turned out to be a prescient
insight, he pointed out that Marcos, who had been elected President in 1965, was establishing a “garrison
state” by increasing the armed forces budget to record levels, keeping retireable generals in their posts, and
militarizing the civilian bureaucracy.

Aquino’s 1969 speech describing the Cultural Center of the Philippines as extravagant and as “a pantheon
for Imelda” (its construction was one of Imelda Marcos’ projects) earned him Ferdinand Marcos’ retort that
he was “a congenital liar.”

Marcos was elected to a second term in November of that year. But despite the Constitutional ban on a third
term, Marcos did not conceal his desire for one, though, among other indications, his efforts to have a new
Constitution passed that would allow it. It was widely known that Aquino would run for President by the time
he was 40-years old in 1973, hence his focus on being an administration critic.

While the contention for elective office has often led to violence among the political elite, it had seldom
deteriorated to that extent among the contenders for national posts. In 1971, however, the bombing of a
Liberal Party rally in Manila’s Plaza Miranda -- for which the Marcos administration was supposedly
responsible -- sent the clearest signal so far that political rivalry at the national level had been raised beyond
verbal skirmishes.

Marcos declared martial law in 1972 to keep himself in power beyond 1973 and arrested Aquino on charges
of subversion, for which he was condemned to death by a military tribunal. Although the sentence was not
carried out, Aquino was nevertheless assassinated when he returned to the Philippines in 1983, creating a
crisis that eventually led to the overthrow of Marcos at EDSA in 1986.

EDSA 1 and the martial law period are the bones of contention between Aquino III and Marcos, Jr., but it is
also over the not too unlikely possibility of the latter’s leading his family’s return to Malacañang, the vice-
presidency being but one step to the country’s highest post.

Aquino III has invested in the verbal scuffle his presumably still considerable influence on the electorate by
directly condemning Marcos, Jr.’s refusal to apologize for the abuses of the martial law regime, and warning
the electorate against the late dictator’s family’s return to Malacañang.

Speaking in FiIipino during the 30th anniversary of the civilian-military mutiny at EDSA, Aquino asked how we
can be sure Marcos, Jr. won’t repeat the wrongs his family committed during martial law if he can’t see
those wrongs (“Kung hindi man lang niya makita ang mali sa ginawa ng kanilang pamilya, paano tayo
aasang hindi niya ito uulitin?”).
On another occasion, Aquino revealed that contrary to current claims from the uninformed that the elder
Marcos had decided not to attack the multitude massed at EDSA from Feb. 23-25, he was actually preparing
to do so, and only yielded to US pressure to abandon that plan.

The Marcos, Jr. mantra has been to declare that Aquino and the country must “move on” -- which can only
happen if the issues that have hounded the country since the martial law terror regime are finally laid to rest,
by, among other means, recognizing the damage that period inflicted on the country and its people.
Subsequent to that would be the imperative for the Marcos family to admit that far from being the golden age
that they’ve been trying to paint it, it was in reality one of the darkest chapters in the already tragedy-ridden
history of this unhappy country, and that, consequently, the overthrow of the Marcos regime was absolutely
essential if the country was to survive.

But the EDSA 1 uprising has been subjected to the revisionist formulation that not only did it not achieve
anything, it also created problems and caused more suffering. EDSA 1’s signal achievement was its
removing from power a regime sustained by violence, deceit, and plunder. Whatever came after was the
responsibility of the succeeding administrations, which, led by the same dynasties that had prevented the
democratization of political power for decades, did fail to achieve the meaningful changes that seemed so
close at hand in 1986.

That after EDSA 1 nothing much changed is beyond argument. But what continues to surprise is the
persistence of the myth that the dictatorship was a period of peace, prosperity and order, and that EDSA 1
might as well not have happened.

No one with any ounce of respect for the facts -- political scientists, economists, journalists, political
activists, human rights groups whether Philippine or foreign-based -- will claim that the martial law period
was anything other than a vile assault on the Filipino people that cost the lives of thousands of their best
sons and daughters, separated families, impoverished the nation, and left a legacy of violence and
corruption from which the country has not yet recovered.

Thus did the late Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore declare, in his book From Third World to First, that Marcos, Sr.
“pillaged the country for over 20 years” -- to the tune of over 30 billion dollars. Oddly enough, Marcos, Jr.
has claimed that had his father not been removed by People Power at EDSA, he would have transformed the
country into another Singapore, implying that he needed more than the 21 years (1965-1986) that he was in
power to do so.

Some Filipinos critical of Aquino III’s record of governance since 2010 have been equally critical of his
statements about EDSA 1 and martial law, and have claimed, despite the facts, that the former was
unnecessary and a disaster, while the latter was the best thing that ever happened to this country. This claim
is in the same category of cluelessness as creationism, which denies evolution and believes that the world
was created in literally seven days.

Whatever may be the flaws of his administration, Aquino III is absolutely right in celebrating EDSA 1 as one of
the best things that has ever happened to this country, and his condemning martial law as one of the worst
-- and in echoing the sentiments of millions of thinking Filipinos that never again should anyone who has
even the remotest possibility of replicating the wrongs of the Marcos terror regime ever darken Malacañang.

Like wildfire, our generation has spawned new strains of Marcos loyalists and apologists. What’s odd is that
they are impassioned, ablaze with righteous anger, even though many of them have never lived through a
single day under martial law or were hardly aware back then. They rabidly criticize the government on social
media, and blame the Aquino family for all the wrongs that ail the country today — two things which,
ironically, one could not  do to any of the Marcoses during the 242 months of the dictator’s rule.

To add even greater irony, advocates of democracy would rather sit tight and be satisfied with the line,
“They’re entitled to their own opinion.” No, those who have lived in a democracy for all 29 years (or less) of
their existence would not call out neo-Marcosians on their obliviousness, citing it as uncouth to do so.
Perhaps those who enjoy democracy today have accepted that wide-scale ignorance is one price we simply
have to pay for our right to free speech. Unfortunately, it seems that another cost of freedom is apathy from
those who bask in this unripe form of democracy, or what many label with the oxymoron, “selective
democracy.”

Wishing for a political strongman

The problem is double edged. With an Aquino in power, and this Aquino — according to critics — failing
miserably in his job as president, people fall into the trap of wishing for his exact inverse: a political
strongman, someone wise and confident in his words… someone who’s not-Aquino and, therefore, a
Marcos. So to answer that need, the specter of Ferdinand Marcos is raised from his grave and made readily
available on social media to those hungry for someone to school our current President. And true to the
Aquino brand of necropolitics, Macoy is idealized via an easily digestible grocery list of all his achievements
after ruling for 21 years (which are meager, considering that he was in power — and swimming in truckloads
of borrowed foreign currency — far longer than any other president).

But many miss the fact that the Marcoses and Aquinos are merely two sides of the same coin, and it is not
necessary to side with one against the other. In fact, we can opt to go against both; it is a choice that
democracy grants us. Politics is never meant to be a crystal clear, black and white science, so there is
nothing wrong with taking in facts and churning out a dynamic conclusion. In the age of postmodernism,
when the singularity of Truth (with a capital “T”) is discredited and multiple truths abound, gaining nuance
has become essential to survival and evolution. In short, there are both good and bad things in both Marcos
and Aquino administrations — that much is undeniable. Distilling their years in power as simply good or
outright bad only creates rifts and leads to greater misunderstanding. Its effects are most tangible now with
Philippine politics polarized into two bourgeois clans naively waging war à la the Montagues and Capulets, at
the expense of no one else but the average Filipino.

‘Kulang sa disiplina!’
Discipline is a virtue neo-Marcosians harp on time and time again. The Draconian values under Marcos rule
are made the ultimate rationale for a return to martial law which, they claim, would somehow  orchestrate the
country’s return to glory. But what many of these neo-Marcosians conveniently leave out is the fact that this
so-called discipline came with a hefty price tag.

Amando Doronilla’s 200-page MA thesis entitled “The State, Economic Transformation, and Political Change
in the Philippines, 1946-1972” offers a unique explanation as to why and how Marcos came to declare
martial law. Briefly put, Doronilla posited that Marcos’ declaration of martial law was the inevitable conclusion
of almost two decades of social, political, and economic unrest — not merely an act done by an individual.
The veteran journalist traced the roots of martial law as far back as the opening of partial trade with the
United States. From there, he discussed critical points in our history which aided in the shift of powers away
from the judicial and legislative branches and towards a monolithic executive power (which is still a distinct
feature of our political system today).

Lifestyle Feature ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch:

Staggering debt and cronyism

One could say that from 1946 to Sept. 21, 1972, the grave political economic insecurity and instability
snowballed, and an equally insecure and unstable president thought he could stop it by taking matters into
his own hands. He planned to do this by mimicking what other presidents had done before him: borrow
money from foreign banks and ingratiate the military — the only arm of government that seemed to work for
him. But unlike past presidents, Marcos borrowed amounts that were twice or thrice the size of the country’s
already-accumulated debts. Much of this money went to his favored men in the military and his cronies in
government — people who (if we were to take his word for it) Marcos trusted to build industries and to
ensure peace and order. We all know now how many of them grew mind-numbingly rich and how many they
had to silence and kill. Ultimately, these were the monetary and non-monetary costs of Marcos’ “discipline.”

Whenever people say that discipline is all we need to progress, I smile and shrug. Not only is it ironic that
Marcos — the murderer and plunderer — has become the  model for discipline, but I despair at knowing that
many of us still think of the presidency as a mere throne from which to give orders. We fail to see that with
every order, there is a need for money to flow, for patronage to be bestowed, and for power to be brokered;
that, indeed, a dictatorship is a system and not simply the “benevolent” whims of an individual.

The spine-chilling implication of Doronilla’s thesis is that the problem does not end with the expulsion of
Marcos from the presidency. When we view the dictator’s acts for what they were and not for the fact that
Marcos initiated them, we see that the Aquinos were and are also capable of making the same mistakes. We
see that the two Aquino administrations have, indeed, managed our deficit unscrupulously, with Cory doing
“the honorable thing” for the World Bank, and with Noynoy acting as the military’s number one fan and
yellow-faced mascot. And just as divisive as the Marcos’ conjugal dictatorship, the mother-and-son Aquino
tandem has kept the power among themselves.

But thankfully, now — as opposed to then — we can criticize. Now we can protest. Now we can fight back.

The Philippines: Marcos v. Aquino

In the developing world, budding democracies can retain some authoritarian aspects. In the early 1980s, this
was certainly true of the Philippines. President Ferdinand Marcos was a staunch U.S. ally and President
Reagan valued him as such. Marcos was also anti-communist, which aligned with U.S.’s strategic interests.
But Secretary of State George Shultz was uneasy about placing too much faith in Marcos.

“He was a shrewd politician who ruled like a monarch in the trappings of democracy,” recalls Shultz in his
book Turmoil and Triumph. “He ended martial law in 1981 but retained most of the powers that it had
provided him. He had established himself as staunchly pro-American and anti-Communist.” ( T&T, p. 608-
609)

Shultz’s discomfort with Marcos created tension between himself and President Reagan. While Marco’s
authoritarian streak was not exactly in keeping with the American ideals Reagan so loved, the Soviet menace
and concerns about communist proxy states were still justifiably widespread in 1982.
Reagan’s Realpolitik meant keeping Marcos close, at least for a time.

But Shultz was concerned. He saw three primary problems with the Philippines, problems which were not
apparent to Reagan. First, a communist insurgency was growing; second, Marcos was running the Philippine
economy poorly; and third, Marcos was in poor health and his wife Imelda had begun jockeying for a more
powerful political position. But what should be done?

Shultz’s solution was to strengthen institutions within the Philippines while simultaneously putting pressure on
Marcos to adopt more democratic reforms.

In September 1982, Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos came to the White House for a State visit. This visit did not
assuage Shultz’s concerns about the Philippine situation, he recalls: “Such occasions are opportunities for
important exchanges and are also full of pomp and circumstance…But I was uncomfortable. I had been
concerned about the Philippines since I had come into office as secretary of state and worried about what
seemed to be a rapidly deteriorating economic and political situation over the past two years.” ( T&T, p. 608)

The essence of Shultz’s concerns stemmed from his belief that Marcos would not easily take to institutional
reforms: “While Marcos, his family, and his political intimates prospered, his economic policies and political
dominance had a debilitating effect on the people of the Philippines. He seemed to have lost the distinction
between public and private: between what belonged to the government and what belonged to him.” ( T&T, p.
610) And yet, Shultz knew that the Philippines hosted key U.S. bases in Asia. He also knew that President
Reagan would be loyal to a fault.

Assassination

Then something happened. Popular Philippine opposition leader Benigno Aquino was assassinated. The
U.S. Department of State and Shultz immediately condemned the assassination. But who was responsible?
President Marcos put together a half-hearted investigation—but Shultz and his team were not buying it. The
five-person Philippine investigative group was eventually disbanded and replaced. With the new
investigation, General Ver, a top military official and close ally of Marcos, was implicated in the
assassination. Yet Marcos was unwilling to distance himself from Ver.

Reagan’s loyalty to Marcos during this time was strained, but not broken. He put his position on display
during the 1984 presidential debates with Walter Mondale. In response to criticisms about the president’s
continued support for Marcos, Reagan said: “I know there are things there in the Philippines that do not look
good to us from the standpoint of democratic rights. But what is the alternative? It is a large Communist
movement to take over the Philippines. I think that we’re better off trying to retain our friendship and help
them right the wrongs we see rather than throwing them to the wolves and then facing a Communist power in
the Pacific.” (T&T, p. 611) Reagan’s position was not just about loyalty to an ally, memories of the Vietnam
War and the Iranian Revolution were still fresh in Reagan’s mind, and he was anxious not to lose more
sympathetic and strategic allies.

The Philippine opposition did not react well to Reagan’s comments. They argued that Marcos was not the
only alternative to communism. The State Department issued a statement following the debate that indicated
the extent of differences emerging between Shultz and Reagan. “A State Department spokesman clarified to
the Associated Press that the president did not mean to suggest the only alternative to communism was
Marcos: ‘I don’t think that the President was narrowing the situation that far. I think there is certainly
recognition on everybody’s part that there are other forces working for democratic change in the
Philippines.’” (T&T, p. 612)

The Rise of Cory

November 1985. Marcos called for a snap election. In a surprising twist, the opposition ran Benigno Aquino’s
widow, Corazon, as their candidate. Corazon “Cory” Aquino turned out to have considerable popular
support. But some within the White House saw her as little more than a political joke:

“When Abe Rosenthal came to Washington in mid-January, he reported firsthand. ‘That empty-headed
housewife has no positions,’ he told me. ‘She is a dazed, vacant woman.” He was distressed at the idea she
might replace Marcos. He passed the same assessment along to President Reagan and Nancy, and Don
Regan, at a White House dinner. His words made a deep and lasting impact on them.” ( T&T, p. 617)

In December 1985, General Ver was acquitted of conspiracy charges in the death of Aquino. With serious
concerns about the impartiality of the investigation and judgment, voices in the U.S. Congress called on the
White House to shut off military aid to the Philippines as long as Ver remained in power. ( T&T, p. 617) Fearful
of what might happen to U.S. military bases the White House remained cautious.

Soon unsavory rumors about the campaign began to circulate. One rumor said that Marcos’ people might try
to abduct Aquino. And concerns about a fair election were rife among observers. Aquino asks for U.S.
protection, but Secretary Shultz denied her request, fearing that more harm might result than good:

“I told [Ambassador] Bosworth to tell Mrs. Aquino, ‘We are prepared to work with you and other to find a
safe Philippine environment.’ I did not want to damage her by the symbolism that would be generated by
U.S. protection, or to turn her into the U.S. candidate. At the same time, I wanted to do what was possible to
prevent harm to her during the volatile time…. Should something happen to her, I knew, we could never
forgive ourselves for not ensuring her safety. I decided that we should encourage her to find ‘a Philippine
solution.’ We would stay in close touch, I ordered, and we would be ready to provide a safe haven as a last
resort—but we wouldn’t tell her that.” (T&T, p. 620)

During the election, Marcos ended up rejecting Bosworth, the U.S. ambassador, saying that Bosworth did not
speak for Reagan. In turn, Reagan sent a ‘special envoy,’ Senator Laxalt, to encourage Marcos to work with
the U.S. on reform. As a “close, personal” friend of Reagan, Laxalt attempted to engage Marcos on reform.
Marcos returned with insinuations that the U.S. might be overstaying its welcome with military bases in the
country. Secretary Shultz viewed this chilly signal from Marcos as a pretext to exert even more pressure for
reform—especially given the possibility that Marcos would eventually turn his back on the U.S.

During Laxalt’s visit, Marcos sent a personal letter to Reagan, the contents of which made Shultz seriously
unhappy:
“’The letter Marcos gave Laxalt for you,’ I told President Reagan, ‘is a disappointing response to your serious
effort, as a friend and ally, to persuade him to face up to the reforms he must make if he is to turn back the
Communist insurgent challenge that directly affects the future of the Philippines and our bases in that
country.’ The president was clearly quite uncomfortable with my harsh assessment. In his head, he knew as I
did that Marcos was blundering badly, yet he felt an instinctive loyalty to Marcos and flashed to me a giant
warning of caution.” (T&T, p. 615)

It was clear Reagan had not yet given up on Marcos. Shultz would have to wait for democracy to take its
course.

The Philippine Election

In the end, the Philippine election involved clear and widespread voter fraud. The consensus from the
international community was that Aquino would have won were it not for the fraud perpetrated by the Marcos
government. Marcos refused to acknowledge an Aquino victory and threatened violent suppression. The
calculation of Realpolitik had changed for Reagan. In a cable from Ambassador Bosworth, the administration
learns:

“The bottom line conclusion is inescapable: Mrs. Aquino would have won if there had been an even
minimally fair count…This election has effectively cost Ferdinand Marcos most of his remaining political
legitimacy and credibility both in the Philippines and in the U.S… Our over-riding policy objective is to
massage our way into the post-Marcos era.” (T&T, p. 627-628)

Reagan finally realized that Marcos must give up power, but he was not happy about the situation. The
president did not want to have to abandon an ally. It had been all too clear that the U.S.’s failure to support
the Shah in Iran had resulted in the Iranian leader’s ouster, (which led to the establishment of a Shiite
Islamist state that remains hostile to U.S. interests to this day). Shultz remained sensitive to Reagan’s
feelings and decided to adopt a more hands-off approach, letting events in the Philippines speak for
themselves: “The president does not want to push Marcos over the brink. We have to wait for events to
happen; we cannot move the president under present circumstances. The Filipino people will have to throw
Marcos out. Ronald Reagan will not push out a friend.” (T&T, p. 629)

Finally, the unrest reached a critical point in the Philippines. The situation became so severe that the White
House had to officially recognize the voter fraud. On February 15, the White House issued a statement: “It
has already become evident, sadly, that the elections were marred by widespread fraud and violence
perpetrated largely by the ruling party. It was so extreme that the election’s credibility has been called into
question…” (T&T, p. 630) Corazon Aquino claimed victory the following day. Hundreds of thousands of
Filipinos took to the streets. Shultz called it “an overwhelming human presence, a living, breathing river of
humanity moving through the capital.” (T&T, p. 630) Yet Marcos was not ready to give up power.

Almost immediately, Marcos’s allies abandoned him. Without U.S. interference, his government crumbled
around him. He threatened to use military force against opponents (including former close allies). Fearing
what Marcos could do, Secretary Shultz and a number of other advisors presented a united front to Reagan,
urging him to send Marcos a message to leave. Shultz recalls:

“President Reagan listened carefully. Then he turned the corner: he authorized a message to Marcos in
response to threats of the use of force urging Marcos ‘to avoid an attack against other elements of the
Philippines Armed Forces,’ and continued, saying that the United States ‘cannot continue our existing military
assistance if the government uses that aid against other elements of the Philippine military which enjoy
substantial popular backing.” (T&T, p. 636)

At 6:45 on Sunday night, President Reagan approved a second message to Marcos: it was time for Marcos
to make the transition from power.” (T&T, p. 636)

Despite the president’s having sent the messages, Shultz felt Reagan had not yet turned an emotional corner
with Marcos. Marcos, meanwhile, rejected the message from Reagan and continued his preparations to fight
the opposition, calling for his supporters to come in from the countryside armed.
Eventually, Marcos called Special Envoy Laxalt—wanting to bargain. He hoped to broker a power-sharing
deal with the new government. “No” came Reagan’s terse reply and Reagan, via Laxalt, instructed Marcos to
“cut and cut clean.” (T&T, p. 637) Finally accepting he no longer had a place in the Philippines or the
backing of the U.S. government, Marcos made arrangements to leave on a U.S. Air Force plane. Ferdinand
and Imelda were given safe haven in Hawaii.

Aftermath

How would the U.S. recognize Aquino? Shultz wanted to portray the situation as a triumph of democracy and
to do so immediately. Shultz announced from the White House pressroom that the U.S. would recognize Mrs.
Aquino’s government.

This difference of opinion between Reagan and Shultz would create a distance between them, one that
would take some time to shrink.

“I knew that my relations with the president and the White House had been badly strained by the turn of
events in the Philippines and my role in them. No one could argue that the result was wrong… The president
had signed off personally on every stop we took. Nevertheless, in his gut, Ronald Reagan felt aggrieved that
his former friend and ally had gone down the drain.” (T&T, p. 639)

Shultz reflects on the implications of Aquino’s election for U.S. foreign policy:

“The rise to power of Corazon Aquino and the fall of Ferdinand Marcos marked an important shift in
American official thinking: support for authoritarian governments that opposed communism could not be
taken for granted. The United States supported people who were themselves standing up for freedom and
democracy, whether against communism or against another form of repressive government.” ( T&T, p. 642)

The Marcoses and the Aquinos compared

Probably he had his ulterior, Machiavellian reasons. Still, though, the strongman Ferdinand Marcos saved the
life of his archenemy, Ninoy, then 48 years old in 1980. He released him from prison (having been convicted
by a military court to be executed by firing squad for multiple murder charges) and allowed him to go to the
US for a crucial heart surgery.

After that, Aquino would get a fellowship at Harvard University, and live with Cory at the upper-class
suburbia of Newton, Massachusetts in an elegant two-storied brick house. “That was the happiest days of
our lives,” his widow Cory would later say.

In cruel contrast, Ninoy’s son, Benigno 3rd, has kept his predecessor, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who at 68
has a life-threatening illness, incarcerated for three years now in a military hospital for baseless charges,
which the United Nations Working Committee on Arbitrary Detention has condemned as violating the
grandmother’s legal and human rights. Due to the utter disregard for her rights and the rule of law, the UN
group even recommended that Arroyo file for compensation for her arbitrary detention.

Indeed, after three years, neither a witness nor a single document has been presented in court to support the
government’s allegations that Arroyo stole from the confidential funds of the sweepstakes office. In the other
case filed against Arroyo, that of electoral sabotage – allegedly in the 2007 senatorial and local elections and
not in the 2004 presidential elections – no other witness has been presented to corroborate the sole
testimony of one Norie Unas.

And who is this guy? He is the city administrator and, for decades, the right-hand man of Maguindanao
governor Andal Ampatuan, Sr., the accused, with his son, as being the brains of the massacre of 58 people
in that province in 2009. Unas would have been among the dozens accused for the killings, if not for his
false testimony against Arroyo.
If only for this vindictive, petty president’s disregard for the rule of law, his lack of the most basic sense of
justice, and his moral depravity in persecuting Arroyo, we should reject in 2016 his party and its candidate
Manuel Roxas 2nd.

This candidate’s lack of any moral sense is demonstrated in the fact that despite his decades of friendship
with the former President, despite her total support for him in her Cabinet, and even as he knows in his heart
that Arroyo is innocent of the charges, Roxas has not lifted a finger to convince Aquino not to persecute her.
Why? Because he can’t afford to lose Aquino’s support for his all-consuming bid to be President.

***

Ninoy’s son, Aquino 3rd, assaulted the independent branch of government that is the bastion of a republican
democracy’s rule of law: the Supreme Court. He launched an impeachment lynch mob to remove its Chief
Justice, Renato Corona, from office. Why? In order to get the Court to agree to a billion pesos more in
compensation for his clan’s Hacienda Luisita, even if the Tribunal under Corona had ruled that its land reform
program during Cory’s Administration was bogus.

Marcos’ son, Ferdinand (“Bongbong”) Jr., defended the Supreme Court, and voted to acquit Corona. He
was one of only three senators (the other two being the late Joker Arroyo and Miriam Defensor-Santiago)
who refused to be bribed, who refused to buckle under the lynch mob that included even award-winning
journalists.

Ninoy’s son, Aquino 3rd, tried to force down the throat of this republic, most probably with the help of
Malaysian money, a law that would have dismembered it and created a Bangsamoro nation-state, complete
with its clearly defined people, its territory, and its armed forces – the three basic elements, as any college
student would learn in college, of that entity we call a “nation-state.”

Marcos’ son, Ferdinand, blocked that conspiracy, and exposed this Bangsamoro Basic Law’s violations of
the Constitution. The Senate hearings he led convinced even those supporting it to junk it or at least,
drastically amend it so it would conform to our Constitution, and block the Moro Islamic Liberation Front from
using it to carve out the group’s own independent nation.

Marcos expanded Philippine territory by issuing Presidential Decree No. 1596 in 1978, which declared that a
group of islands called then as the Spratlys, is Philippine territory, a municipality of Palawan whose official
name would be the Kalayaan Group of Islands. He ordered garrisons stationed on the islands, especially on
the biggest isle Pag-Asa, where he ordered an airstrip built.

Aquino 3rd lost Philippine territory when he foolishly ordered Philippine ships in May 2012 to leave
Scarborough Shoal, believing the report of his special envoy, Sen. Antonio Trillanes 4th or his foreign
secretary, Albert del Rosario, (the two would later blame each other) that the Chinese had agreed to the
simultaneous withdrawal of ships. They didn’t, and probably just laughed at this President’s gullibility. Now,
their vessels simply shoo away our vessels and fishermen still kilometers away from the shoal’s mouth.

Aquino has done nothing to stop the erosion and start the repair of the airstrip Marcos had built, so that
eventually its usable length could only allow the smallest of planes to land on the area.

Marcos convinced the Philippine ruling class to lend the government their support by successfully leading the
local economy through the 1970s oil crisis largely unscathed, which gave it enough momentum to grow a
phenomenal 9 percent by 1973. That drove GDP growth to average an impressive 6.2 percent from 1972 to
the 1979 apex of his regime.

Aquino 3rd has won the support of a big segment of the ruling class, not because of his anti-corruption
crusade, nor any economic reform he has engineered. It is because he has done nothing to derail the growth
momentum Arroyo achieved during her term and the trust of the global community she earned for the country
when she steered the economy through the worst global economic crisis that raged from 2008 to 2009.
The Philippines under Arroyo was the only country in Asia that still managed some growth in those
tumultuous years. Under Aquino, the country’s relatively high growth rates have been due to the fact that his
is the only Administration in this country that had the fortune of not having to go through any global
economic catastrophe.

That high growth rate from 1972 to 1979 – was achieved at the cost of the dismantling of our institutions of
democracy, which we still haven’t been able to rebuild.

Similarly, growth in our economy over the past five years has been at the cost of a megalomaniac President
damaging our democratic institutions.

Marcos closed down The Manila Times and the Lopez-owned Manila Chronicle and the ABS-CBN television
network. His cronies then set up The Daily Express, The Times Journal, and The Manila Bulletin – to support
him and his martial law.

Similarly, Aquino 3rd now uses the newspapers that replaced the Marcos newspapers and the ABS-CBN
Network, which his mother helped to resuscitate to support his regime. One leading broadsheet very loyally
has taken up every single political campaign Aquino has launched as its own crusade – from removing then
Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez, impeaching Chief Justice Corona, jailing opposition figures for the misuse
of their pork barrel funds, and even fabricating corruption charges against Vice President Jejomar Binay to
weaken his candidacy in the 2016 presidential elections.
Marcos closed down media; Aquino controls the minds of media, which do not even realize it.

This is one of the biggest reasons why there is no public outrage over Aquino’s turpitudes such as his
ruthless incarceration of Arroyo; the corruption at the MRT-3 that has made a hell out of millions of Filipinos’
daily commute; the massive smuggling that even our poor farmers are being outpriced by imported
agricultural products; the massacre of 44 of our elite troops in Mamasapano because of this President’s
criminal bungling; his government’s incompetence in relief operations for victims of the Yolanda Super
Typhoon and the amazing dearth of news reports on jueteng, the billions of pesos it generates to line the
pockets of government officials, and criminals’ rampage across the land that sows fear and uncertainty
among members of all strata of society in this country.

Ninoy: The true hero

Ninoy Aquino had prepared a speech he intended to give upon returning to the Philippines from his exile. He
never had the chance to give the talk because he was assassinated upon his return.

The first sentences of his undelivered speech read: “I have returned on my free will to join the ranks of those
struggling to restore our rights and freedom through violence....I am prepared for the worst and have
decided against the advice of my mother, my spiritual adviser, many of my tested friends and a few of my
most valued political mentors. A death sentence awaits me.”

Ninoy Aquino sacrificed his life to help free the Filipino people from the tyranny of Ferdinand Marcos. If we
now honor Marcos as a hero, then does this mean that Ninoy offered his life in vain? Does this mean that
Ninoy was wrong when he said that the Filipino was worth dying for?

Ninoy’s martyrdom
How can single person fight tyranny and inspire people to restore democracy to their nation? How can a
single man restore pride to a nation and leave the legacy that the Filipino is worth dying for? There are very
few stories in the Philippine saga as inspiring as that of Ninoy Aquino.

Close Ad X

Every August 21, Filipinos commemorate the martyrdom of Ninoy Aquino, which triggered the People Power
Revolution that led to the downfall of the Marcos dictatorship and the restoration of democracy in the
Philippines.
There are many types of heroic deeds and heroes. Some are military commanders, philosophers and even
scientists. Then there are heroes who suffer persecution and death for espousing a cause they believe in.
Such heroes continue to fight for and remain committed to a cause, even as they are fully aware of the risks
and can foresee possible retaliation by their opponents. Such heroes we call martyrs, and their death,
because of their adherence to a cause, martyrdom.

Although there have been martyrs throughout history, their numbers are very few because their ultimate fate –
death – by most as too great a price to pay. Martyrs do not seek death but they are willing to die rather than
renounce their beliefs. But it also true that martyrdom serves as the ultimate motivation for others to continue
fighting for their cause.

St. Joan of Arc was convicted of heresy and burned at the stake on May 30, 1493, after a conspiracy by foes
of the French king Charles VII and the English. Twenty-five years after her death at the age of 19, her heresy
conviction was overturned. In 1920 she was canonized as a saint. It was her sacrifice that restored the
French monarchy and finally drove the English  out of France.

In 1535, Thomas More was tried for treason for refusing to sign an oath recognizing King Henry VIII’s divorce
from Catherin of Aragon in order to marry Anne Boleyn. Had More agreed to take the oath, his life would
have been spared. But he refused to betray the Church, and he was beheaded. Thomas  More was later
canonized as saint.

Mahatma Gandhi preached and practiced the doctrine of non violent resistance to all forms of oppression.
He used his formidable skills to help attain independence for India. In 1948, he stepped out to greet some
people. Godes, a Hindu extremist, shot him three times. His death unfortunately did not prevent the partition
of India. But today he is still recognized as the inspiration of non violent resistance even if he suffered a
violent death.

Martin Luther King Jr. organized and inspired numerous acts of civil disobedience, sit-ins and marches for
civil rights. He received the Nobel Prize in 1964, the youngest recipient at that time. In 1968, he was shot
and killed by a white racist who was later identified as James Earl Ray. When he was still alive, he had said
that whoever gave the eulogy for him should make no mention of the awards he had received. Instead, he
wanted that person to say that he had been a “ drum major for peace and a drum major for righteousness.”

Dr. Jose Rizal wrote two books, Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo. While in prison, he wrote the
poem Mi Ultimo Adios. His writings became part of the inspiration for the Philippine Revolution. But it was his
public execution that became the symbol of Spanish oppression and the Filipinos’ struggle for freedom.

Ninoy Aquino’s death has all the characteristics of martyrdom. Like St. Thomas More, Ninoy could have
saved himself by staying in exile and swearing allegiance to a tyrannical ruler. But he refused and decided to
come home, fully aware of the possible consequences.

Like Mahatma Gandhi and St. Joan of Arc, Ninoy suffered a violent death. Upon his arrival in the Philippines,
he was shot to death as soon as he stepped on the last step of the service stairway.

Like Martin Luther King, Jr., the death of Ninoy provided more inspiration for more civil disobedience and
marches that became known as the People Power Movement. Like Dr. Jose Rizal, Ninoy’s execution became
a symbol of the Marcos tyranny and further fuelled the courage and commitment to freedom of the Filipino
people. Two scenes – Rizal being shot by Spanish soldiers in Luneta and Ninoy’s body lying still on the
airport tarmac – are among the most heroic images in Philippine history. These two scenes have also
epitomized the ideals of Filipino heroism and love of freedom.

Creative writing classes

a.) Young Writers’ Hangout for Kids & Teens: August 20 (1:30-3pm), September 3 (1:30-3pm), September
10 (10am-12nn), September 17 (1:30-3pm)

b.) Fiction Writing for Adults with Menchu A. Sarmiento: October 8 (1:30-5:30pm)
In defense of Martial law: Why Marcos is a hero

The burial of the late President Marcos is not an issue on Martial Law victims. But if you would insist, then I’ll
take toll on it. Yes, there were a lot of people who have died from Martial Law. There are a lot of victims of
torture, sudden disappearances and so on and so forth. This is a written fact, and I concede on your claims.
BUT, let’s go back to the main root of Martial Law. Why was it declared? Simple: There was complete chaos
in the country plus there were assassination attempts to the first lady, Enrile, and even the president himself.
The armed forces were immobilized and impotent. There was no income coming into the government. That is
why he had his last resort: Martial Law.

Was it in any way unconstitutional? HE JUST APPLIED THE CONSTITUTION. It was strongly necessary. As a
leader, you have to overlook and control certain things if there’s no peace and order anymore. Let me leave
the Marcos’ critics this burden: If you are in his position that time, and people were against each other or so
to speak even the government, how can you solve the problem as the President? Remember, Marcos aced
the bar examinations twice. His knowledge of the law and constitution was par excellence.

Marcos is a hero; Aquino aided the NPA

Burying Marcos won't make him a hero, because he already is a hero. A war veteran who fought side by side
with our guerrillas who thirst for freedom and a president that made the Philippines a better country. With his
innate intelligence he made the lives of many Filipinos easier by providing a lot of infrastructure projects,
which I mentioned in the opening remarks. The thing about being named hero is that not everyone will hail
you as one; the thing about FEM, however, is that a lot of people still consider him a champion, and he truly
is.

READ OPENING REMARKS:  Why it is our responsibility to bury Ferdinand Marcos in “Libingan ng mga
Bayani”

Talking again about the victims of Martial Law wouldn’t do you any good. If turpitude or morality is to be
taken into account for one to be called a hero, then why do we consider Emilio Aguinaldo as a hero? It is
also a historical fact that he ordered the execution of Andres Bonifacio, who was a famous leader. It is also
a historical fact that he ordered the execution of Juan Luna, who has a great battle plan to win the war
against conquerors. All of these, and still we consider him a hero. I also want to point out Benigno Aquino III
who’s considered to be a hero despite helping the rise of NPA during the Marcos regime… Point is, a lot of
people are still considering them heroes despite the activities linked to him.

On revisionism

It is not an attempt to forget, but rather a call for us to move on with the past issues. This is not to forget or
revise what was written but to allow ourselves to heal from the past. In fact, this should be remembered and
put to greater national discourse, but to destroy the whole family with issues from the past is very wrong.
Forcing BBM to say sorry is very wrong. Whatever wrong deeds of any father cannot be passed to his
son/daughter. It is not hereditary in nature. Decades have passed. Let the dead rest to where it truly belongs.

For my arguments:

1. Of the 47,228 remains interred at the Libingan Ng Mga Bayani, 32,268 were military personnel who died in
the infamous “Death March” from Bataan to Capas, Tarlac during World War II. Marcos was there too. Again,
this uplifts the earlier argument in the opening stance that he deserves to be buried in the Libingan ng mga
Bayani because has been a soldier and was alongside Filipino and American soldiers in the death march.

2. He may not be a Champion of human rights abuses but does it make him less a hero for fighting for our
country? Does it diminish his achievements and lifetime service as a public servant? I believe not. His
achievements and contributions stay the same even with a lot of bombarding issues. Issues don’t make his
contributions less significant nor his burial make him a better man or escape from the ghosts of the past. We
are just going to put him where he belongs and let the issue cease.

3. This issue has always been opposed by well-known schools. It is because of most historians and
antimarcos law students that this burial is still an unending issue up to now. They are the ones who are
followed/listened to most of time because they love to speak out, they love to express themselves. But, do
they speak for the Filipino people as a whole? Their perspective is not everyone’s perspective. Just look at
how many votes BBM got for VP position.. plus I have some friends who are not pro marcos but who are
okay with the burial. It just shows that the burial issue has long been overdue. It’s time to move on. For me,
some are just overreacting on this issue. Hear the common Filipino!

Look at how many Marcos supporters there are. We must listen to their side too, and not just the historians
or the law students. They should not be the one to dictate us… besides, is this still an issue on their
respective fields? I believe not. Let him be in the heroes’ cemetery.

He was a war veteran.

He was our former president.

He applied the constitution when it was necessary.

He had a lot of contributions to the country.

The house of congress already gave the go signal.

Issues don’t make his contributions less significant nor his burial make him a better man or escape from the
ghosts of the past.

A lot of people are still considering him a hero.

Historians and law students don’t speak for the whole Filipino nation, much like from the People Power.

We are to bury the man, not to praise him.

Again, let those who are long dead rest for they cannot defend themselves. Let our sense of justice and
humanity be bigger than our personal pains.

The affirmative side stands strong. For all of these, I have never been more proud to propose the notion that
FEM truly deserves to be in the heroes’ cemetery!

Is Marcos a hero?

Philippine Daily Inquirer / 12:24 AM August 20, 2016

As of this writing, President Duterte is standing pat on his decision to allow the transfer of the remains of
former president Ferdinand Marcos (FM) to the Libingan ng mga Bayani in September, ostensibly to live up to
his promise given to the Marcos family and the voters of the Ilocos region. His spokesperson has even
declared that the overwhelming election victory of Mr. Duterte is an affirmation that the Filipino public supports
the promise he made. But one could dismiss this argument as too much of a stretch, considering that there
were various other reasons for his election. One could also argue that he won by a plurality and not a majority,
and thus the majority of the nation does not necessarily affirm such a promise.

There are various dictionary definitions of a hero. One defines a hero as “a person noted for courageous acts
or nobility of character.” Another, as “a man who exhibits extraordinary bravery, firmness, fortitude or
greatness of soul, in any course of action, or in connection with any pursuit, work, or enterprise.” A hero is
thus one that we would want our citizens to emulate as a role model. Would FM fall under these two common
definitions of a hero?

To answer this question, we need to first establish the facts as to the kind of person and president FM was,
given that there is much misinformation circulating, particularly in the internet. Some facts are undisputable
because these have been clearly established and verified by independent researches and court records. These
include the unexplained killings and disappearances, the massive plunder of government funds and resources,
and the crony capitalism that bled the country dry. It is also a fact that at around the same time that FM ruled
with absolute authority over the Philippines, similar autocratic governments were ruling in South Korea, Taiwan,

ADVERTISEMENT

Singapore and Indonesia. Except for Indonesia, which was as plagued with corruption as the Philippines, the
authoritarian leaders of these countries used their powers to move their countries forward, transforming them
into advanced economies. In our case, the damage inflicted by FM on the nation continues to hound us to this
very day and will continue to do so for many years to come. The billions of US dollars plundered by FM could
have been used to develop our infrastructure and basic industries and promote social progress that would have
transformed the Philippines into a developed country as well.

Surely, based on established facts, FM does not meet the dictionary definition of a hero. Unless, of course, our
values are truly so distorted that we would want to emulate someone who was selfish, corrupt, and indifferent
to the suffering of the poor.

Allowing FM to be buried in the Libingan ng mga Bayani would create a stigma that all Filipinos around the
world would carry, as citizens of the only country who accorded hero status to a dictator who plundered the
country blind, curtailed basic freedoms, and trampled on basic human rights.

A positive development is the announcement of President Duterte that though he is committed to have the
remains of FM transferred to the heroes’ cemetery for the simple reason that he was a former soldier and a
former president, he is nevertheless going to abide by the decision of the Supreme Court where three petitions
opposing his plan have been filed. Thus, all is not lost. A decision of the high court upholding any of the
petitions would be best, for it would provide Mr. Duterte a good excuse for not being able to honor his
promise. And it would not result in a distortion of history.

The Libingan ng mga Bayani was built pursuant to Republic Act No. 289 (An Act Providing for the Construction
of a National Pantheon for Presidents of the Philippines, National Heroes and Patriots of the Country). Section
1 provides the intent of the law: “To perpetuate the memory of all Presidents of the Philippines, national heroes
and patriots for the inspiration and emulation of this generation and of generations still unborn, there shall be
constructed a National Pantheon which shall be the burial place of their remains.”

Some of the petitioners point out that the law “only allows the burial of a president or soldier worthy of public
inspiration and emulation” and that “the burial of Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani simply
mocks and taunts Section 1 of RA 289.”
They further argue that the burial would contradict RA 10368, which recognizes the massive human rights
violations during martial law under the FM regime and gives the government the moral and legal obligation to
recognize such violations and provide reparation to victims. According to the other petitioners, the planned
burial would be contrary to public policy; they cite historical records on the abuses and plunder committed
during the FM dictatorship.

As a layman interpreting the provisions of the laws cited, one could only hope and pray that the Supreme
Court, which is not bound by any campaign promises made by President Duterte, would uphold the petitions
and save the country from humiliation.

Below are the ten points that Sison raised against Marcos’ burial at Libingan ng mga Bayani:
1. The Filipino people cannot allow Ferdinand Marcos, the 14-year long fascist dictator, a traitor and a
criminal of colossal proportions  to be honored in any manner as a hero.  They cannot forget and forgive his
gross and systematic violation of human rights. He was culpable for the murder of at least 3,240 of his
political opponents. He caused the torture of at least 34,000 and the illegal imprisonment of 70,000. He used
his despotic power to enrich himself and his family. He incurred excessive foreign debt for overpriced 
infrastructure projects. He plundered public resources amounting to at least  Php167 billion in pesos and at
least $15 billion.

2. Marcos was definitively and categorically condemned by the Filipino people as a fascist dictator and was
overthrown from the presidency through the sovereign revolutionary act of the people who stormed the
presidential palace in 1986 and flooded Edsa to persuade the reactionary armed forces to withdraw support
from him. Had he not been helicoptered out of his palace by his US imperialist master, he would have been
immediately arrested and tried by the  Filipino people or he would been dealt with summarily  like Mussolini
upon the defeat of the fascists in Italy.

3. But even then his thousands  of victims of at least 9,500 sued him for human rights violations in the US
judicial system. He was found criminally culpable for these human rights violations. The heirs of his estate
are under obligation to indemnify the victims. The final US court decision is accepted by the Philippine
government, which has taken responsibility for processing and distributing indemnification to victims from
the erstwhile Swiss bank deposits of the plunderer Marcos.

4. In view of its recent decision to allow the remains of Marcos to be buried in the Libingan ng mga Bayani
(LNMB), the current majority of the Supreme Court should be reminded that the 1973  Constitution which was
used by Marcos to impose fascist dictatorship on the Filipino  people was scrapped upon the downfall of
Marcos and was replaced by the 1987 Constitution. This current Constitution carries explicit provisions
regarding human rights and restraints on presidential powers by way of condemning  and repudiating the 
colossal crimes of the Marcos fascist dictatorship. These were committed through unlimited concentration of
executive, legislative and judicial powers in the hands of one person.

5. Since the fall of the Marcos dictatorship, the three branches of the Philippine government  have always
agreed that the Marcoses have engaged in the criminal plunder of public resources and that the ill-gotten
wealth must be recovered.  Investigations and court proceedings have been successfully undertaken to
establish the criminal culpability of Marcos for plunder.
6. No less than the chief PDF-Laban party mates  of President Duterte, the founder Aquilino Pimentel Sr.
and Senate President  Aquino Pimentel III demand that Marcos should not be honored as a hero and the
victims  of the Marcos dictatorship should not be made to suffer further injustice.
7. Many of those who are personally close to Duterte say that he should not betray the stand of his own  late
mother who stood up articulately and courageously against the Marcos dictatorship. The Marcos fascist
dictatorship is not a good example for Duterte to project an image of strong leadership. He can make a
revolutionary stand on issues and he can thus stand as a strong leader of the people.
8. Marcos himself wanted to be buried beside his mother. Why submit to the political whim of his heirs to use
the  burial of his remains or display of his wax figure at LNMB as a means of revising history, covering up the
monstrous crimes of Marcos and boosting the Marcos family’s political stocks.
9. To bury the remains of Marcos in LNMB is a violation of the agreement of President Ramos and the
Marcos family that said remains must be buried in Batac, Ilocos Norte.
10. Too much public resources will be wasted to secure the remains of an arch traitor at LNMB from being
blown up like the oversized bust of Marcos on the way to Baguio./rga

Late Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos, who ruled from 1965-1986, including two decades of
dictatorship, was finally laid to rest at Heroes’ Cemetery, also known as Libingan ng mga Bayani, in Taguig,
Metro Manila on Friday. This surprise move came just ten days after the Supreme Court ruled that there was
legally no obstacle to burying the controversial late president at the national cemetery. The burial has caused
both praise and criticism, which indicates the existence of a persistent, unsettled controversy and the deep
divide within the country on how Marcos should be remembered, even after 30 years of democratization.

In 1986, Marcos and his family fled to Hawaii amid massive “People Power” protests against the regime that
finally ended his dictatorship and restored democracy to the Philippines. Three years later, he died in
Honolulu, never having had the chance to step back onto his native soil. Initially, his remains were not
allowed to be buried in the Philippines. After a deal was agreed upon by both ends – the then-Ramos
administration and the Marcos family – his body was finally returned to the country in 1993 and laid to rest in
Ilocos Norte, Marcos’ home province. It was also a part of the deal of his “return” that Marcos would never
receive full honors as the late president, including a national funeral and burial at Heroes’ Cemetery.

Though a compromise was made, it does not necessarily mean that Marcos’ family and loyalists gave up
their hope. In fact, it was their long-held dream that one day Marcos would be buried at this cemetery as a
late president and as a national hero who fought for the country during World War II.

Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.
One of those who opened the door for this dream was President Rodrigo Duterte. During his campaign for
the presidency, Duterte openly declared that he would allow the burial of Marcos at Heroes’ Cemetery.
Accordingly, he ordered permission for the burial once he was elected. As a response to this move, critics,
including victims of Marcos’ reign, filed seven petitions to prevent burial at the Heroes’ Cemetery. However,
the Supreme Court recently judged, by a count of nine to five with one inhibition, that there is legally no
reason to bar the Duterte administration from allowing Marcos’ burial at the cemetery.

In one sense, the issue is certainly a matter of legal interpretation, and there are debatable questions such
as whether Marcos really fought against the Japanese during the war. More importantly, however, the recent
controversies evolving around this matter indicate the deep divide in the country regarding how Marcos and
his era should be remembered. Marcos’ evaluation has not yet necessarily been settled, and it is not rare to
encounter discourse referring to the Marcos reign as the “glorified past,” partly due to the despondency of
the country’s 30 years of democracy.

The democratization brought about by “People Power,” which ended Marcos’ authoritarian regime, has been
the one of the proudest landmarks for the Philippines and its people. During the approximately two decades
of dictatorship, which began with the declaration of martial law, political opponents and those against the
regime were severely oppressed. The democratic process was suspended and manipulated by the Marcos
regime. Democracy has a particular meaning for the Philippines and all the more for this past history in a
region where non-democratic regimes are still vigorously surviving.

However, from another perspective, the fruits of 30 years of democracy, particularly in a practical sense,
are debatable. The economy has not developed as steadily as expected and often has stagnated. Even
during the Aquino III period, which saw stable economic growth, the gap between the rich and the poor
did not narrow. In other words, the majority of people have still been left behind in terms of development,
even under the democratic regime. Furthermore, the deterioration of security and prevalence of illegal drugs
may have exposed the negative side of a less controlled society. It is unfair to blame this on democracy
itself, but it is also true that this dissatisfaction has caused some people to remember the Marcos regime as
the “good old days.”
If we take this perspective, recent political phenomena in the Philippines could be understood in the same
context – the landslide victory of Duterte, who has authoritarian inclinations, and the rise of Bongbong
Marcos, a son of the late president, who is gaining nationwide popularity and placed second in the recent
race for the vice presidency. The controversy caused by Marcos’ burial again has revealed the deep divide
within the country regarding the Marcos regime and the potential discontent over the past three decades of
democracy. In today’s situation, in which there is speculation of another period of martial law under Duterte’s
government, this divide could potentially affect the course of Philippine politics. Though Marcos might finally
be laid to rest, the major controversy over his legacy is still unsettled.

Top 10 Accomplishments of the Marcos Administration

21 years in the seat of Presidency really marked the name of one Ferdinand Marcos. He is the President who
served the country in the longest period of time. From 1965 to 1986 he ruled over and governed the
Philippines. Thoughts, opinions and perceptions about him were thus divided because of this. While some
may take a very positive outlook about his administration, some on other end of the spectrum, took a more
negative side. Nonetheless, despite all these issues, let us give credit to whom and where credit is due. Let
us all take a look in this list of achievements done by the Marcos Administration.

1. Efforts to Promote Food Sufficiency

Poverty has long been a problem of the country, and to solve that, former President Marcos has advocated a
lot measures to target food sufficiency as a way to alleviate poverty. Some of his efforts include the Green
Revolution, the Blue Revolution, the Liberalized Credit and the Decontrol Program. The Green Revolution
obviously was about increasing the production of rice through cultivation of the IR-8 Hybrid rice; this
actually made the country a very self-sufficient rice country in 1986. The Blue Revolution on  the other hand
is about doing efforts to preserve and promote the marine resources of the country which are among the
best export products. The Liberalized Credit is about permitting the growth of numerous rural banks all over
the country resulting to the accessibility of credit to finance purchase of agricultural inputs, hired labor, and
harvesting expenses at very low interest rate. And lastly, the Decontrol Program was about implementing the
price control policies on rice and corn to provide greater incentive to farmers to produce
more. Deregulation of trading in commodities like sugar and coconut and agricultural inputs like fertilizer
were done for more efficient marketing and trading arrangements.
2. Education Reform
Another one big accomplishment of President Marcos is also the promotion and steps to reform the existing
educational system. Access to free education widened during the Marcos Administration. The biggest portion
of the budget was allotted for Educational Programs (P58.7 Billion in 20 years), this is according to several
progress reports which were released then. Moreover, during his regime, numerous schools and educational
institutions have been opened to serve the Filipino people. According to a nationwide study, literacy rate
jumped high by 21% from 72% to 93% in 1965.

3. Agrarian Reform
President Marcos also pushed forward the growth in the agrarian sector. Believing that farmers comprise
most of the major workforce in the country, he has passed several decrees and resolutions to serve the
interest of this sector. P.D. 27 or the Tenants Emancipation Act of 1972 was made possible to free farmers
from the bondage of the soil and transfer them to the ownership of the land they till. This decree was in fact
the very first Land Reform Code in the country. Because of this, many farmers have gained right to the land
they till, and many have decided to stick to farming as a profession because of the promise of this decree.

4. Promoting Primary Health Care

Another measure of growth is through the health care system. If a country can provide for the health care
needs of its constituents then the country does not lag far behind economic development. President Marcos
during his reign made sure that every Filipinos have equal access to basic and primary health care. He has
institutionalized a Primary Health Care (PHC) Program which made medical care accessible to all Filipinos
especially those in the very remote areas in the Philippines. According to a report, “this program was even
awarded by United Nations as the most effective and most responsive health program among the third world
countries. With PHC life expectancy increased from 53.7 years in 1965 to 65 years in 1985. Infant mortality
rate also declined from 73 deaths per 1,000 live births in 1965 to 58 in 1984.”
5. Housing Initiatives
One solution to a constellation of problems is Housing; it solves the issue of illegal settlement, city traffic
and misuse of public spaces. And President Marcos has made sure to put an effort in utilizing this solution.
He, together with Bagong Lipunan Improvement of Sites and Services (BLISS), expanded the government’s
housing program for low-income group. 14,000 slums were reduced to 2,500 by the end of 1976 because of
the housing initiative. Not only that, President Marcos also coordinated with PAG-IBIG and HLURB (Housing
and Land Use Regulatory Board) to improve further the implementation of the aforementioned program.

6. Energy Self-Reliance
Another solution to some of the pressing problems the country has back then was the use and promotion of
the renewable sources of energy. With the initiative of President Marcos, the use of indigenous energy
sources were developed like hydro, geothermal, dendro thermal, coal, biogas and biomass. This has put the
country into a great leverage because we are not a hundred percent dependent on the oil from the Middle
East unlike other countries. Moreover, because of this the extensive energy resource research and
exploration and development resulted to reduction of oil imports from 100% in 1965 to 40% in 1985 and in
the same year, more than 1,400 towns and cities were fully energized.
7. Export Development
Before all these shortcoming that we have right now, let us look back to when we were one of the top
exporters to the global economy. During Marcos’ regime, the Philippines has been one of the leading
countries who provide the global market with multiple products. During 1985 textile and textile products like
garments and embroideries, furniture and rattan products, marine products like prawns and milkfish, raw silk,
shoes, dehydrated and fresh fruits were exported aside from the traditional export products like coconut,
sugar, logs, lumber and veneer. These products were all from our country. Furthermore, these exported
goods make the Philippine economy quite stable and in a very good condition. However, things now have
changed.
8. Labor Reform
Another sector which President Marcos paid attention to is the manual labor workforce. Aside from farmers,
he listened and attended to the needs of the labor force. He did this through promoting the Magna Carta of
Labor to promote greater protection to labor and employment, and to further human resource development.
He did this because he believed that one way to achieve growth is to care for the people who brings money
into the Philippine economy. The minimum wages of the workers were boosted through the guaranteed 13th
month pay and cost of living allowances. Employment potentials of Filipinos were enhanced through skills
training. During that time, there were 896,000 out-of-school youths and unemployed graduated from various
training centers all over the country. Stabilized employment rate thus entailed potential growth for the
country’s economy.
9. Unprecedented Infrastructure Growth
If there’s one thing that the Marcos Administration should be proud of, it is the establishment of numerous
world-class infrastructure in the country. Several buildings, recreational parks, and public transportation
media have been built during Marcos’ regime. Not only that, telecommunications development grew big, land
transportation became better through the construction of roads and irrigation in the farm lands were
improved. This is all because the administration took a long-term perspective about the country’s growth.
Some of the buildings constructed back then were still in use today like the Philippine International
Convention Center, Center for the Culture and the Arts, Arts Center, Kidney Center, Lung Center and the ever
famous San Juanico Bridge in the South.
10. Political Reform
This is probably the most controversial achievements among all these. The drastic shift from a democratic to
a very authoritarian rule really shook the Philippines as a country and this all happened during Marcos
regime. As a matter of fact, that shift was even dubbed as the ‘darkest days of the Philippine political
system’. It posed several restrictions back then that gave rise to multiple issues that are present until now.
The Martial Law did not just reform the Philippine politics, but it has absolutely changed and turned it upside
down. But nonetheless, this political reform gave way to the birth of many government offices and
departments which enhanced the public service of the government. Actually, all of the established
Departments during the Marcos regime were retained until now.

PRESIDENT FERDINAND MARCOS's ACCOMPLISHMENTS: compared to all his succeeding presidents

accomplisments' COMBINED

We can talk about completed and commissioned government projects of the late FERDINAND E. MARCOS Sr.

Marcos completed Power plants in 20 years

1). Bataan Nuclear Power Plant, completed 1983
2) Leyte Geothermal Power Plant, completed 1977
3)Makiling-Banahaw Geothermal Power Plant, completed 1979
4) Tiwi Geothermal Power Plant, completed 1980
5) Angat Hydro Electric Power Plant, completed 1967
6)Kalayaan Hydro Electric Power Plant, completed 1982
7) Magat A Hydro Electric Power Plant, completed 1984
8)Magat B Hydro Electric Power Plant, completed 1984
9)Pantabangan Hydro Electric Power Plant, completed 1977
10)Agus 2 Hydro Electric Power Plant, completed 1979
11)Agus 4 Hydro Electric Power Plant, completed 1985
12) Agus 5 Hydro Electric Power Plant, completed 1985
13) Agus 7 Hydro Electric Power Plant, completed 1982
14) Pulangi Hydro Electric Power Plant, completed 1985
15) Agus 6 Hydro Electric Power plant, recommissioned in 1977
16)Masiway Hydro Electric Power Plant, completed 1980
17) Main Magat Hydro Electric Power Plant, completed 1983
18)Calaca Coal Power PlantCompleted in 1984
19) Cebu Thermal Power Plant completed in 1981
20) Palinpinon 1 Southern Negros
Geothermal production Field completed in 1983.

***Not mentioned are diesel plants**

Cory Aquino, Ramos, Estrada, Gloria Macapagal, Ninoy Aquino III COMBINED in 26 years: ZERO

Every new power plant built During their time were all privately Owned (mostly by Lopezes, AboitIz, Aquino
And Cojuangco Family) and is now owners of some Power Plants completed during Marcos.

Marcos completed Bridge projects in 20 years

1) Biliran Bridge150 meters long of Leyte, completed 1975
2) Buntun Bridge 1369 meters long of Tuguegarao-Solana, Cagayan, completed 1974
3) Candaba Viaduct Pulilan 5000 meters long of Bulacan-San Simon, Pampanga, completed 1976
4)Mactan-Mandaue Bridge 864 meters long of Lapu-Lapu-Mandaue, Cebu 1972
5) Magapit Suspension Bridge 449 meters long of Lal-lo, Cagayan completed 1978
6)Mawo Bridge 280 meters long Victoria, Northern Samar completed 1970
7) Patapat Viaduct 1300 meters long Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte completed 1986
9)San Juanico Bridge 2060 meters long Tacloban, Leyte-Santa Rita, Samar. Completed 1973
Not to mention the unnamed hundreds of bridges under 100 meters long.
TOTAL LENGTH = 11472 meters long
Marcos Established/Founded State Colleges/Universities in 20 years
1)Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University in La Union founded in 1981
2)Mariano Marcos State University in Ilocos Norte founded in 1978
3)Kalinga-Apayao State College in Tabuk Kalinga founded in 1970
4)Abra State Institute of Science and Technology in Abra founded in 1983
5)Pangasinan State University founded in 1979
6)University of Northern Philippines founded in 1965
7)Philippine State College of Aeronautics founded in 1969
8)Cagayan State University established in 1978
9)Quirino State University established 1976
10)Isabela State University established 1978
11)Pampanga Agricultural College established 1974
12)Mindoro State College of Agriculture and Technology-Calapan City established 1966
13)Occidental Mindoro State College established 1966
14)Palawan State University established 1965
15)Bicol University established 1969
16)Camarines Sur Polytechnic Colleges established 1983
17)Rizal Technological University established 1969
18)Technological University of the Philippines established 1971
19)Capiz State University 1980
20)Guimaras State College 1968
21)Northern Negros State College of Science and Technology established 1971
22)West Visayas State University became established as university in January 1986
23)Leyte Normal University 1976
24)SLSU- (Southern Leyte State University) - Sogod 1969
25)SLSU- Hinunangan 1975
26)SLSU- Tomas Oppus feb. 1 1986
27)SLSU- Bontoc 1983
28)SLSU- San Juan 1983
29)Basilan State College 1984
30)Western Mindanao State University became a university in 1978 followed with building the satellite
campuses in:
WMSU-Alicia campus, Zamboanga del Sur
WMSU-Aurora campus, Zamboanga del Sur
WMSU Curuan, Zamboanga City
WMSU-Diplahan, Zamboanga Sibugay
WMSU-Imelda, Zamboanga Sibugay
WMSU-Ipil, Zamboanga Sibugay
WMSU-Mabuhay, Zamboanga Sibugay
WMSU-Malangas, Zamboanga Sibugay
WMSU-Molave, Zamboanga del Sur
WMSU-Naga, Zamboanga Sibugay
WMSUOlutanga, Zamboanga Sibugay
WMSU-Pagadian City, Zamboanga del Sur
WMSU-Pitogo, Zamboanga del Sur
WMSU-San Ramon, Zamboanga City
WMSU-Siay, Zamboanga Sibugay
WMSU-Tungawan, Zamboanga Sibugay
31)Central Mindanao University established 1965
32)Misamis Oriental State College of Agriculture and Technology established 1983
33)Northwestern Mindanao State College of Science and Technology estbalished 1971
34)Davao del Norte School of Fisheries established 1969 ( now known as Davao del Norte State College)
35)Mati Community College (MCC) founded in 1972 (now known as Davao Oriental State College of Science
and Technology)
36)Malita Agri-Business and Marine and Aquatic School of Technology founded 1966 now known as
37)Southern Philippines Agri-Business and Marine and Aquatic School of Technology
38)University of Southeastern Philippines established 1978
39)Cotabato Foundation College of Science and Technology established 1967
40) Cotabato City State Polytechnic College established 1983
41)Mindanao state university- Iligan city founded 1968
42)Mindanao state university- Gensan city founded 1971
43)Surigao del Sur State University founded 1982
44)Surigao Del Norte School of Arts and Trades (Founded in 1969) now known as Surigao State College of
Technology
45)Sulu State College founded in 1982
46)Tawi-Tawi Regional Agricultural College founded in 1975
47)Adiong Memorial Polytechnic State College founded in 1970's
48) Makati Polytechnic Community College- Technical High School founded in 1972

(that i have found so far) out of 108 state universities and colleges are established and accomplished
projects of FERDINAND E MARCOS. He also improved and re equipped the remaining colleges/ Universities
that were established/ founded before 1965.

Cory Aquino, Ramos, Estrada, Gloria Macapagal, Ninoy Aquino III combined Established/Founded State
Colleges/Universities in 26 years:

ZERO- the remaining of 108 State Colleges/Universities are built and founded before 1965. They though
renamed few Colleges and Universities and Refounded them after 1986.

National Manpower and Youth Council (NMYC) founded 1976. Now changed to TESDA to discredit Apo
Marcos.

Few in not a fraction of high schools all over the Philippines. Built and founded during Marcos leadership
1) Amlan Municipal High School was established 1972
2) Amparo High School was established in 1979
3) Aplaya National High School was established 1969
4) Balayan National High School (BNHS) established 1985
5) Balibago National High School established 1970
6) Bayugan National Comprehensive High School established 1980
7) Buenavista National High School established 1972
Dalupaon National High School established 1972
9) Don Emilio Macias Memorial National High School established 1982
10) Dona Francisca Lacsamana de Ortega Memorial National High School established 1972
11) Dr. Juan G. Nolasco High School established 1966
12) Eastern Samar National Comprehensive High School established 1969
13) Francisco P. Felix Memorial National High School (FPFMNHS) established 1973
14) Gen. T. de Leon National High School establsihed 1969
15) Ismael Mathay, Sr. High School, formerly called the GSIS Village High School established 1971
16) Jose Borromeo Legaspi Memorial National High School established 1981
17) Kaong National High School 1974
18) Lawang Bato National High School established 1967
19) Liloy National High School established 1974
20) Mag-aba National High School established 1977
21) Mandaluyong High School established 1977
22) Navotas National High School established 1983
23) Parañaque National High School (Main Campus) (Formerly known as Parañaque Municipal High School)
established 1969
24) Pasay City North High School established in 1969
25) Pedro E. Diaz High School established 1977
26) Philippine High School for the Arts established 1977
27) Pinagtongulan National High School established 1967
28) Punta National High School established 1971
29) San Juan National High School established 1968
30) San Mateo National High School established 1985
31) San Pablo City National High School established 1969
32) San Pedro Relocation Center National High School established 1970
33) San Ramon National High School established 1967
34)Tabon M. Estrella National High School established 1981
35) Makati Polytechnic Community College- Technical High School founded in 1972
36) Tomas Cabili National High school Iligan city 1971
37) Dasmarinas National high School 1971
I. Food sufficiency

A. Green Revolution

Production of rice was increased through promoting the cultivation of IR-8 hybrid rice. In 1968 the
Philippines became self-sufficient in rice, the first time in history since the American period. It also exported
rice worth US$7 million.

B. Blue Revolution

Marine species like prawn, mullet, milkfish, and golden tilapia were being produced and distributed to
farmers at a minimum cost. Today, milkfish and prawns contribute substantially to foreign exchange income.

C. Liberalized Credit

More than one thousand rural banks spread all over the country resulting to the accessibility of credit to
finance purchase of agricultural inputs, hired labor, and harvesting expenses at very low interest rate. During
1981-1985, credit was available without interest and collateral arrangements.
Some of the credit programs were the ff:

1. Biyayang Dagat (credit support for fishermen)

2. Bakahang Barangay –supported fattening of 40,000 head of cattle in farmer backyards

3. Masaganang Maisan, Maisagana, and Expanded Yellow Corn Program –supported 1.4 Million farmers
through P4.7 Billion loans from 1975-1985

4. Gulayan sa Kalusugan and Pagkain ng Bayan Programs –provided grants and loans of P12.4 Million to
encourage backyard and communal production of vegetables and improve nutrition of Filipino households

5. Kilusang Kabuhayan at Kaunlaran (KKK)— supported 25,000 entrepreneurial projects through P1.8 Billion
and helping 500,000 beneficiaries

D. Decontrol Program

Price control polices were implemented on rice and corn to provide greater incentive to farmers to produce
more. Deregulation of trading in commodities like sugar and coconut and agricultural inputs like fertilizer
were done for more efficient marketing and trading arrangements.

II. Education Reform

Access to free education widened during the Marcos Administration. The biggest portion of the budget was
allotted for Educational Programs (P58.7 Billion in 20 years).

The literacy rate climbed from 72% in 1965 to 93% in 1985 and almost 100% in Metro Manila on the same
year.

III. Agrarian Reform

Tenant’s Emancipation Act of 1972 or PD 27 was implemented without bloodshed. This was the first Land
Reform Code our country. Since it was implemented until December 1985, 1.2 million farmers benefited,
either they became the owner or leaseholder in more than 1.3 million hectares of rice and corn lands.

IV. Primary Health Care

The Primary Health Care (PHC) Program made medical care accessible to millions of Filipinos in the remotest
barrios of the country. This program was even awarded by United Nations as the most effective and most
responsive health program among the third world countries. With PHC life expectancy increased from 53.7
years in 1965 to 65 years in 1985. Infant mortality rate also declined from 73 deaths per 1,000 live births in
1965 to 58 in 1984.

V. Housing for the masses

Bagong Lipunan Improvement of Sites and Services (BLISS) Housing project had expanded the government’s
housing program for the low-income group.

Massive slum upgrading projects have improved to 14,000 lots in 1985 from 2,500 in 1976. The Tondo
foreshore, for instance, is one of the biggest and most miserable slum colonies in Asia was transformed into
a decent community.
A total of 230,000 housing units were constructed from 1975-1985. The laws on socialized housing were
conceptualized by President Marcos through a series of legal issuances from the funding, the lending,
mortgaging and to the collection of the loans. These are governed by the Home Mutual Development Fund
(Pag-Ibig Fund), the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) and the National Home Mortgage
Finance which remain intact up to the present

VI. Energy Self-Reliance

Indigenous energy sources were developed like hydro, geothermal, dendrothermal, coal, biogas and
biomass.

The country became the first in Asia to use dendrothermal and in five years we became number two, next to
US, in geothermal utilization. The extensive energy resource research and exploration and development
resulted to reduction of oil imports from 100% in 1965 to 40% in 1985 and in the same year, more than 1,400
towns and cities were fully energized.

VII. Export Development

During 1985 textile and textile products like garments and embroideries, furniture and rattan products, marine
products like prawns and milkfish, raw silk, shoes, dehydrated and fresh fruits were exported aside from the
traditional export products like coconut, sugar, logs, lumber and veneer. The maritime industry was also
dominated by Filipinos wherein 50,000 seamen were employed by various world shipping companies.

VIII. Labor Reform

The Labor code was promulgated which expanded the concerns of the Magna Carta of Labor to extend
greater protection to labor, promote employment, and human resource development.

The minimum wages of the workers were boosted through the guaranteed 13th month pay and cost of living
allowances. Employment potentials of Filipinos were enhanced through skills training. During that time, there
were 896,000 out-of-school youths and unemployed graduated from various training centers all over the
country.

IX. Unprecedented Infrastructure Growth

The country’s road network had improved from 55,778 kilometers in 1965 to 77,950 in five years (1970), and
eventually reached 161,000 kilometers in 1985. Construction of irrigation facilities was also done that made
1.5 million hectares of land irrigated and increased the farmer’s harvest and income.

In addition, nationwide telecommunication systems— telephone systems, telex exchange too centers, and
interprovincial toll stations were also built.

X. Political Reform

The structure of government established by President Marcos remains substantially the same except the
change of name, inclusive of superficial features in laws, to give a semblance of change from that of
President Marcos regime.

The only significant department that was abolished after the departure of President Marcos was the
Department of Ministry of Human Settlements under Imelda Romualdez Marcos. It was dismantled but the
functions were distributed to different offices.
XII. Fiscal Reform

Government finances were stabilized by higher revenue collections and loans from treasury bonds, foreign
lending institutions and foreign governments.

XI. Peace and Order

In 1966, more than 100 important smugglers were arrested; in three years 1966-68 they arrested a total of
5,000. Military men involved in smuggling were forced to retire. Peace and order significantly improved in
most provinces however situations in Manila and some provinces continued to deteriorate until the imposition
of martial law in 1972.

What ever happened to these?

Did the suceeding administration just forego these just because it had Marcos’ signature?

These,though made in the 1970's address problems that we are facing today.
Had these not been abolished and maintained for the last 30 or so years, things may be so much different.

Aquino hails contributions of electronics industry to economy

By: Irene R. Sino Cruz - @inquirerdotnet

Inquirer Visayas / 08:02 PM April 20, 2012

LAPU-LAPU CITY—President Benigno Aquino on Friday lauded the semiconductor and electronics industry for
its contribution to the Philippine economy despite the decline in the global demand for its products.

“Your industry, for the past couple of years, was left reeling from the effects of the disaster that hit Japan, on
top of a global economic slowdown that spanned years,” Aquino told the participants of the World Electronics
Forum and the Semiconductor and Electronic Industries in the Philippines Inc. (Seipi) general membership
meeting held at Shangri-La”s Mactan Island Resort and Spa in this city.

Over 200 leaders of the electronics industry from the Philippines and other countries attended the four-day
17th World Electronics Forum.

ADVERTISEMENT

According to the President, the country’s economy is “inextricably tied” to the semiconductor and electronics
industry.

He recalled that the industry’s exports had accounted for an average of 65 percent of the country’s total export
for about a decade, but its share had dropped to 50 percent in 2011.

“This contributed to the decline in total merchandise exports, which pulled down the 2011 GDP (gross
domestic product) growth rate by an estimated 2.2 percentage points,” Aquino said.
Despite the decline, the industry’s direct employment grew by 6 percent, from 500,000 in 2010 to 530,000 in
2011, the President said, calling it an encouraging sign.

Aquino also credited the industry for its innovation, understanding and vision that forged the industry’s
resilience.

On the other hand, industry leaders projected bright prospects for the sector.

In his briefing for the President, Seipi chairman Bing Viera said the comparative figures for investment in the
first two months of the year showed an improvement.

According to Viera, the industry recorded $4.16 billion in investments inn January and February 2011. But
during the same period in 2012, the investments reached $4.49 billion, an increase of about seven percent.
The bulk of these investments came from the semiconductor subsector, he added.

Viera said they expected the industry to post a major recovery in the next two to three months.

The Seipi had earlier disclosed that it expected electronics exports to increase from 10 to 15 percent this year.
Last year, the industry’s exports dropped by 20 percent.

Mr. Aquino maintained that the industry’s “growth and resilience has been nothing but exceptional,” despite the
global conditions in the past couple of years and the less-than-ideal political climate over the past decade or
so, which has, only now, begun to change.

“You have been able to thrive, and not merely survive, in the Philippines despite the limitations presented by
the business environment, which cannot be separated from the political milieu,” he said.

The President told the forum he expected the industry to achieve greater heights as it “builds on the
momentum that the country is experiencing right now” and promised that his administration would be
supportive of the industry.

“My government is determined to meet any challenge that might arise in your industry with equal resilience and
equal fervor. You can continue to count on my administration’s active support for the semiconductor and
electronics industries,” Aquino said.

The Philippines provides about 10 percent of the world’s semiconductor manufacturing services, including
mobile phone chips and microprocessors.

Aside from these products, the Philippines also became the site for the manufacture of other products such as
anti-lock brake system, CD-ROM drives, digital signal processing units, printed circuit boards and disk drives.
Ninoy Aquino – Truly A False Hero
How can someone who truly did nothing to actually rally his people be tagged a hero? What follows is a story
of illusion. A myth, born of a nobody. And the fables written into the pages of the so-called “victors” history
books, of a man who, prior to the Martial Law years, was seen as nothing more than a representative of the
Familial elite, who still dominate Philippine politics to this very day.

This goof should have never been made a HERO. He did absolutely nothing of historic worth for the country,
except talk his ass off. And catch a bullet. That’s right folks. He got capped, because he didn’t know when
to shut up!

From the moment he got back from Korea in 1952. And through most of his political career. He made no
efforts towards actually molding something for the betterment of the nation. Here is a short list of what he
could have done. But didn’t:

 He never created any type charity works. Or special projects.

 He never gave a scholarship to any school children.
 He never had any popular projects to support the underprivileged.
 He never made a single contribution to either the local or national infrastructure.
 He never did anything to boost the the economy.
 He never gave any impression he had vision for the future.
 He simply capitalized on the stubborn nature of then-president Marcos. Yet, never once, did he
speak publicly in front of throngs of people. Only on the floor of the Senate.
Think about it. This goof Ninoy, has never even been considered for any kind of “top 10” list. What has he
really done for the Filipino people? Unlike Magsaysay, Bonifacio, nor the modern-day Joan of Arc’ Loida-
Lewis. A woman whose charity within the Bicol region, has amounted to millions of pesos. Ninoy? None of
these. What’s worse, he was a Communist sympathiser. For example: He was never in Plaza Miranda when
the bombing occurred. Apparently, he was either warned by his communist associates to avoid the event. Or,
as some evidence suggests. He may have planned the entire incident himself.

He also used Communist support to finance his campaign against Marcos. Thus, he proved to be a political
hypocrite. He never once offered any economic platforms, nor anything that could have pointed the
Philippine nation in a direction along the lines of the other Asian economic tigers of the time. Instead, he
used his senatorial position to attack and castigate president Marcos for the formers hard line stance against
the growing communist threat in the late 1960’s. Rather than proposing stronger democratic institutions at a
time when many communists groups were being established. And China was actively supporting a number of
leftist organizations within the country.

A Bust of Ninoy, located inside Terminal 3.

How can a nation continue to sell this goof as a hero. When he has done absolutely nothing to help his
countrymen. And not just within his native province of Tarlac. But also from Luzon to Mindanao and Visayas?
Verbal foibles that never fed an empty stomach. Nor filled an empty table.

Ninoy was just another Oligarch. But would never openly profess it.

His father was a Japanese collaborator during the 2nd World War. A Makapili as some might say.

He was married to a Cojuangco. Another greed driven clan. Again. How can he be tagged a hero?

 Rizal, an Ilustrado, wrote many revolutionary letters and books before he was executed.
 Bonifacio bravely led the Pugad Lawin before he was betrayed by his Katipunan colleague, Aguinaldo.
 Magsaysay came from humble roots and was loved by the people.
 Even Manny Pacquiao had to take thousands of hits, before becoming a Champion.
And Ninoy? He was only good at giving speeches regarding how things should be in this country. And that’s
all he ever did. Talk, talk, and more talk.

Then he got shot.

Was proclaimed a HERO martyr.

They have made all kinds of bronze statues, monuments, and busts after him.

What is with this nation, and people who talk a lot? Is that what it takes to become a hero? If so, then why
not make Lacierda a Hero? Or how about Boy Abunda? Kris Aquino? Inday Badiday? Or even Secretary De
Lima?

They’re talkative aren’t they? But then again, they’d have be shot first. Wouldn’t they?

Ninoy Aquino, a plain idealist that contributed nothing to the nation. All talk. Never an ounce of action.

11 DISTURBING FACTS WHY BENIGNO AQUINO JR. SHOULDN’T BE A HERO

The proposed Marcos burial at the Libingan Ng Mga Bayani, and this year’s Martial Law Anniversary were
among hot topics this year, especially after electing some political activists in the Senate, and giving top
government positions to others.

Leftist groups are pushing to include the story of Martial Law in textbooks and other teaching aids because
they want to fulfill their personal and selfish goals – to totally discredit the living Marcos family.

But how about the fake hero that we declared after Marcos was ousted? How about the traitor who sold
Sabah to Malaysia just to fulfill his personal grudge and selfish plan against former President Ferdinand
Edralin Marcos?

The following reasons why former Senator Benigno Aquino Jr.  shouldn’t be a hero and must also be
included in textbooks.

1. He never created any type charity works. Or special projects.

2. He never gave a scholarship to any school children.
3. He never had any popular projects to support the underprivileged.
4. He never made a single contribution to either the local or national infrastructure.
5. He never did anything to boost the the economy.
6. He never gave any impression he had vision for the future.
7. He simply capitalized on the stubborn nature of then-president Marcos. Yet, never once, did he speak
publicly in front of throngs of people. Only on the floor of the Senate.

The above are just simple reasons why Aquino should not be a hero.

The following will justify furthermore that the fooled Filipinos under the Cory Aquino administration declared
Aquino a hero rather than a traitor.

1. BENIGNO AQUINO JR. SOLD SABAH TO MALAYSIA

The deceased and former Senator Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino Jr. had guaranteed Malaysia in 1983 that the
Philippines would drop its case over Sabah in return for its backing in the move to expel strongman
Ferdinand Marcos, a previous outside undertakings official uncovered yesterday.

Hermes Dorado, previous national domain division leader of the Department of Foreign Affairs, said Aquino
met with then Malaysian Prime Minister Mohammad Mahathir before he about-faced to the Philippines and
was killed on Aug. 21, 1983.

Dorado said there were no official records of the assumed meeting amongst Aquino and Mahathir, yet said
he “got to be conscious of this bit of insight” from previous envoy and resigned general Rafael Ileto.
“General Ileto indirectly confirmed that Ninoy Aquino asked for help from Mahathir in exchange for dropping
the Sabah claim when he gains power,” Dorado told a forum at the University of the Philippines in Quezon
City.

Dorado said Ileto was the person assigned to monitor Aquino’s movement on his journey back to Manila.

“There was a commitment to help oust Marcos,” he added. “That is the reason why the government today is
somehow reluctant to support the Sabah claim.”

“Our hands are tied today because the leadership up to this day is committed to drop the Philippine claim of
Sabah,” he said.

2. BENIGNO AQUINO JR. CREATED THE SO-CALLED “JABIDAH MASSACRE” AND HAS BEEN THE
BIGGEST HOAX FOISTED ON THIS NATION.

It was a yarn spun  in 1968 by treasonous politicians of the Liberal Party at that time as a propaganda
weapon intended to deal what they thought would be a fatal blow to  then President Marcos’ bid for
reelection the next year.

In another demonstration of the law of unintended consequences, the just organized Moro National
Liberation Front (MNLF) then used the allegation to rouse Muslim youth’s anger so they would rally to the
fledgling organization, which the more powerful Muslim traditional politicians refused to support.

The MNLF (and its breakaway group the Moro Islamic Liberation Front) ably mythicized Jabidah to become,
as an academic put it, the “sacral moment invoked from time to time to mobilize the Muslims to the
movement’s cause.” Misuari portrayed it as the culmination of genocidal attacks against the Moros;
therefore, a Bangsamoro—an independent nation-state of the Moros—is necessary.

The mythicization of Jabidah has been so successful that even President Benigno S. Aquino 3rd and
supporters of his Bangsamoro Basic Law have falsely, cruelly compared the Mamasapano massacre of 44
police commandos to the nonexistent “Jabidah massacre.” In their ignorance and stupidity, they are spitting
on the graves of our fallen heroes who fought for the Republic.

How stupid can this president get: It was his father, then senator Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino, Jr., who actually
debunked the allegation of a Jabidah Massacre from the very start. His statements on this are preserved in
the annals of the Senate as his privilege speech delivered March 28, 1968:

3. BENIGNO AQUINO JR. ALLEGEDLY ORCHESTRATED THE PLAZA MIRANDA BOMBING SO PEOPLE
WOULD BLAME MARCOS.
At Plaza Miranda that evening, a crowd of several thousands had gathered to listen to the Liberal Party
senatorial candidates and mayoralty candidate for Manila at their miting de avance.  It was to be their final
and most important public rally before Election Day, so the entire LP senatorial slate and top leadership were
there, except one key figure—the country’s most voluble senator and LP secretary-general, Ninoy Aquino.

Where was he?  Was he not seen driving around the area in a convoy before the rally began?   In an article
written for another paper,  Ronald Roy, lawyer-son of the late former Senator Jose Roy, narrates talking to
the late Salvador “Doy” Laurel on the telephone about Ninoy attending a “despedida de soltera” for Doy’s
daughter Suzie at the Laurel residence that evening.

He was “watching Plaza Miranda on TV” but looking “fidgety,”  Doy reportedly told Roy.

A little after 9 pm, the grenade attack occurred, killing instantly a five-year-old child and Ben Rojas, the
Manila Times photographer. A total of 98  were injured and seven more died later.

According to Roy, he and his late father, Sen. J.J. Roy, rushed to the hospital to visit wounded friends.
There, Salonga reportedly told his father: “Ka Pepe, may kinalaman si Ninoy dito sa aming pagkabomba!”
(“Ninoy knew something about this bombing!”)  “He might have said more if my father had allowed him.
Instead, dad hushed down his friend so he could rest,” Roy wrote.

What we have here reflects a very serious contradiction in our history.  It’s only when the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth is told that we can be truly free.

4. BENIGNO AQUINO JR. COLLABORATED WITH CPP/NPA/NDF TO DESTROY MARCOS

It started when young Aquino, as a war correspondent in Korea and Southeast Asia in the early 1950s, saw
communism in a different light.

In the book The Aquinos of Tarlac, Nick Joaquin quoted Aquino as saying: “To me, Communism and
democracy had been black and white: Communism was bad, democracy was good. But when I saw how the
North Korean prisoners were tortured and yet stuck to their own creed, I began to wonder.”

Aquino would later rub elbows with leaders of CPP themselves — first with founder Jose Maria Sison, and
later with Rodolfo Salas, CPP chair at the height of Martial Law.

While Aquino’s relationship with Sison was more detached, Claudio said it was different with Salas.

In an interview with Claudio, Salas said not only did he bring wounded New People’s Army (NPA) soldiers to
Aquino’s houses, but he received guns and cash from Aquino himself

He also said Aquino had a significant contribution to the expansion of NPA in the country.

Salas claimed the relationship went beyond these meetings.

He said he was “best friends” with Aquino’s aide Perfecto “Pentong” Masbad, and whenever Pentong would
get a “balato” (bonus) from Aquino, Salas would get some too.

Why Ninoy Aquino IS A National Hero To Me

During the late 60's and 70's when Ninoy Aquino was in politics and the opponent of the infamous Marcos I
was not impressed by him. I thought he was a demagogue, and a political lightweight. I wouldn't had voted
for him had he stood for presidency.

But then terrible events changed the nature of the Philippines. We went into a climate of fear and repression.
All the prominent people who were not able to flee that were on the wrong side of the fascist dispensation
were imprisoned and tortured. Those in lower rung of the social ladder had it even worse.

At that time before the (people power) Revolution broke out at EDSA. We thought there will not be any
change at all. Our spirits were broken.

Until Ninoy Aquino challenged the status quo once again. I remembered him being asked if returning from
exile was worth it. That risking his life was a fair price to pay for the Filipinos. He replied it was. I thought he
was joking and he wasnt serious. I was wrong.

He did return. And he paid the ultimate price for that decision. Ninoy was not planning to become a martyr I
am sure. Thats why he had that bullet proof vest on, and a lot of press as a second layer of protection. He
did not even have to return.

That single act impressed me the most. As did most people. That when the botched coup against Marcos
happened and the conspirators needed protection, we came.
It was because we had enough. That if Ninoy could be salvaged like a cockroach what more of us? For what
did we have to lose anymore, since our life didn't mean swat, anyway. We did not do it for the political class
nor for Cardinal sin.

I thank Ninoy for that one selfless act. It prodded us into action like we would never have done.

That is why Ninoy Aquino will alway be a national hero in my eyes. He was not a saint. Hell, no. He was
flawed as anybody else. But he did more to ignite that perfect storm that liberated us from a decade of
coerced silence.

NINOY IS NOT A HERO

This guy should not have been made a He has done nothing for this country but
HERO. talk.

He was murdered because he talked a lot. When he was still alive, he had made no charity project. He gave
no scholarships to children nor had any popular projects to support the underprivileged. He has made no
contribution to local or national infrastructure. He did nothing for the economy. He did not show us a vision.
He only capitalized on the stubborness of Mr. Marcos and fought against it using tools of democracy. This
guy, Ninoy did never make it to the top list of leaders who really did something for the Filipino people. Unlike
Magsaysay, Bonifacio nor the modern-day Joan of Arc' Loida-Lewis of whose charity to the Bicol region
amounted to millions of pesos, Ninoy had none of these. What's worse,he was a COMMUNIST
SYMPATHIZER. He was never in Plaza Miranda when the bombing took off. Apparently, he was warned by his
communist friends to take cover.

He used communist support to sustain his campaign against Marcos. He was a political hypocrite. He did not
offer economic platforms nor anything that should concretely place this country into the line of Asian
economic tigers. Instead, he used his senatorial position to attack and castigate Marcos for the former's
hardline stance against communists overruning this country. Ninoy proposed democracy in a time where
many communists groups were formed and when China was actively supporting leftists organizations in the
country.

How can this guy be a Hero when had virtually done nothing to help his countrymen not only from Tarlac but
also from Mindanao and Visayas? Words could not feed a hungry stomach nor more of the same to fill an
empty table.

Ninoy was an Oligarch, but he did not openly profess it.

 His father was a Japanese collaborator during the 2nd World War, a Makapili.

He was married to a Cojuangco, a greedy clan. How can he be a hero?

Rizal,an Ilustrado, wrote many revolutionary letters and books before he was shot. Bonifacio bravely led the
Pugad Lawin before he was sinisterly betrayed by his Katipunan colleague, Aguinaldo. Magsaysay came from
humble roots and was loved by the people. Manny Pacquiao had to take a thousand hits to become a
Champion.

And Ninoy?

He was only to giving speeches of how things should be in this country.He just talked and talked.

Then he was shot.

Then he was proclaimed as a HERO.

Then we made bronze monuments and busts after him.

Why is Aquino so afraid of Marcos?
 159

BY FRANCISCO TATAD ON FEBRUARY 28, 2016OPINION ON PAGE ONE

Aquino’s afflictions
Undying hatred of the “Marcos past,” unreasoning fear of a “Marcos-friendly future,” and total rejection of
any suggestion from any source that Filipinos had begun to rethink the real value of Martial Law and
Ferdinand Marcos’ real standing among Philippine Presidents are among the saddest afflictions of President
B. S. Aquino 3rd.
These were aggressively on display on the 30th anniversary of the February 25, 1986 EDSA ‘revolt,’ when
Aquino relaunched his late parents’ lifelong campaign against the late President Marcos. Completely
anathema to Aquino was The New York Times’ observation that Filipinos had become nostalgic about the
“golden age” of Marcos, when the Philippines and their President were highly respected everywhere. Aquino
frothed in the mouth upon reading this.

Ninoy’s politics
Since the late ‘60s, the discrediting and destruction of Marcos had been the main object of the late former
Senator Benigno Aquino Jr.’s politics. As senator, his uninterrupted polemics was against Marcos. He
authored only one law—the Study Now, Pay Later law, which the late former Senator Raul Roco, during his
own campaign, claimed to have drafted as Ninoy’s chief of staff—but he delivered endless anti-Marcos
speeches.
In one such speech he blew the cover behind Marcos’ national security project for Sabah, the Philippine
territory, which had been incorporated into Malaysia against our formal protest. This ironically made Ninoy a
“hero” and Marcos a “knave” especially to the Malaysians, the British and so many naive and unthinking
Filipinos, who had no appreciation of the paramount national interest involved. To this day we suffer the
consequences of that highly irresponsible and “treasonous” act.

Aquino went beyond mere speeches.

Communist broker
In 1969, he brokered the meeting between Amado Guerrero (aka Jose Maria Sison), leader of the Communist
Party of the Philippines (CPP), and Bernabe Buscayno, aka Commander Dante of the New People’s Army
(NPA), which forged the ties that launched the Communist rebellion against the government. When the
Communists came knocking at the gates of Malacañang, Marcos decided to fight back by declaring Martial
Law in 1972. The oligarchy, which counted on the Aquinos, condemned Marcos for proclaiming martial law,
but not the Communists who had threatened to overthrow the government and provoked a constitutional
response from Marcos. This continues to this day.
Plaza Miranda bombing
In 1971, Aquino accused Marcos of having ordered the bombing of the Liberal Party political rally at Plaza
Miranda, where all the top party leaders were on stage except for himself, the party secretary-general, who
was mysteriously out of reach during the attack. He surfaced later, dressed in a military uniform, apparently
ready to oust Marcos and take over, if any of the LP leaders had been killed. The toll was high, but none
among his top colleagues were killed.
Years later, the Communists confessed to the crime, but former Senate President Jovito Salonga, one of the
most seriously injured bombing victims, said, “Ninoy had something to do with it.” But Aquino never
apologized, nor was condemned for it. As Marcos’ most important martial law prisoner, he was sentenced to
death by a military tribunal, but allowed to leave for the US for a heart surgery. He returned three years later
only to be gunned down at the international airport that now bears his name.

Marcos warning
Marcos, through his Defense Secretary, Juan Ponce Enrile, had tried to dissuade him from coming home,
citing a reported security threat, which the government was apparently still trying to ascertain. This went
unheeded, and he returned. The rest is history. Marcos was blamed instantly for the murder, and members of
the aviation security command were accused and convicted of the crime. But the grieving widow, who
became revolutionary president after ousting Marcos, never bothered to find out the real brains behind it.
Neither did her son PNoy, who became President in 2010. Mother and son simply encouraged the public to
believe, without any basis, that Marcos was responsible.
Cory’s politics
Cory spent her six and a half years in office trying to wipe out anything and everything that bore Marcos’
mark. She discarded the government’s full-scale industrialization program; scrapped the Department of
Energy, the all-but completed Bataan Nuclear Power Plant and the entire national energy program; exempted
her own family-held Hacienda Luisita from land reform; left all of Imelda Marcos’ cultural projects to the
elements; expunged “Isang Bansa, Isang Diwa” from the national consciousness; handpicked 50 individuals
to write a new Constitution because she could not trust the Filipinos to elect those who should do it; barred
the Marcoses from returning to the country to answer charges against them, but instead asked the US to
prosecute them for some of these crimes; spent over a trillion pesos in six and a half years to build a few
flyovers in Metro Manila, as against the P600 billion or so Marcos had spent to build all the infrastructure in
the country in 20 years; barred Marcos from being buried in the Libingan ng mga Bayani where even dogs
and scoundrels lie.
PNoy does one better
Now PNoy has done his deceased parents one better, by savaging not only Marcos pere but also Marcos fils.
He has warned the nation against the “dangers” of making Sen. Ferdinand (Bonging) Marcos Jr. the next
Vice President of the Philippines. As though the vice presidency, which has no known official duties or
responsibilities, had become more important than the presidency, and in charge of running the government.
Or that, finally guilt-stricken about his hopelessly inept and heartless six years in office, Aquino has reached
the conclusion that no son of a former President should ever be allowed to go near it.
To Aquino and his claque, trying to prevent Bongbong from becoming Vice President has now become as
important as, if not more important than, trying to prevent Vice President Jejomar C. Binay from becoming
the President. The plot against Binay continues, even after it has begun to produce the most embarrassing
results. But it has, interestingly enough, also spun a subplot against Mar Roxas, the very candidate who is
supposed to benefit from the original plot.

If Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa and his “Samar Group” had their way, Aquino would have dumped
Roxas by now for his poor survey ratings. He would have openly supported Sen. Grace Poe Llamanzares, the
constitutionally ineligible foundling, whom he is trying to help before the Supreme Court where her
disqualification by the Commission on Elections is under review. Upon my petition and those of three other
petitioners, the Comelec has disqualified her and cancelled her Certificate of Candidacy for misrepresenting
herself as a natural-born citizen and a resident of the country for the last 10 years.

Still, Aquino has not shown the same aversion to and fear of Binay as he has vis-a-vis Marcos. Why is this?
Is it because he knows that even with the PCOS (precinct count optical scan) machine—now renamed VCM
(voting counting machine)—under his control, he may not be able to stop the surge in favor of Marcos,
without courting serious trouble? As the only Ilocano candidate for Vice President, Bongbong has rekindled
the spirit of the “Solid North,” which has already produced three Presidents—Elpidio Quirino, Ramon
Magsaysay and Marcos, and which has traditionally contributed the cream of its youth to our armed forces.

What millennials say

Among the millennials, the crank propaganda effort to recreate “the horrors” of Martial Law appears to have
failed. A friend who was detained during martial law tells me of his conversation with his young daughter,
who is an unabashed Bongbong supporter. “Did you know I was a Martial Law victim?” he asked his
daughter. “You told me so,” she said. “Why then are you supporting Bongbong, whose father was the author
of Martial Law?” he said. “Well, I know nothing about his pop. But we’re talking of Bongbong, and he is
cool.”
And that, he said, was the end of their conversation. Is any millennial saying, Aquino is cool?

Unblemished
Of the five senators running for VP, Bongbong alone has not been tarred for receiving P50 million or more
from Malacañang to convict and remove Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona during his Senate
impeachment trial. Next only to Senate President Franklin Drilon, who received P100 million, Francis
Escudero received the biggest chunk of P98 million, while Alan Peter Cayetano, Antonio Trillanes 4th, and
Greg Honasan received not more than P50 million each. This was an unspeakable crime, which should have
immediately disqualified them from public office. Aquino knows this could not be said of Marcos.
The long view
But one more thing needs to be said, Although Bongbong may not have in him Aquino’s vindictive streak,
and as Vice President, he may take no active interest in jailing Aquino for his crimes, his own presidency
could just be a matter of time, and when his time comes, he could have the nation’s political history purged
of all the bogus and revisionist claims that have made heroes out of opportunists, traitors, villains and
scoundrels during the two Aquino regimes. The Aquinos, whose treason began with PNoy’s grandfather’s
collaboration with the Japanese during the last Pacific war, would finally be exposed for what they are, and
brought down from their outrageous pedestal.
Permanently, we trust.

Leni in trouble
Aquino’s fear has apparently become palpable within his own circle. Thus, some close supporters of
Congresswoman Leni Robredo, the Liberal Party vice presidential candidate, have accused him of preparing
to dump her because of her poor survey ratings, in favor of Escudero, who has higher ratings. Robredo and
Escudero, together with Honasan, are not only Bicolanos but also natives of the same town, Bulan,
Sorsogon. By marrying the late former Naga City mayor and former DILG Secretary Jesse Robredo, whose
death in a private plane crash remains a mystery, Leni became a resident of Camarines Sur, the biggest of
the Bicol provinces, where she is said to enjoy strong “hometown” support. By contrast, Escudero is said to
have made so many political enemies in his native Sorsogon. No wonder, despite his supposedly high rating,
I have yet to hear someone say she’ll vote for him.
And Roxas, too
Malacañang has formally denied the accusation, just as it has denied that Aquino was positioning the
constitutionally ineligible Mrs. Llamanzares to replace Roxas, should his numbers fail to improve. But
Malacañang was reportedly behind the move to make Solicitor General Florin Hilbay argue before the Court
as ‘Tribune of the People,’ that foundlings of no known parentage are natural-born citizens, even without
any basis in the Constitution. And Malacañang was reportedly behind the recent move of the Commission on
Human Rights to submit an intervention in the Llamanzares case, even without leave of Court after the parties
had submitted the case for resolution.
As lead petitioner against Mrs. Llamanzares, I have asked the Court, through legal counsel Manuelito Luna, to
require the CHR to show because why it should not be cited for contempt for its illegal and highly unethical
intervention. We shall see how the Court treats our motion.

A medical issue
amid all this, Aquino has managed to remain reasonably restrained with respect to anyone that threatens to
cancel his (declared or secret) presidential candidate. It is the vice presidential contest where he tends to
exaggerate his reaction. At the mere mention of Marcos’ name, he seems to froth in the mouth, ready to
climb walls. This could present some custodial problems after he steps down. Should he take former
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s place in her present detention, or does he need a “home” or an
“institution” where he will have the privilege of thinking that he is the only sane person in the whole wide
world? This appears to be a medical issue; the doctors should be looking into it.