Monday, February 27, 2006

NEWS FLASH: MILITARY COUP TOPPLES PHILIPPINE PRESIDENT (with help from Communists and Leftists)

Mike Arroyo, in his own words.

Credit should go to Mike Arroyo

THIS is a season of remembering those exhilarating days in January last year when Joseph Estrada, accused of betraying the trust of the Filipino people who elected him president, was ousted three years and five months short of his term.

Believing in giving credit to where credit is due, we are reprinting here again excerpts of the interview with Mike Arroyo by the eminent Nick Joaquin on his role in the ouster of Estrada, which paved the way for his wife's takeover of the presidency. The interview appeared in the March 5, 2001 issue of Philippine Graphic.

"She had really left the Cabinet at the right moment: the timing was perfect. If she had tarried a moment longer, she would have been too late for EDSA: she would have made it there as an opportunist. And as for the ill-feeling in Metro Manila, we tackled that by going back to the door-to-door campaign: she went from barangay to barangay explaining her motives, outlining her program. And it worked. Then came the impeachment trial, and from there, tuloy-tuloy na.

"There was a time honestly, when I felt I erred in advising her to resign from the Cabinet. The masa in Manila apparently wanted her to stick it out with Erap. And when she started attacking him, everything fell on us - grabe!- everything! But I told myself: it's now or never; if we lose here we're totally destroyed and it's goodbye to her political career - but if we win here, she becomes President! So we really fought.

"We got all those Erap tapes from Ramon Jacinto and distributed them all over. We bought one million and a half million copies of Pinoy Times to give away so the public could read about the Erap mansions and bank accounts.

"And when EDSA happened, we texted everybody to go running there. EDSA, EDSA: everybody converge on EDSA! Panalo kung panalo. Patay kung patay! Jinggoy had already announced what they would do to us if they won.

"Chavit Singson had Plan B involving elements of the military to strike the first blow. They would kindle the spark by withdrawing from the government, and one by one others would follow: Class '71 would also withdraw, then Class '72, and so forth. But General de Villa warned that the timing had to be precise because one untimely move against the government and the military would automatically defend it. The move must be made at what De Villa called a 'defining moment.'

"You see, General De Villa had his Plan A, which was better than ours, because his was focused on the Chief of Staff and the Service Commanders. At past one o'clock p.m. January 20, Chief of Staff Angelo Reyes defected but we knew that already the night before, when negotiations had lasted until the small hours. By past 2 a.m. we knew Reyes had been convinced to join. His only condition was: Show us a million people on EDSA so it will b easier to bring in the service commanders.

"And they asked when the crowd was thickest; we told them: from three to five in the afternoon. So they agreed to come to EDSA at around that time. But while hiding in their safehouse, they got reports that General Calimlim could not be located and their first thought was: "He's out looking for us!" So they decided to rush to EDSA right away. When they got there, why there too at the Shrine was Calimlim! He had been looking for them all right, but join to join them, not to arrest them!

"Our group there was a back-up strike force. In fact, it was our group that won over to our side the PNP first. If Panfilo Lacson had resisted, he and his men would have been repelled: there would have been bloodshed, but not on EDSA. In every place where Erap loyalists had a force, we had a counter-force to face it, with orders to shoot. And not only in Metro Manila. Carillo had already been sent to the provinces; and in Nueva Ecija, for instance, we had Rabosa. This was a fight to the finish. That's why those five days that Erap was demanding were so important. He was counting on counter-coups and baliktaran.

"I was negotiating with Pardo up to three o'clock in the morning: niloloko lang pala kami. But I told him point-blank: "If by six o'clock this morning you haven't given us the resignation letter, we will storm the gates of Malacañang!' But they insisted on more talk: with De Villa up front, and my back channel debate with Pardo, which even became a three-way contest, with Buboy Virata pitching in.

"But the threat to march to Malacañang was for real. And so was the danger of bloodshed. I wasn't telling Gloria everything: I didn't want her alarmed. So she didn't know about the orders to shoot."


UPDATE: oh yeah there were communists and leftists too who participated in this: Crispin Beltran, Satur Ocampo, Teddy Casino Liza Masa, Rafael Mariano and Etta Rosales.

UPDATE: the difference between estrada and arroyo is that erap at least was democratically elected (won by a landslide), whereas Arroyo stole the presidency TWICE. One in 2001. The other during the 2004 elections.

UPDATE: I don't think Arroyo, Mike Defensor or any of those who supported Edsa dos (including the likes of that hypocrite winnie monsod) have any moral high ground at all when it comes to lecturing us about the evils of a coup, since it will only sound hyprocritical and laughable.

Maybe if they did not participate in the edsa dos, they'd be more credible.

And for me, the only legit edsa in my eyes is Edsa 1986 where we ousted an overstaying and illegitimate ruler/dictator who cheated in 1986, but was proclaimed "winner" anyway by his Congress/Batasan.

UPDATE: thanks Rizalist, Atty-at-work, and Hillblogger for linking to this post. go click on their links for more comments and info.

UPDATE: Another must read post from Rizalist. Check out the photos.

13 comments:

ricky said...

nice article. suggest you post it in other blogs too.

john marzan said...

good idea. will be posting it at pinoyexchange.

Rizalist said...

good stuff john! really shows they understand how to do a "coup" on a President.

ricky said...

why don't you post it in ellen's, djb's, and other blogs also?

Rizalist said...

John this was such a brilliatn post I've put a link to it on my front page today. galing!

john marzan said...

thanks. :)

Atty-at-Work said...

I came across this great post though DJB's site. Allow me to post it in my site. Thanks.

HILLBLOGGER said...

John,

Brilliant 'coup'*, publishing the real story is a superb move!

I've always maintained that Gloria and her husband were behind a coup d'état plot against a duly-elected president of the Republic.

Your publication has got to be circulated! People mustn't forget the crime that Gloria, her husband, Angie, Rene de Villa and a host of important personalities committed against the nation and its people.

HILLBLOGGER said...

Hi again John,

Just to let you know that I posted your blog with proper credit over at:

http://hillblogger.blogspot.com/2006/03/news-flash-military-coup-topples.html

Hope you don't mind. Thanks a lot.

john marzan said...

I came across this great post though DJB's site. Allow me to post it in my site. Thanks.

Cool, atty at work.

Your publication has got to be circulated! People mustn't forget the crime that Gloria, her husband, Angie, Rene de Villa and a host of important personalities committed against the nation and its people.

thanks. but credit should really go to ellen tordesillas because article niya yan. i just posted the entire article in my blog kasi baka pati sa wayback machine mawala eh.

wala na kasi yung 2002 article niya sa malaya.com.ph.

Just to let you know that I posted your blog with proper credit over at:

http://hillblogger.blogspot.com/2006/03/news-flash-military-coup-topples.html

Hope you don't mind. Thanks a lot.


no prob. every filipino should read the nick joaquin interview with pidal.

Yasumi said...

inihanda ng Komite Sentral ng Armadong Imahinasyon (UPdiliman squaters)

PEBRERO 2006-- Bilang pagpupugay sa anibersaryo ng pagbagsak ng Diktaduryang Marcos dalawang dekada ang nakaraan matapos mag-alsa ang mamamayan, hindi nakapagtataka na ideklara muli ng kasalukuyang pangulo ng tinaguriang “demokratikong” bansa ang State of National Emergency at isailalim muli ang mamamayan sa direktang kontrol na katumbas ng Diktaduryang Militar. Ito ay dahil sa resulta ng sistematikong karahasan ng estado sa inter-relasyon nito sa kanyang nasasakupan. Bahagi kasi ito ng eternal na krisis ng Estado- ang krisis ng marahas na labanan sa kapangyarihan.

Natural ang ganitong pangyayari bilang uri ng dinamismo sa ilalim ng sistematikong operasyon ng Estado na ang layunin ay panatilihin ang kultura ng dominasyon at submisyon. Kaya naman ang estado ay hindi lamang kakambal ng karahasan, kundi ito mismo ay kongkretong realisasyon ng organisadong karahasan. Kabilang sa mga karahasang ito ay ang paglikha ng organisadong sitwasyon na panatilihin ang submisibong role-play ng mamamayan sa mga kaganapan tulad ng ngayon, ito ay ang simpleng gampanan ang pagpili ng panibagong boss matapos ang isang popular na pag-aalsa. Aplikable din ito sa legal (eleksyon) na paraan.

Kaya hindi kataka-taka kung bakit popular sa atin bago maganap ang isang pag-aalsa ang katanungang, “Sino ang ipapalit?” na para bagang ang kapalaran natin ay nakasalalay parati sa isang tagapagligtas. Ayon kay Max Weber, ito ay tinatawag na Charismatic Authoritarianism, isang uri ng kategorya sa depenisyon ng Authority bilang esensya ng Estado (popular ito sa Katolikong bansa kagaya ng Pilipinas).

Sa madaling sabi, ang Estado ay nilikha para sa dominanteng minorya upang kontrolin ang kapalaran ng submisibong mayorya. Ang mamamayan sa loob ng kontrol ng Estado ay kinondisyon upang maging taga-sunod.

DISKURSO AT KAPANGYARIHAN

“Discourse can’t be reduced to an ideological reflexion, it is to be thought as itself a battlefield,” sabi ni Michel Foucault nang bigyan nya nang depinisyon ang kapangyarihan (power) at ang relasyon nito sa atin (power relation).

Mahalaga ang kapangyarihan (power) sa pagbuo ng kolektibong aksyon, kaisipan at indibidwal na opinyon, pero hindi dapat maipagkamalan ang kapangyarihan sa awtoridad, bagamat, “Authority is often used interchangeably with “power”. However, the meanings differ. “Power” refers to achieve certain ends, “authority” refers to the legitimacy, justification and right to exercise that power,” ani Max Weber. Ang Estado ay sadyang binuo para isentralisa ang kapangyarihan at hangga’t maaari, walang diskursong magaganap sa labas ng kanilang sirkulo, sapagkat ito ay prebilihiyo lamang ng iilan sa lipunan. Ang State of National Emergency ng pangulo ay isang malinaw na halimbawa sa paglilimita ng diskurso sa pagitan lamang ng rehimen, dahil siya lamang ang awtoridad. Walang pwedeng sumabat at hindi pwedeng magsagawa ng sariling diskurso ang mamamayan, ‘ika nga ni Police Chief Arturo Lomibao, “No Permit, No Rally!”

DISTRIBUSYON NG KAPANGYARIHAN

Ideklara man ang State of National Emergency o hindi, hangga’t nariyan pa rin ang awtoridad at presensya ng Estado bilang tagapag-sentralisa ng kapangyarihan, mananatiling mangmang ang mamamayan. At dahil dito, ang kasaysayan ng pag-aalsa ay mare-reduce na lamang bilang kasaysayan ng bangayan sa pagitan ng magkalabang mga elitista sa interes, na walang ibang layunin kundi ang i-repersenta ang taumbayan at ibandila ang Estado. Habang tayo ay nasa isang tabi at nakapanatiling konsyumer lamang ng ispektakulong ito.

Totoo nga ang kasabihang “nakakabobo ang telebisyon”, dahil sa telebisyon ang tagapanood ay walang partisipasyon sa ispektakulong nagananap, bukod sa siya ay simpleng tagapanood at tagatanggap ng mga katotohanang ready-to-eat straight from the screen. Isa rin itong malinaw na halimbawa ng modernong konsyumerismo sa pulitka, kultura at ekonomiya. Pero hindi ito nangangahulugan na tapos na ang kasaysayan, bagkus, sa ganitong yugto ng eternal na krisis ng Estado, may oportunidad ang mamamayan na bawiin ang kapangyarihan sa kamay ng iilan at idistribyut ito batay sa bawat pangangailangan ng komunidad, grupo ng tao at indibidwal.

Sa lipunan ng commodity-spectacle, ang distribusyon ng kapangyarihan ay hindi ibinibigay ng libre, ‘ika nga ng Situationist Internationale na islogan sa pagitan ng mga barikada noong 1968 student revolt sa Pransya, sinabi nilang, “Huwag ipaglimos ang karapatang mabuhay—Nakawin mo!”

Ang karahasan na dulot ng Estado sa mamamayan ay may naibibigay na rekisito sa radikalisasyon ng karaniwang tao hanggang sa umabot ito sa isang full-blown resistance. Dito lamang sa yugtong ito maisasapraktika ang paggamit ng kapangyarihan upang tugunan ang pangangailangan ng bawat indibidwal tungo sa pagpapabuti ng kaniyang sarili. Sa ganitong yugto, walang pangangailangan na siya ay i-representa ng sinoman, sapagkat sa pagkakataong ito ay alam na ng bawat indibidwal ang kanilang nais (desire) at ang gustong ikontribyut sa lipunan na absent noon sa pagiging commodity labor nya.

ANG PAKIKIBAKA (RESISTANCE)

Mahalaga ang resistance (armado o hindi) para mabigyan ng asersyon ang soberenya ng indibidwal o grupo ng indibidwal laban sa awtoritaryang tiraniya ng Estado. Sa madaling sabi, isa itong importanteng sangkap sa diskurso ng mamamayan upang panatilihin ang kalayaan at depensahan ang kurso ng ating kapalaran batay sa nais (desire). Sa pamamagitan ng boluntaryo at malayang organisasyon ng tao sa bawat komunidad, ang asersyon para sa ating soberenya ay maaaring magsimula dito.

Ang distribusyon ng kapangyarihan sa malayang organisasyon ng tao ay hakbang tungo sa pagkawasak ng pampulitikang kapangyarihan na naka-sentralisa lamang sa kamay ng iilan na kumakatawan ng Gubyerno at ng Estado.

Habang ang tagapagtanggol at taga-salba ng Estado ay abala sa pagbubuo ng Transitional Revolutionary Government o Transitional Council na kumakatawan sa burukratikong Kaliwa at konserbatibong Kanan, na ang ultimong layunin ay tumungo sa rekuperasyon. Ang kahalagahan ng pagkakabuo ng mga malayang organisasyon ng mamamayan sa kabilang banda ay para sa detournement nito, ang layunin ay pabagsakin ang Gubyerno.

Ang rebolusyon mula sa baba na ilulunsad ng malayang organisasyon ng tao ay walang iba kundi ang praktikal na emansipasyon ng mayorya laban sa dominanteng iilan. Ito ay pakikibaka ng kaluluwa at nais (desire) na walang ibang maglulunsad kundi ang boluntaristang indibidwal. Ito ay rebolusyon ng, “free construction of popular life in accordance with popular needs . . . from below upward, by the people themselves . . . [in] a voluntary alliance of agricultural and factory worker associations, communes, provinces, and nations." [Statism and Anarchy, p. 156 and p. 33]

END

baycas said...

maraming salamat, john and ellen.

i posted your links at pcij blog #700.

maraming salamat din djb.

john marzan said...

you're welcome baycas