Justice for Jennifer

Politics and justice do not usually mix well. The courts of our justice system insulates itself from public sentiment for a reason.

Justice is not a spectrum. It is a compass direction that must always point to true north. Public sentiment always represents a much larger expression than this.

Politics on the other hand is usually served by tides of public sentiment and public sentiment only insofar as the public passion is at its flood.

Both serve as distinctive expressions of the enduring life of our national values. Apart, they are clear. But taken together, they represent a false choice.

The cause of justice for Jennifer should prepare itself for a difficult road ahead.

Because when politics and justice mix, it is often at the expense of the other. Which one depends on who is left believing and holding on at the turn of the tide.

I am for equal justice before the law.

No one deserves to be murdered in the way she was murdered.

This is a human being, let us remember - with human struggles, human hopes, human connections, and a citizenship which causes her to belong equally and equitably with all other citizens in our Republic. One could say the same of Pfc. Joseph Scott Pemberton.

All of these are equal considerations.

The unfortunate thing is that, due to the inescapable weight of larger issues beyond the context of this case, these individually human considerations might have inadvertently taken on a political spin.

Due process, custody and safety, correctional jurisdiction are inherently non-political issues. They belong to a sovereignty (of being) that is universally exclusive and imiscible to States.

To be honest, I am not privy to the details of the issue. I do not think this is a hate crime though. It might be more a crime of passion. There are certainly things that can and must be done to prevent and deter crimes like this from happening again in the future.

I do not think this must affect our friendship and treaty obligations with the United States. I am thinking much more of those US citizens who live in friendship with our people than with the politics of the matter here.

However, if we do not streamline and clarify the process of expediting justice in cases such as these, it might affect the overall effectiveness of our being able to carry it out as kindred Countries. Defense being always a matter carried out in the absolute.

We are both a democracy and should understand the weight of public sentiment and the vitality of national memory. Our governments alone can not sustain the potency of a national friendship and treaties alone can not effect a truly common defense of this vital friendship.

Good will must be displayed in the treatment of this case on both sides.

My sincerest sympathy goes out to the family and the friends of Jennifer Laude. It would be remiss of me not to extend my condolences to the bereaved - to those loved ones she left behind in our care.

May her soul find the peace that this world was not able or willing to offer her. May she find her way back to the God Who loves us all and gives us hope for our humanity.

Jennifer Laude is a victim. This is the bottom line. Let us not make more victims in her name.

Justice must be done.
---<--@

20141026: Apparently, there exists two other concurrent cases involving the murder of a transgender individual. When I began ruminating about the fate of Jennifer Laude, the first question that came to my mind was, "what was primary will driving the public outcry, the core sentiment as it were at the center of the outcry?"

Is it because Laude is a member of the LGBT minority sheltering under our Republic peace or is it because the alleged perpetrator just so happens to be a serving member of the US Armed Forces?

I was afraid it shall be the latter because it proves that much of the outcry is political - clamoring for an issue more than the human issue we should be dealing about in the immediate.

I understand Susselbeck is outraged. I do not wish to expound on his morality here. I sympathize with his loss of an intimate personal connection. He led one of  the protests in Aguinaldo, got into an unfortunate scuffle with one of our soldiers, apologized, and is now on his way back to Germany.

Should we make him into a persona non grata? I think we should have clearer guidelines on that too. This however, is a matter for our lawmakers and policy innovators.

51st State of the Union?

With all due respect, America had had to go through some harrowing times before her Republic got to where they are right now... And is still beset with problems comparably as tough as the problems we are now being faced with.

These are a Country's defining moments, my brothers and sisters of the Promise... when the ice sure seems thin and the breaking point is near - if we so choose to honor ourselves and our friends, and place our duty to Country firmly in the right... (so remember, no peace without adversity.)

Indeed, we share some of those defining moments with the US - especially during WWII in Bataan, upon Corregidor, along the infamous death march from Marivelles to San Fernando, the fight back from Leyte, from Lingayen, and into Manila -

BUT we do have defining moments of our own that are all our own - the spirit of EDSA '86 (politics aside, one of the great triumphs of the nobility of the Filipino spirit - think about it), the gallant Ayungin 9, the humble but resounding victories of our ongoing Internal Peace Process are but some examples.

My fellow Filipinos, we shouldn't be comparing what we have with what they have AND expect greatness from ourselves at the same time. For all great moments arise from the same (human) spirit - are of the same seed, same soil, same sky, same soul... our human habitation after all is but one realm in Creation.

But we can not have our cake and eat it too.

What this Country of ours need is sharper focus and deeper love.

AND what the US - and - this Republic of ours need is a greater and more profound understanding of the friendship that we already share,

THAT, God-helping, we shall 'ere and Now, ever always share.

For no one Nation is perfect, and that's why we have each other - that's why we are created, called, and commissioned as one Family under one God.
---<--@

We can not have our cake and eat it too.

Salutation #157

(Earthrise)

How we perceive each other
- as nations -
whether as potential adversaries
or as potential friends
constantly influence how we prepare
to encounter each other.

In a globalizing world
where we tend to encounter each other
- often and inevitably,
distinguishing between these two perceptions
is becoming increasingly important.

We must be careful not to slide back
into that old way of thinking
that inclines the mind to consider
the old mold of division as the paradigm of the new
for this will multiply our troubles considerably.

Every nation
is a potential friend - of all nations -
because every nation has more in common
with each other than we had
often thought!

Indeed
our peace is allied to each other
more deeply - and - more enduringly
than we had ever considered...

Our spirits are kin!
And our destiny so interwined
that - we are as if we are being constantly led -
into an ever greater unity by our unity
and often even more so by our divisions
unto oneness with each other on earth
as it is in heaven.
---<--@

Salamat po

Thank you, HRM Sofia of Spain 

for gracing our humble Country with your visit this July 2-6, 2012.

Your visit is greatly appreciated
and will be cherished and remembered
as an affirmation of the good will
between our Countries
and of the peace that exists
between our nations.

Mabuhay po kayo
at mabuhay po ang Espanya!
---<--@

Never scorn an offer of friendship
it may be the very hand that saves you from yourself.



And yes, Spanish should be one of our official cultural languages and have priority in that context within our educational system.

Conflicted

We hate America

and we love America 

all at the same time - it seems.

Not because of America as herself 

but because we may at times be conflicted.

- selah -

We define our relationships
and we may only define those realities 

that exist within our focus.

When we know ourselves, 

we will also know our friends. 

And the sooner this awakening 

completes itself in our soul as a nation, 

the better.

- selah -

Is it America's fault then,
my fellow Filipino compatriots,
that we're so conflicted about America?

Here is where I personally stand -

I am neither pro-America nor anti-America.

I subscribe to neither schools of thought
for both of these teaches a form of exclusion
that estranges us from the reality of our nationhood.

The truth is
we can not live to be other people
- just the same as -
we can not live without other people.

We may only believe in the best of America,
trust in the best of America, build upon the best of America
- all the while remaining true to ourselves as ourselves -
with each our hearts abiding - as one -
steadfastly here in the land and in the Republic
where we all as one nation
rightly belong.

This is not hard to do
if we know who we are, my people,
and we may only come to know who we are
if we refuse to let our national identity be defined
by hatreds, divisions, and all manner of evil inspirations.
---<--@

Embracing the Times

View in Review 20120511

While there are other note-worthy articles I should like to include in this Review, for today, I am going to delve exclusively on the one issue that seems to loom in the horizons of my mind - Scarborough Shoal.

(I initially did not expect this incident to become so protracted...)



Scarborough Shoal is NOT a population center.

It is an economic resource.

For what else is it?

There is a difference here, a subtle but significant one.

- selah -

Sovereignty lies chiefly in the nation - in the reality of we, the people who under God and before our laws and constitutional ideals are ordered and arrayed (in time and dimensional space) as one nation.

And from the nation extends to those spheres proper to our Republic undertaking of Country.

Why is it then that in the issue of Scarborough Shoal we are becoming so willing to undertake with China (PRC) burdens proper only for the defense of a population center?

Sovereignty has degrees just as equally as defense has depths yet sovereignty in all its places must be equally well-defended.

How we undertake this defense - against War, against each other - lies chiefly in how we must succeed in its conduct.

If we do not succeed in a diplomatic course of action as history has always been so eager to point out, we shall have no other recourse but an armed confrontation - a low-intensity conflict, as it were.

In this particular outcome, if we allow it to be, we shall be in control with China (PRC) only of how much damage we shall each be willing to sustain, for in this particular outcome, all parties would have already lost even before formal hostilities will have already begun.

We can not subdue China (PRC) neither can China (PRC) subdue us.

In this particular outcome, the longer view of things both obscures itself from our vision and denies itself from our foresight.

For we certainly could pursue the Scarborough Shoal issue through to its military means but to what ends, my fellow Filipinos, to what uncertain ends?

So instead of going into that exercise in sheer futility that in this particular case is armed conflict, it is to our common benefit with China (PRC) to find a way to share the advantages as well as inherent responsibilities of maintaining a common marine area as a mutual resource meant for the peace of both our peoples.

There is a middle ground to be found here. War shall not avail us anything.

And this middle ground has got to be found, recognized and commonly agreed upon through the use of an innovative approach that seeks to let go of old and antiquated ways of thinking... for the times are truly changed.

My personal position here (in support of President Noy) is to clarify, communicate, compromise, recognize, coordinate, legislate, and conform - exhaust every means, take every opportunity to transform this unwanted incident into an achievement of good worth to our nation (with armed confrontation only as a means of last resort in the conduct of the defense) - all for the greater good of our common regions in Asia, for the good of our Asia, and from our Asia to our needful world so much in need of respite and repair.

Moreover -



Scarborough Shoal is well within our 200 nautical mile EEZ or Exclusive Economic Zone (a compensatory advantage of our Archipelagic nature) and its continuing and responsible maintenance as an integral part of our territorial seas is sanctioned by UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea).

Of the substance of this truth, lettered in international law, and witnessed by many of our kindred nations, we may indeed constantly rely.

It is more costly, in terms of the national wealth, for the PRC to do what our naval forces and maritime law enforcement agencies must be able and indeed are able to accomplish in these waters. This is to maintain the law of our Republic and extend forth the sovereign peace of our one nation into this maritime territory - not to make it ours - but to preserve it as a resource for the good of our nation.



The PRC's over-extension (inherent in its claim to the whole of these waters west of our Republic) is also a cause for concern among other Countries in our world whose vital interest it is to keep those international shipping lanes within and beyond our EEZ free; whose nations need assurance that these sea lanes are kept open and available as a common trust of all nations.

However, the law by itself is troublesome if we ignore the fact that that the PRC is laying a claim to Panatag or Scarborough. This is why it is important to meet the PRC in the middle and preserve not only the dignity of both our Republics but also the viability and value of the shoal for the use of our future generations.

The US commitment to our defense may only be as strong as our own commitment to our own defense.

We must be able to take this in principle: Our primary defense in the context of the common defense and in concert with the mutual defense of our allies is always our responsibility.

We must be a friend to our friends and they shall be a friend to us.

The old mold of our ASEAN, however tenuously, may still understandably prevail.

That our ASEAN of late may still feel itself a random and accidental falling together of unrelated interests within our region instead of that purposed, principled, unified, Providential gathering of kindred nations into one focused and decisive regional force for collective peace and human community within our Asia may be evident in the uncertain stance that our own region is now taking here in our own region.

Therefore, we, as a defense partner with the United States and as part of the one ASEAN Neighborhood, must take both of these vital considerations arising from this unwanted incident as an impetus to spur forward the transformation of our Republic as well as that of our region with ASEAN and recognize its potential as an integral part of our diplomatic initiative.

We must do everything in our power to amicably resolve this standoff with the PRC.

Mabuhay! God be with us all.
---<--@

The Human Cost of War

Indeed,
my fellow Filipino compatriots,

the first ones to suffer the pains of War 

are ever the weak and the vulnerable.

- selah - 

Not our politicians,
not our able soldiery, 

not our middle classes,
not our wealthier classes, 

not even the criminally inclined, 

it is our small fisherfolk 

and their humble, hungry families 

who bear the brunt of this stand-off.

People whose minds (and stomachs) 

dwell furthest off of this brewing crisis!

We must bear in mind and heart 

that the human cost of this deadlock 

begins with them and is now counting...

   (Indeed,
   War will not cease
   until all of us
   - from least to strong -
   are made weak and vulnerable.
 
   For the spirit of War is a devourer of peoples!)

If we who are able
do not consider their plight 

to lend to our sense of urgency 

a deepening sense of justice, 

we might find ourselves taking stands 

on the wrong foundation.

---<--@

20110613

The Spratly Dispute

Our one Filipino nation has intimate cultural ties with the one Chinese nation. These historical ties are built upon the strength of common blood ties as well as by the pull of national necessities that flow naturally from the geography of our growing region.

Because of this, it is very difficult (but not impossible) for me to visualize our one Republic in open armed conflict with the People's Republic of China (PRC). And I am reasonably sure that the PRC feels the same way.

Armed conflict between any nation is truly an option of last resort and one not to be entered into lightly.

Therefore, what we must guard against is the unnecessary escalation of tension.

It is vital that reporting (from all sources) on the Spratly dispute respects and represents this fact of our national life - peace is our prerogative. No one in his or her right mind would want our whole region to descend into open war.

This is our first and foremost consideration - War serves no nation.

We are duty-bound both by honor and charity, to repel all threats that impugn the sovereignty of our one Republic however - and this consideration above all is what must drive our will to see to it that this issue is resolved - properly and using all available means.

Indeed, every citizen of every nation is bound to the common defense of their Country from every and all elements that threaten their peace and good will both internal as well as external.

Defense is a reaction. So what are we reacting to in the case of the Spratly issue?

There really is only one worthwhile cause for a shooting war - a clear, imminent and direct threat to the life of our nation i.e. our population and its posterity. This cause above all other causes absolutely compel the conduct of the defense. For it is the very cause of our existence as a nation.

Everything else must lie squarely within the realm of statecraft and diplomacy - until it fails and we have to go to war. God-forbid this should happen but it has happened before in the history of our nations - and many, many times.

Personally speaking, I am not convinced that we are presently reacting to a clear, imminent and direct threat to the life of our nation.

But if we remain confused or undecided about how we might as a Republic react to this threat, it might come to pass that we shall find ourselves treading a path we did not set out to take. Fear is only good if it keeps us alert to the truth.

What is in our hearts, my honorable compatriots, matter. We can not react passionately about this issue. Nor can we allow vague sentimentalism to rule our love of Country.

The Republic we serve is real, the people it shelters is all too real. As regards to the Spratly issue, there exists also a real threat - but the conclusion most favorable to our nation (and therefore, to all nations in the long-term) depends on how well we are able to penetrate today the confusion that must surround it.

Defense is a reaction. How well we handle ourselves matter above all because how well we handle ourselves (especially in the midst of adversity) is a reflection of how well we know ourselves both as a nation and as a Republic whole. And according to how much we know ourselves, we are able to glimpse also into the humanity of other nations as well.

Here is my analysis on the matter:

There are in reality two States that serve the one Chinese nation. For our intents and purposes, we shall refer to them as the elder and the younger States i.e. the mainland and the island ones.

The elder State is authoritarian in form. Her language therefore, will reflect this form. She is a Republic and therefore, very protective of her own. But so are we.

Though she does not always represent the actual desire of her nation - fact is, the elder State is still representative of the authority to represent that desire. If we know ourselves, we know to understand what this desire is.

But since we are a fully functional emerging democracy - the way by which we intend to achieve the end for which this desire exists in our people is very distinct though not different from her.

Where this desire intersects is where the common ground for the Spratly dispute may be found not in its distinctions.

Since this is a dispute, we can not meet her at her language. We have to stay with our own. We must reiterate the facts without inflaming the passions that underlie the tension. We must agree to use a common terminology that is neutral.

We have to consolidate our own collective will to preserve our peace and use this opportunity to press forward with our own internal national reconciliation processes strategically synchronizing these with our national development agendas (their tactical requirements as it were, including the modernization of our AFP, PNP, BFP, BJMP, etc.) without which our Republic can not obtain to its fullest potential.

ASEAN has a large part to play in this, of course. I am mystified as to why the knee-jerk reaction is to fly to the US and not to our partners in the region first. Our region is important enough to consider and one that is collectively possessed of interests of its own - more importantly, these interests are shared interests and they must be represented by our ASEAN.

The US is an ally (and a valuable one too) but she is not the only one. We have to learn to place a real value on our friendships with other nations as a matter of completing our remembrances.

The US is in principle an ally of the defense - and so are all the other nations (each to its own degree) of our one family of nations in the United Nations, China included. Our own worst enemy here at the moment is the perceptions we create in ourselves and therefore in other nations.

We must be clear and we must be resolute, above all we must base our thinking about the matter on relevant facts and our understanding of its favorable resolution on the force of law.

We must take to the side of the defense and undertake to properly understand it and the peace that it serves.

War serves no nation. I am not saying that fighting for the defense of our nation is not good, I am meaning precisely that. Fighting for the defense is good and when it is, it ultimately leads its nation to victory.

What we presently need here is an order of business not an order of battle.

The contested areas are not viable population centers in the near to mid-term therefore, the core of the dispute is really and specifically economic in nature.

There is a great possibility that the area is rich in petrochemical resources. I am of the conviction that diplomatic tact and business acumen not military force will best serve the national interests of all parties concerned as well as preserve the stability of the greater region.

We must specifically and strictly confine the Spratley dispute into the realm of strategic, regional economics. We may ask ourselves, "what regional economic goals may it serve?"

And this strategy must be geared towards the eventual de-militarization of the region.

Owing to the times, the actual causus belli of the Spratly issue - i.e. the resources - is limited by time itself so that the further we remain indecisive on the matter, the less and less probable that any nation will succeed in harnessing and therefore, profiting from the true potential of the area.

Research is parallel to available information and in the age of information, sans the paradigm of War, research will only go exponentially fast. And all research is driven by necessity.

My thinking here is that if we sit on this issue long enough without actually going to war, it will probably go away (at least in terms of significance).

And it is most likely that this is the outcome, disadvantageous though it may be (in terms of economic gain for the entire region), that is most advantageous to all parties concerned, if the region remains indecisive.

If we remain divided on the issue - the best outcome is to prevent an open, armed conflict. If we are to find some common ground on the issue - the best outcome is an economic one. Therefore, the less politics involved the better it shall be.

---<--@

The Culture of Death

A famous saying goes, "home is where the heart is." This is true because a house is not always a home.

Now, the culture of death is like a house built on four foundations.

1. Heretical Materialism - the social doctrine that both the goal and the substance of life is purely material because the physical universe is really all there is.
2. Atheistic Secularism - the religion that imposes the belief that there is no God because Man is independent and self-sufficient by himself alone.
3. Moral Relativism - the lie that believes that justice is arbitrary because there are no moral absolutes as both good and evil come in convenient shades of gray.
4. Social Darwinism - the lie that believes that brute force is the singular social requirement, in the absence of virtue and truth, that measure the excellence of nations or individuals.

A culture of death is a culture of contempt for Sacred Life. This is the house that breeds the darkness that sustains the Beast of War.

It is a house that must rely on division being held up purely by its opposition to the truth. It is therefore, a house built invariably on persecution of whatever form and spirit.

It harbors a great disregard for our common humanity.

It must necessarily hold the universal spirit of Mankind in utter contempt, disrespecting the virtues embodied in its heroes - all our patriarchs, prophets, judges, kings, queens, apostles, bishops, martyrs, virgins, doctors, saints, holy personages, leaders and teachers - from all times and from all peoples, known and known to God alone, all those who are particularly beloved of every honorable religion, and therefore, to one Creator of all Sacred Life in all His revealed mystery.

It abhors wisdom in all its forms and seeks to scandalize the common people and undo the peace of the nations.

This is not our house.

Another thing about the culture of death, this house is parasitic. We only have to return to our original foundations and work to reverse its lies in ourselves to find our home (away from Home) once again.

---<--@

Sheltering Wings

The difference between a monarch and a president is one of election. The similarity is that both of them still have to make the surrender of kings - an acceptance of a life of service to the nation as a rule above all rules.

Now, the peace of the Responsible State are like sheltering wings - everybody is engaged from the center in a lateral hierarchy that embraces the nation.

This is a liberating embrace - one that both preserves the dignity of the individual citizen as well as unleashes their promise in the service of the national good - everybody ascends with but one ascending to the vision of Country being in itself true to the first principles of nationhood.

The opposite is the grip of a tyrant. And we all know this from common experience.

This is the shelter we are presently trying to obtain for our nation - not for winter's sake but for the spring. This is the cause of our allied generations begun in 2009 (prior to 2009 there was no choice and after 2012, this choice will be no more).

---<--@

Salutation #13

(Completing our EDSA)

To all our national communities, Peace -

A significant part of the peace of the times, my people,

as it concerns our nation, the Philippines,

involves bridging the gap between generations

and between administrations.

There are specific moments in our history

that we need to re-examine in light of these times.

And we shall do this not to scatter

either our belongings to each other

or our remembrances together

but to more fully gather them together

in and amidst ourselves.

For if we know ourselves as ourselves,

we can no longer be a nation

swayed hither tither by a dark night.

If we find confusion in our hearts about the past -

especially from 1986,

now is the time to re-examine these pivotal events.

And we shall do this with a view to establish the facts

upon more familiar grounds of fundamental truths

we have now re-discovered about ourselves as a nation

as well as about our nation in the context of its God-given right

to prosper and advance

under the peace of a Republic undertaking of Country.

Look upon these present times yourselves, my honorable compatriots,

and see the coincidences for what they are - signal graces.

My intention here is to guide you -

but you have to let yourself be led.

And not by me.

- selah -

All our Presidents have had something to give to our Country.

It is up to us to discern what good there is

that we have inherited from past Presidencies.

For if we remember only the problems,

we shall fail to build on the strength

of previous administrations.

It is only natural for every generation

to inherit a degree of evil

(to test their strength and commitment to the truth)

but sufficient for this evil - always -

is the good of the prevailing day.

We have come to remember

the faults of our Presidents

and may God allow it to serve our vigilance well.

But to the point that we tend to almost always forget their virtues,

we are consigning ourselves to a labor of unending beginnings.

For it is these virtues that connect our lineages together

and it is by the strength of these connections that we prosper.

If we are wise, my people,

and if the LORD, our God, blesses us,

even what darkness there is may lead us to the light.

Only those who are without remembrance remain in the dark.

---<--@

Mabuhay ang Pilipinas! God bless us all.

Sheltering Wings

The Circular Relationship of the Four Causes

20110517

The Two Clocks

The will of War and the will of Peace can be likened to two clocks.

Either one of these clocks may exist at the very heart of a nation at any time - right at the very head waters.

Each clock dictates the general inclination of the people and works to synchronize the movements of each our will of Country.

One clock inescapably leads to a time of death and desolation and the other to a time of life and abundance.

We move forward only by the weight of the burdens we must bear with each other as a nation and this burden is the burden of Justice.

It is a burden that grows even the heavier under the suffocating crush of War and the lighter under the sheltering wings of Peace.

When we follow or are led to follow the clock of War, the clock of War moves forward as the clock of Peace is stopped.

When we follow or are led to follow the clock of Peace, the clock of Peace moves forward as the clock of War is stopped.

When we allow the will of War to steal away the lives and promise of each our fellow Filipino compatriots

, the clock of War is hastened.

When we allow the will of Peace to work to fulfill the lives and promise of each our fellow Filipino compatriots, the clock of Peace is hastened.

Either clock leads all the way to the higher purposes of God for all creation and in all things, seen and unseen.

But the choice is always ours which one to follow.

For we can only follow one.

My honorable compatriots, this is the clock that a vast majority of the nations of our world have been following for the last 2000 years. It is also the same clock that was begun at the time of Abel.

It is called the Doomsday Clock.

We can see for ourselves here today where it has taken us (by the perilous state of the planet itself and the general brokenness of the nations of our world) and where it shall eventually lead all the nations of our one family of nations.

But there is another clock...

We now have a choice (at a time, times, and half-a-time).

It is the only choice we can really make.

---<--@

Alliances of Principle

No Country in this world matures on its own.

We depend on our relationships with other Countries for many things.

But there is such a thing as an alliance of principle - a relationship based on shared values.

There is also such a thing as a relationship of mere convenience which is not really a relationship at all.

Of the two, we ought to prefer exclusively the former over the latter.

There is no such thing as a false relationship. Either one exists or it does not.

Where it exists, it must be founded on common values. Where it does not, it must be bridged by common values.

What are these values?

Let us establish ourselves upon the first principles at the timeless foundation of our nationhood:

I believe in God, in goodness and the triumph of Sacred Life.

I believe in preservation of both human dignity and human promise.

I believe in the Four Faithful Causes that work to advance the Ages of my Republic undertaking in the one heart of my people across our generations to the very last of our generations.

I believe in peace and human community, a just equality, the inviolability of human rights, and in honorable religion.

I believe in freedom with responsibility, in choice with accountability, in press with humanity, and in meaningful, joyous service to the common people.

I believe (as far as this Republic of ours is concerned) to belong to only one class of citizenry with no elitism, no factionalism, no undue prejudices, and no monopolies on virtue and human morality.

I believe in a free market economy in the truest sense of the word.

I believe in authentic human entrepreneurship that is mindful of its roots and of its role in enriching and protecting the spirit and the values that underpin our national prosperity and the economy of our Common Market.

I believe, most of all, in the inherent ability of the least of my brothers and sisters of the Promise to obtain from God and this Country, both the material successes that honest labors provide and the felicity and spiritual communion that a faithful religion gains.

I believe that in and through all these things, we belong as a necessary and vital whole extending across families, tribes and generations as one nation distinct but not apart* from the one family of the nations of Mankind.

(*a nation distinct but not apart - the freedom to be different as well as the freedom to be the same - this is essentially particularity existing within a commonality; both of these are forms of belonging and equally worthy of the absolute defense)

I believe in, we the Philippines, and the one Republic that represents all our hopes - the guardian of our peace as a people and the keeper of the sacred remembrances of my one Filipino nation.

Now, I've only sketched out a very general sense of the values I know in myself we possess as a nation. But the point of the matter is that we should likewise seek to build our alliances based on a sense of shared values and principles.

Because the friendships we should seek to nurture and prosper with in this new age are those that recognize and communicate shared foundations.

They shall be real, living, evolving, even eternal relationships - refreshing, mutually beneficial, and solid against adversity.

And they shall nevermore be as those arrangements of the past - exhausting and frustrating to both mind and heart. That particular age is at an end.

We shall be a friend to our friends and they shall be a friend to us.

That's my thoughts on building friendships - alliances of principle - and I sincerely believe it should form a large part of our foreign policy.

---<--@

Mabuhay ang Pilipinas! God bless us all.

Farewell to Promise