FROM SOMEONE WHO HAS SEEN NIGHT AND DAY IN THE PHILIPPINES

MY whole point.

I am not keen in staging armed revolt to replace the
occupant of Malacanang Palace.
In my previous posting, I have already outlined
the grounds why partisan rebellion is not a solution.
I was part of the framing of the 1986 Constintution
as Technical Assistant, hence, I fully understood when
Pres Cory conveyed apology for taking an active role in
extra constitutional process to remove a president.
Breach of the collective social contract was committed.

Take the lesson of Vietnam.
Did the aggressor, in this case U.S.A. achieved in
bringing peace in Vietnam by dropping bombs thereby
perpetuating the internicine war?

The U.S. and Vietnamese government were compelled
to sit across the negotiating table to discuss the
peace accords.

I know a bit how to plan for a coup d'etat. It is easy
to start trouble. But how and when to stop it, no one
can tell. What is etched in my mind when I think of
resorting to arms as a means to correct the ills that
afflict the birthland is none other than but backlash.

Baka ho ba ang "gamot" ay mas masahol pa pala
sa sakit.

The EDSA Dos is clear case that unconstitutional
manner of removing elective officials is not the
best option.

EDSA I is altogether different. I learned as early
as 1978, Pres Marcos is no longer governing the land.
Mga "power centres" na. 'Di nga maka basa ng
diyario si PFM. Ang nakukuha nia na lang ay mga
news clippings pag dating sa national security
briefing.

Let's amend the Cory Constitution if we must, if there
are provisions that no longer fit to the existing Philippine
reality. But meanwhile, until the Constitution is revised
or amended, let us uphold the fundamental law of the
land to avert chaos and anarchy.



Bob Gabuna writing from the Arctic Region