Monday, July 04, 2005

Divisive issue

The alleged GMA recordings and the jueteng gate scandal has really divided the nation. It is for the moment similar in effect to the Dreyfuss case in France. In the Dreyfuss case families would argues and sensible dinner talk would cease when the case was discussed. The other day I heard a person was shot because of an argument arising from the GMA political scandals. The divisiveness has also beeb active in cyberspace. Friends have been debating about it in e-groups, blogs and forums. I am posting below a post sent to our barkada's e-group about the matter. Before you proceed let me just say I think we have heard the cases from both opposing camps ad infinitum and ad nauseum. And I think its high time the accusers both the opposition and Archibishop Cruz file the proper case in the proper venue, the courts or in case of impeachment Congress. If their accusations are true and their case airtight then let the axe fall where it will. 1. GMA admitted to talking to a comelec official after the election and during the canvassing. It is possible to split hairs or discuss how many angels can fit the head of a pin over this and people have. The thing is she admitted to talking to a comelec official and acknowledge it was improper. 2. Did she commit anything illegal? Or did all the improper act add up as an illegal act? 3. Despite her confession? She has not implicitely stated that the tape was genuine. It can only be genuine if it is corroborated by testimonies of GMA, Garcillano, the wiretapper and also it it is certified genuine by an impartial technical source. Has this happened not yet. 4. Why is this important to me at least. All pro and anti arguments surrounding this debate is mired with emotions and disgust. Its easy to be morally disgusted at an act. Its even easier to be mad at GMA because of the taxes and bitter pill that she has been enforcing. So far I have not seen any damning evidence that has been corroborated, both from the pro and anti GMA camps. In the field of study all evidences should be supported by other facts from other sources. Emotional appeal is seductive but not really dependable. 5. In judging someone (that is what we are doing here) you should have all the facts. I think this is important because sooner or later all of us will be called to account for what we have done. Some of us may have been already been pre-judged in one form or another. If you were the one in that position being allegedly charged with an act, what would you like to be pre-judged based on partial evidence untested and unvalidated. Will you think its fair to be judged by opinions or beliefs of another person or group of person even if they are in the majority? 6. And if GMA is guilty and her actions accountable should she be impeached? Of course. Should she resign even before a trial or an impeachment case? Maybe if the evidence is without a shadow of a doubt true. Does that mean Noli de Castro should resign alongside with her? Not really, unlike the US elections the President and VP are voted separately here in the Philippines. The president unsubstantiated evidence only points to GMA. Even the improper act was done by GMA. No, Mr de Castro stays. He will become President. 7. That is the bind really isn't it? The dilema most people have now? Do we burn the house in order to fix the roof? Is this issue the most important issue at the momnet? or have we just made it so? And now with the admission of PGMA we are in a rut because what are we to do? Is Noli so unacceptable to the most of us that the solution is he should also resign? Maybe she should have just lied. Electoral fraud nor improper conversations with comelec officials is not the monopoly of people in power. The same set of people have been in and out of government so much that in all probability they have all bought votes, talked with comelec officials, did dagdag-bawas and probably a host of assorted things. Political families that have been well-entrenched in their communities have all been saints and always come out on the top. Even the religious groups have one way or another dipped their hands in politics. Birth control, morality, and sexual lifestyle have been the issues were pressure from the moral groups have exerted their hand. Was it democratic? Was it proper? In this light is Edsa I, II and III proper? Are the sins of the father coming back to haunt us?


Post a Comment

<< Home