If we are to provide a measuring stick of knowing how the Cebu Blogosphere had grown these past years, one would be tracking the developments of Best Cebu Blogs.

Their vision:

“Best Cebu Blogs Awards aims to recognize the existence and relevance of blogging in Cebu’s local blogging scene by pooling the finest online publishers in the Queen City of the South. It also aspires to augment Cebu bloggers’ influence in the general cyber community worldwide.”

For most, it was a time of the year in Cebu where everyone gathers and see who had excelled in the field based on the criteria set by the organizers and judges.

On a personal note, Best Cebu Blogs says more than what it is presenting every year. It not only emphasizes the importance of quality online publishing but also the value of continuous growth.

In 2008, 2009 and 2010, it was basically the selection of top 10 best blogs in the Cebu blogosphere as adjudged by the popular vote and a panel of qualified judges.

PinoyWorld is proud to say that it was selected as one of the Best Cebu Blog Awardee of 2009. In 2010, we came in as sponsor. RLCOMM International, the mother company, supports BCB’s visions.

This year, BCB has grown in terms of quality blogs in different niches. Forty one bloggers (41)  are vying for seven titles:

• Top 10 Famous Blogs Facebook Contest
• Best Cebu Food Blog
• Best Cebu Personal Blog
• Best Cebu Photo Blog
• Best Cebu Travel Blog
• Best Cebu Technology Blog, and
• Best Cebu Fashion Blog

Not only has the number of qualified blogger/participants, and their niches had grown. The progress can also be seen in the number of industries supporting it. The 4th Annual Best Cebu Blogs Awards is made possible by Nokia Philippines, Maribago Bluewater Beach Resort, SM City Cebu, Timex Philippines, GT Cosmetics Manufacturing, GT & Me, Globe Telecom, Wacky Tots PhotoBooth, Orange Brutus,  Cebu Bloggers Society Inc., Empress Of Drac, Bjorn Cebuano, Face Cebu, Pulso.PH, and Old’s Cool Online.

Seeing BCB’s growth in the past years makes me smile and proud. BCB does not only promote quality and progressive online publishing, it also indirectly strenghtens and supports my personal vision for a unified, strong, dynamic and responsible social media community for Cebu.

My sincerest Congratulations to its Founder Mark Monta (http://facecebu.net), Co-Organizer Agnes Jimenez (http://www.empressofdrac.com/), Co-organizer Bjornson Bernales (http://www.bjorncebuano.com/) and the rest of the BCB 2011 Team!

Sincerely,

RUBEN B. LICERA, JR.
Moderator, PinoyWorld.org
Chairman, Visayas Blogging Summit 2011
Vice President, Cebu Bloggers Society

One of the Philippines largely organized blogging organization – Cebu Bloggers Society Inc., issued a statement of support to the Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health and Population Development Bill (House Bill 4244) or popularly known as RH Bill.

In their statement, first posted via their official Facebook page, the group sees the need to fight and uphold everyones sexual and reproductive rights.

In the said Manifesto, CBS stated the following points as the benefits of the RH Bill as soon as it is implemented:

• Promotes gender equality and equity, with no discrimination against persons living with HIV/AIDS or any individual based on sex, age, religion, sexual orientation, disabilities, and ethnicity;
• Can effectively reduce unplanned pregnancies which often result to induced abortions, maternal deaths, prevent the spread of sexually-transmitted infections including HIV/AIDS, and improve the quality of life of every child and youth through information and services on sexual and reproductive health; and
• Recognizes, respects and promotes the right of every Filipino, including the youth, to free and informed choice.

The said manifesto also encourage other bloggers and youth to actively promote and educate others on the salient points of the RH Bill.

Bayan Muna Rep. Teddy Casiño is pushing for the passage of a bill exempting concerts by local artists from amusement taxes “in order to give Filipino music artists substantial support in the face of the influx of foreign acts that are at times even favored by local governments with discounts over Filipino concert producers who can hardly avail of the same.”

Casiño sponsored House Bill 3787 titled An Act Providing For Tax Exemptions and Subsidies for the Local Music Industry by amending certain sections of the Local Government Code of 1991 in yesterday’s Committee on Ways and Means meeting.

HB 3787 will mandate that the holding of operas, concerts, dramas, recitals, painting and art exhibitions, flower shows, musical programs, literary and oratorical presentations, including pop, rock, or similar concerts as long as they feature mainly Filipino artists and Filipino compositions shall be exempt from the payment of the 10 percent amusement tax imposed on them.

The bill also directs that proceeds from amusement taxes on foreign acts shall be earmarked for subsidizing workshops of local theater musicals and/or training and workshops for local artists and composers. The remaining proceeds from the amusement tax shall then be shared equally by the province and the municipality where such amusement places are located.

Present at yesterday’s hearing was Organisasyon ng Pilipinong Mang-aawit (OPM) Chairperson Mitch Valdez who appealed for the approval of the bill to remove a tax that she said was killing the local music industry.

Under Local Government Cod, the holding of pop, rock, or similar concerts are subject to a maximum amusement tax of 10 percent of gross receipts from admission fees.

“The music industry has been dying since the 1980s. This is evident with the greater number of foreign artists’ concerts that do not pay regular income taxes that Filipino artists do. Thus our own musical artists’ growth is stunted and have the least access to advertising support, marketing and promotions since these have been eaten up by foreign gigs,” Casiño said.

Valdez told the Committee that they opposed the lumping together of musical concerts with movies in the determination of amusement taxes. She said that unlike movies, which are shown 5-6 times a day in thousands of theaters and whose taxes are deducted from ticket sales, concerts are held in one venue and for a very limited time but whose taxes are computed based on printed tickets regardless of whether these were sold or not.

“Some kind LGUs waive the tax but they ask us to gives donations to the city’s favorite charitable foundation but that is on a case-to-case basis and depends on whom you know in the LGU. In other words, it is being dictated where we are going to donate,” Ms. Valdez said.

“What we want is a level playing field. This is why we fully support the bill of Cong. Casiño,” she added.

The Committee has scheduled another hearing on the measure next week.

Former Senior Government Officials FSGO Website

Unlike other cultures, our Filipino culture does not accord suicides by public figures one clear and definitive meaning. Thus the message of a Filipino dying in public by his own hand often ends up being contested, improvised and twisted by various interested parties. And so it is with the tragic death of General Angelo Reyes. Did he put a bullet through his heart in an ultimate admission of personal responsibility for whatever wrong he had committed? Or was his willful termination of his own life a sublime act of protest to assert his innocence against unfair yet unremitting persecution?

The death of someone like Gen. Reyes who served our country for most of his life deserves our respect, prayers and reflection. This is a tragedy to one person, to his family and to many who believed and admired him for his personal, professional and public life. For his fellow Filipinos that Gen. Reyes left behind, his chosen timing and manner of exiting the public stage and this mortal world challenges us to seek some meaning and purpose from such a tragic loss. We, former senior government officials, choose to see the death of Gen. Reyes in the light of the principle that public office is a public trust.

1. We find no honor in a death without meaning to the welfare of our nation.
Gen. Angelo Reyes took his own life in the midst of an investigation that exposed the corruption within the command structure of our military, corruption that had tainted him. For whom did Gen. Reyes die? If he died to escape the consequences of his involvement, or to put a lid on further revelations, or worse, to become a sacrificial lamb for all others more tainted than he, his was not an honourable death. The smug faces of unpunished corruption that visited his wake only further dishonour him. If, on the other hand, his death inspires our leaders to finally clean up the corrupt system in the military that ensnared him, he might yet be the last soldier to die in our people’s war against corruption. Gen. Reyes may have died by his own hand, but in truth, corruption killed him. As we pray for the forgiveness of his sins, we hope that his blood spilled on his mother’s grave will begin the cleansing of his beloved AFP, the government he protected and the nation he served.

The death of Reyes should not be wished upon anyone, not even the Garcias, the Ligots, and other alleged recipients of military graft, or even their alleged real protectors. That would be unchristian. But perhaps these lost souls in the people’s war against corruption should be reminded that moral death is as tragic as physical death. And the suffering will be much longer.

2. The investigation into high level corruption in the military should continue.
Gen. Reyes’ death could not and should not be blamed upon our legislators, no matter how hurtful their statements may have been. While more civility and courtesy could mark our congressional investigations, and invited “guests” to these proceedings could be treated better by their “hosts”, it must be clear by now that these legislative inquiries serve a vital function in democratic governance. Thus far, the truth about high level corruption has obviously and apparently not been brought forth by agencies charged with this function. Neither the police, the NBI, the Ombudsman, nor the courts have shown any talent nor interest to bring forth to our people the truth about corruption at the highest levels of our government.

Despite their rantings and distractions during these public hearings, our senators and congressmen have been able to put names, faces, numbers and dates to the corruption that every citizen knows infects our officialdom.
We continue to regard George Rabusa and Heidi Mendoza as heroes in our people’s war against corruption. They have nothing to be ashamed about in this tragedy. Mendoza has apparently always been honorable in the discharge of her functions, while Rabusa had to confront and acknowledge his own sins in order to retrieve his own lost honor by finally telling the truth.

We ask Commodore Rex Robles and the others who have special knowledge of the facts concerning corruption in the military that they pay their respects to Gen. Reyes by coming out with the truth, rather than expecting others to do their work for them. Truth telling is the responsibility of everyone who knows the truth.

3. Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez must go.
The Ombudsman can no longer sustain her pretense that moves to oust her are merely partisan efforts by the critics of Gloria Arroyo. There is nothing partisan about our people’s nearly universal desire to have a new beginning in the Office of the Ombudsman. The whole nation wants its government to move along the tuwid na daan and this incumbent Ombudsman is one of the biggest boulders on their way. Everybody wants this boulder out. She no longer has any excuse for trying to stay.

We remind the Supreme Court, and other lawyers, that in deciding the case on the impeachment of Merceditas Gutierrez, their final responsibility is not to search for arcane legal principles that would find fault in the effort, but to join the Filipino people in ridding ourselves of this boulder along our path towards a righteous and just Philippines.

The death of Gen. Reyes reminds us that corruption kills. Most often, it kills poor Filipinos with hunger, disease, disaster or crime because the money meant to help or protect them was stolen. It kills soldiers whose bullets ran out, whose guns fail, whose trucks ran out of gasoline, whose aircraft crashed due to poor maintenance, all because someone stole the money for their needs. Sometime, corruption kills those that partake of its evil fruit.

The death of Gen. Reyes is finally a reminder that public office is a public trust. Those who occupy public office shall be held accountable, by our laws when possible; by public opinion, when necessary; by history, eventually; or by individual conscience, ultimately.

Responding to an urgent request from the Teduray inhabitants in Sitios Fute, Keturanga and Tamatalun in Barangay Ahan, Guindulungan, Maguindanao, the Mindanao Peoples’ Peace Movement (MPPM), the Alyansa ng mga Mamamayan para sa Karapatang Pantao (AMKP) and the Lumad Development Center, Inc. (LDCI) sent a 19-member Study Mission to look into reported incidences of indiscriminate bombings of civilian Teduray communities and to assess the situation of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in the province of Maguindanao.

The Study Mission which visited the areas on May 17 to 19, 2009 documented the following:

1. That indeed on May 1-4, 2009 and some nights up to May 15, inhabitants in Sitio Fute now temporarily residing in Sitio Mari in Barangay Ahan reported 46 rounds of mortar shellings. The mission members themselves saw at least 12 craters or huge holes created by such bombs and the bones of five (5) horses that were killed. Some houses were also hit by shrapnel. Fortunately no one was killed or injured.
2. That as a result of such bombings, at least 60 families from the affected sitios have evacuated to Sitio Mari in Barangay Ahan, Guindulungan, Maguindanao and 33 others are now in evacuation camps in Semangkong, Talayan, Maguindanao.
3. That as far as we could gather, there are no revolutionary camps in the area. However, we were told that insurgents only pass by occasionally.
4. That the situation of internally displaced persons has worsened. In fact during our preparatory trip on May 14, 2009, Mayor Antaw Midtimbang of Guindulungan told us that 2,000 more families have been added to his original 4,000 family-evacuees in various evacuation camps. He further told us that nine (9) out of eleven (11) of his barangays are affected by the conflict. The Secretary to the Mayor of Talayan also told us in the same visit on May 14, 2009 that twelve (12) out of fifteen (15) of their barangays have been forced to evacuate to their three barangays along the highway.
5. That according to Guindulungan officials, military elements have conducted illegal searches of houses in their town and have also engaged in indiscriminate bombings.

The Study Mission makes the following urgent recommendations and calls:

1. That the contending military forces cease and desist from indiscriminate bombings of civilian communities.
2. That the MILF/AFP troop movements do not endanger civilian communities by their movements and their armed confrontations.
3. That both forces observe rules of warfare especially as outlined in international humanitarian law and other civilized rules/protocols of warfare.
4. That the Government of the Philippines and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front return to the negotiating table to find a lasting solution to the Mindanao conflict. We recommend further that the people be consulted on issues in the peace negotiations.
5. That the Government of the Philippines through the National Commission on the Indigenous Peoples make the necessary steps to look into the welfare of the indigenous peoples in their ancestral domains.
6. That aid agencies immediately send relief goods especially roofing for makeshift huts as well as food and medicines for the evacuees in Semangkong, Talayan and in Sitio Mari in Guindulungan, Maguindanao.

We call most urgently for action from the GRP and the MILF to prevent the escalation of the war by returning to the negotiating table and to lay all issues being raised by both sides as part of the agenda of the peace talks. In the meantime aid should be given to all IDPs!

ALVARO O. SENTURIAS, JR.
Chair, MPPM

TIMUAY SANNIE BELLO
LDCI

VHONG B. FENIS
Convenor, AMKP

For more information contact Alvaro Senturias, Jr. <alsenturias@gmail.com>

[PINOYWORLD Editor's Note: Full text of Sen. Pia S. Cayetano's speech in plenary today, May 18, 2009 about: (1) the insensitivity and inaction of the Department of Justice (DOJ) in relation to the new rape complaint by "Vanessa" against a US serviceman; and (2) allegations of corruption involving the P46-million funds for the Balikatan Exercises in 2007. The speech was referred in plenary to the following committees: Justice and Human Rights; Women, Children and Family Relations; Defense; and Foreign Relations.]

I. Advancement of women’s rights and women equality

Mr. President, 26 years ago, under the 1935 Constitution, Filipino women were not allowed to vote; women had little say in the management of the affairs of the country.

Over the years, women’s equal rights have slowly been acknowledged.

As of April 30, 1937, women have gained the right to vote. With the passage of the Civil Code in 1949, married women now make a will and dispose of her properties without the consent of her husband.

Laws on sexual harassment, marital rape, trafficking of, and violence against, women all have been passed in an effort to protect women’s rights. Likewise, to bolster the need to provide equal opportunities to women, the annual General Appropriations Act, since 1995, requires all government agencies to commit 5% of their budget to gender issues.

Today, women are involved in decision making levels, a number of women, hold high level positions in the government. In fact, we are headed by no less than a woman president.

But have we now suddenly reverted to the dark ages?

II. Vanessa’s rape case

Last April 19, on the heels of the acquittal of US Lance Corporal Daniel Smith in the Subic rape case of “Nicole,” what was supposed to be a night of fun turned out to be a horrifying experience for “Vanessa,” a 22-year old college student in a private university. After a night of partying in the company of friends, she found herself alone with a US Serviceman in the confines of a Makati hotel. Upon realization that she was misled, Vanessa tried to leave the room, but the accused slapped her, took her forcibly against her will and raped her.

Although Vanessa reported the incident to Gabriela and recounted her ordeal to the media, as of now, she has decided not to pursue her case in court.

Mr. President, I commend Vanessa for her courage in making public a very personal and humiliating experience. But by exposing this very personal and humiliating act, what did she get? Something tantamount to a scolding by no less than the representative of our government who is tasked to ensure that justice is served.

My heart goes out to Vanessa and what she has been through. Rape is so personal, no one can begin to understand the pain and anguish the victim will go though by recounting her ordeal in a court setting.

I wouldn’t be surprised, Mr. President, if Vanessa’s hesitancy in filing a case is influenced by her perception of the government’s poor handling of the rape case of Nicole. I wonder if the Department of Justice (DOJ) will be more proactive in protecting our women this time around.

Although the case of Nicole is the first ever criminal case against a US serviceman under the VFA that went to trial, it is reported that more than 3,000 cases, including abuse of women and children, have been filed against US servicemen at the height of the presence of US military bases in the country. But, all were dismissed. Mr. President, what does this say about our commitment to uphold women’s rights and their human rights?”

III. Ignorance of the law, the need for gender sensitivity

Mr. President, I was appalled and infuriated to read that our so-called “Justice” Secretary Gonzales had said that Vanessa should be “compelled” to press charges against her supposed rapist to prove her statements.

As quoted from GMAnews.tv, Gonzalez was reported to have said that “Vanessa’s” basis for not filing a complaint against the American soldier “is something I could not accept.” He further stated “If the girl is really violated why would she not complain? I think she should be compelled to complain,”

This kind of statement displays utmost insensitivity, and worse, ignorance of our laws. Rape is so intrusive, so damaging to one’s self-esteem, so humiliating and embarrassing.

Mr. President, it is not difficult for a person with average intelligence and with a compassionate heart to understand why a rape victim would be hesitant to testify.

Mr. President, by making such callous remarks instead of hearing Vanessa’s side or at least giving her the benefit of the doubt, Raul Gonzales has no business being justice secretary. He needs to learn basic gender sensitivity, which even law students are now taking up in law school. How do we expect our prosecutors and law enforcers to protect our women when the DOJ Secretary himself takes the worst anti-women stand I’ve ever seen?

Mr. President, our international commitments mandate gender sensitivity in the implementation of laws, most especially laws that are meant to protect the rights of women. In a Study of the Secretary-General of the United Nations entitled “Ending violence against women: from words to action, it is provided that
“States have concrete and clear obligations under international law to address violence against women, whether committed by state agents or by non-state actors. While circumstances and constraints allow for different types of action to be taken by a State in addressing violence against women, they do not excuse State inaction.

Background

ASEAN is now entering the phase of achieving an ASEAN Community by 2015. There are a lot of challenges in dealing with how to deepen the integration of ASEAN. One of the crucial challenges is youth employment. International Labor Organization (ILO) reported that more than 30% of Indonesian youth are unemployed. Almost 88 million youth worldwide are jobless. The causes are lack of job fields, being low educated, and unskilled so they are not competitive.

The fact is that the youth lack initiative in designing the strategic and implementing steps to create a continuing entrepreneurship. Moreover, it is important to urge media to provide enough space for the youth to creatively articulate their ideas and practices in the field of entrepreneurship. As the agent of change, the youth have to possess economic independency which they develop through the initiative of empowering entrepreneurship. Youth need to develop further communication through international network in the field of youth entrepreneurship.

Based on the above mentioned, Indonesia is pleased to organize the International Youth Camp 2009 with a view to grow young entrepreneurs

“Thou shall not resurrect charter change.”

This was Kabataang Pinoy Party’s message to lawmakers as the House of Representatives resumed session today.

House Speaker Prospero Nograles has earlier announced that he would file a new charter change resolution allegedly signed by 175 congressmen when session resumes.

Kabataang Pinoy said that while Malacanang distances itself from cha-cha moves, allies of Pres. Gloria Arroyo’s insistence on pushing for it could only be meant to extend her term via changing the form of government.

Kabataang Pinoy Spokesperson Alvin Peters added that cha-cha moves are also yet ways to ensure Arroyo’s immunity from inevitable law suits after 2010.

“This year’s Easter Sunday celebration conveys a new message to the youth and the people. Cha-cha should remain dead, and the only way it would stay that way is if Speaker Nograles and other disciples of charter change make the ultimate sacrifice and withdraw their resolutions in the House,” Peters said.

Kabataang Pinoy said that it is set to lobby and dialogue with congressmen and lawmakers within the week to convince them that “charter change is not the change the youth wants and needs. “

Peters also lambasted presidential son Pampanga Rep. Mikey Arroyo for being Malacanang’s ‘spokesperson, apologist and champion for cha-cha’ in the House. “He should just shush and keep his thoughts to himself, he is not a good example to the youth,” Peters said.

Reference:
Alvin Peters (+63 920 620 9362)
Vencer Crisostomo (+63 922 429 0258)

Sent to us by
College Editors Guild of the Philippines <cegphils@gmail.com>
College Editors Guild newsdesk <cegp.newsdesk@gmail.com>

Actually, there is no controversy anymore.

The Limasawa error, which the National Historical Institute turned into a hoax in 1998, was fully explained in the article read before The Society for the History of Discoveries on 13 October 2000 at the Library of Congress, Washington D.C.

The idea Limasawa was anchorage of Magellan’s fleet on March to April 1521 rests entirely on two erroneous assertions of an ex-priest who had NOT read any eyewitness account. He hadn’t ead Gines de Mafra, Francisco Albo, The Genoese Pilot, Martin de Ayamonte. Nor the 3 extant French codices of Ant. Pigafetta.

He also failed to read key secondary sources, e.g., Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas, Antonio de Brito, and Maximilianus Transylvanus.

He read only the extant Italian manuscript of Pigafetta we know today as the Ambrosiana codex.

The name of this resigned Augustinian is Carlo Amoretti.

Here are the two assertions of Amoretti:

1. That Mazaua (actually he used Giovanni Battista Ramusio’s Massana and Messana, the Italian equivalent of Maximilianus Transylvanus’ Latin word Massanam) is the island Limassava shown in the map of Jacques N. Bellin of 1734; and

2. That the latitude of Limassava and Massana are in Antonio Pigafetta’s 9 deg. 40′ North.

Amoretti’s dicta were uncritically- -more correctly, mindlessly– repeated by James Burney (1803), Lord Stanley of Alderley (1874), Jose T. Medina (1890), Manuel Walls y Merino (1899), James Alexander Robertson (1903), F.H.H. Guillemard (1890), and everyone else down the line. Martin Fernandez de Navarette (1837) did not follow this thoughtless surmise. Leonce Peillard (1991) defied it asserting Mazaua was in Mindanao.

Filipino and Philippine historiographers just as mindlessly adopted the Amoretti claim. This is most perplexing in the case of Pablo Pastells, S.J. who was co-editor with Wenceslao Retana of the 1897 edition of Fr. Francisco Combes, S.J., inventor of the word “Limasaua.” Pastells was author of a note found on Page cxxxiii that states merely that based on a French translation of Pigafetta (this was the 1801 French edition of Amoretti’s transcription of Pigafetta, but more likely the Spanish translation of the French by Jose Toribio Medina) Magellan did not go to Mindanao. Pastells does not outright declare the anchorage of Magellan from March-April 1521 to be Limasaua. Pastells saw the difficulty of declaring Limasaua as anchorage because the Combes story of Limasaua mentions NO mass being held anywhere in the Philippines on March 31, 1521.

Pastells makes a totally mind-blowing assertion in his 1900 edition, a 3-vol. republication, of Francisco Colin’s work Labor evangelica.. . In footnote (2) on Page 144, Pastells asserts, “Se dijo en la Isla de Dimasaua. V. Pigafetta.” This is either an absent-minded professor’s thoughtless claim or a mindless if careless remark by an inattentive writer or a sleight of hand maneuver to force a false claim.

Nowhere in Amoretti, be it in his original French or in the Spanish translation of it by Jose T. Medina, is there a declaration by Amoretti or Antonio Pigafetta himself that an Easter mass was held on March 31, 1521 in an island named “Dimasaua.” Amoretti surmised Mazaua was Bellin’s Limassava. Pigafetta named the isle Mazaua (spelled Mazzana in the Italian map, Mazzaua in 3 French texts).

In any case, early on the onset of American colonization of the Philippines, there was a babelian free-for-all as to the real name of the “site of the first mass.” I like to think of it as a kind of festival of inventions, there was Limasaoa, Limasagua, Simasaua, Simasagua, Bimasagua, Bimasaua, Limassava, Limasaua. Thrown into the mele were eyewitness names Mazaua, Masaoa, Mazagua, Macava, etc.

To put sense and order into this chaos, in 1908 a committee made up by Trinidad Herminigildo Pardo de Tavera, Dr. Najeeb Mitry Saleeby, Carlos Everett Conant and Emerson B. Christie revised a map of “The World Book Co.” and spelled the name “Limasawa” by way of resolving the confusion of the many names. This orthography was adopted by the Phil. government’s “Philippine Committee on Geographical Names.”

What was the basis for this earth-shaking dictat? Tavera’s spin on Pastell’s earlier spin on Amoretti’s surmise, “Magellan did not land in Mindanao, and the first mass was not held in Butuan.” Tavera later reshaped this into his more famous dismissive remark, which one Jesuit priest calls apodictic, “En Limasawa y no en Butuan fue endonde se celebro la primera Misa en estas regiones.”

This remark is the entire logical construct of the Limasawa hypothesis, a reconstruction of what Amoretti asserted. In 1953 the National Historical Institute (then known as National Historical Committee) invoked a paraphrase of this Tavera dictum by a Leyte historian, Jayme de Veyra who said he seems to recall having read Tavera’s remark, as proof of Limasawa being Magellan’s Mazaua, “site of the first mass.”

Virtually all official “verdicts” coming from the National Historical Institute–I recall two before its disastrous one in 1998–are entirely based on Tavera’s remark. The NHI further made this conundrum virtually impossible of solution by framing the issue of Mazaua’s identity in terms of the question, “Where is the site of the first mass, Limasawa or Butuan?” I explained this fallacious and falsifying proposition in my SHD paper as the fallacy of the false dichotomous question which asks the reader to pick between two
false options.

In 1998, the NHI not only dismissed Gines de Mafra as fake, with full knowledge it wasn’t.

It twisted the conversation beyond rational bounds by making it appear that my paper was trying to prove Butuan is the port when I took pains to show that the Butuan error was a product of the corruption of the Pigafetta account by Ramusio and that the island in question was Mazaua. In my paper I listed all the properties of Mazaua–The Table of Correspondence- -which showed there is not one point where Limasawa and Mazaua coincide.

Only the NHI and pro-Limasawa historiographers (if there is one honest historiographer among its rank left) still think Limasawa could be the island Mazaua.

The problem that faces us all is this: Is the island of Pinamanculan- Bancasi, discovered by earth scientists using the insight of Gines de Mafra, the real port of Magellan’s fleet?

That question cannot be answered by the tools of historiography. Archaeology is the proper tool that could unlock the truth of that island. And what will prove that isle is Mazaua? Artifacts that can be directly traced to Magellan and to Gines de Mafra and other Europeans visitors during the Age of Sail.

How many artifacts are needed to comprise compelling evidence? That is a question that no one can definitively answer. Unless we unearth a signed affidavit in 20-karat gold tablet by Fernao de Magalhaes, notarized by Raia Siaiu and witnessed by citizens of Mazaua, saying, “I declare this is the site of the first mass!”

- – - – - – - – - -

PINOYWORLD Editor: This interesting insight and dissection to history is shared to us by “Vicente C. de Jesus”  <ginesdemafra@gmail.com>.

PINOYWORLD Editor: The statement below was sent through an e-mail from the office of the Executive Director Ryan Christian P. Echevarria of  CENTER FOR PEOPLE’S RIGHTS AND PARTICIPATION (CPRP) released on April 6, 2009.

STATEMENT ON SELECTIVE VIGILANTISM IN DAVAO CITY

We from the Center for People’s Rights and Participation, Inc. (CPRP) join Chairperson Leila M. de Lima of the Commission of Human Rights (CHR) in condemning the selective vigilantism that has been going on in Davao City.  CPRP holds that all human beings, whatever their social status, are rights-bearers and all are duty-bearers.  CPRP is therefore horrified at the vigilante killings of hundreds of persons in Davao City suspected of having committed crimes.  These killings are all the more reprehensible because they selectively victimize the already societally disadvantaged and marginalized.

Such lawless meting out of death or injury is a blatant violation of human rights, undeniably placing our socially uninfluential fellow citizens at the mercy of criminally misguided vigilantes and seriously undermining the process of law guaranteed by our Constitution.

We share the cogent observation of the CHR Chairperson that only poor citizens have been subjected to the killings perpetrated by unnamed groups and individuals who, ironically, style themselves as defenders of peace and order and protectors of the weak and innocent.  The alleged high-mindedness of their objectives can never justify the foul means they employ, which amount to selective murder of people whose guilt is yet to be proven.

In a civilized society due process of law must always prevail.  No one has the right to slay another person on mere suspicion.  The democratic traditions of our nation demand that no one shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without a fair trial.  Our laws hold that no one, whether socially influential or uninfluential, shall be subjected to inhuman treatment, as everyone is entitled to equal protection of the laws.  Anyone who transgresses these principles, state actor or not, is a human rights violator and deserves to be penalized in accordance with our legal system.

We in CPRP cannot countenance the atrocities committed in Davao City.  Thus we throw our full support to the CHR in its campaign to end selective vigilantism in Davao City and other places in which this scourge has begun to show its bloody hand.  We stand with the Chairperson of the CHR as she leads the Commission to take steps to identify the perpetrators and bring them to justice.  While we believe that peace and order are essential for national security and economic development, we strongly maintain that the rights of our fellow citizens and fellow human beings are sacred, especially the right to life, which is the most fundamental of rights.  These rights must not be sacrificed.  And those rights we shall faithfully defend at all times.

Ryan Christian P. Echevarria
Executive Director
Center for People’s Rights and Participation