Wednesday, August 10, 2005

Spread the Light, Banish the Darkness

From Manolo Quezon's blog. Echoing the pundit, if you agree with this message, please post in your blog or email to friends.

An invitation.
August 20, 2005 at exactly 6:00 pm.

When an ordinary citizen steals, would an “I am sorry” be enough? When an ordinary citizen lies, would an “I am sorry” be enough? When an ordinary citizen cheats, would an “I am sorry” be enough?

Ask yourself: If you are an employee and your employer catches you cheating, lying and stealing — will an “I am sorry” be sufficient or a “lapse of judgment” be accepted? Or would you stand to lose your job?

What is our country coming to if we hold ordinary Filipinos to higher and stricter standards than we hold the highest official of the land?

This is not to say that the President of the Philippines is guilty of all that she is being accused of. It is only to say two different standards of rules - one for the powerful and one for the powerless — cannot exist if ours is to be a truly democratic and pluralistic society.

This is not the country we want. And so perhaps it is time we do something about it.

If you believe, as we do, that it is time for ordinary Filipinos to stand up and be counted in the fight for TRUTH — as well as for Transparency, for Responsibility, for Unity, for Trust and for Hope — then join us in a simple demonstration of our collective sentiments.

On August 20, Saturday, at exactly 6pm, take a few moments to light a candle in demonstration of our collective effort to take this country back from all who have not been true to it and to all of us ordinary citizens - and to be the first step in bringing about the light that will banish the darkness that hovers over our land!

Spread the light. Banish the darkness. August 20, 2005 at exactly 6:00pm.

Transparency. Responsibility. Unity. Trust. Hope.

I'll be lighting a candle with my suman.


  1. I find it ironic that Mr. Quezon states that he is not saying that the President is guilty, when he clearly expects appropriate payback from her as though she were.

    Yes, GMA hardly looks innocent at the moment. However, I don't think we can really make demands of someone as though they were guilty, and then state that we're not saying she's guilty, all in the same breath.

    If we think she's guilty, then we think she's guilty. Let's call a spade a spade, please.

  2. The difference, I think, is that GMA seems to be hiding under technicalities. Guilty of something? Certainly. But while legal means are used to obstruct justice, perhaps she can never be guilty in the legal sense which is, I think, the stance that Sassy Lawyer is taking. The demand is for accountability as a public official, something which GMA has not done.