Satan's Dragon Rising - Shifting the New World Order in the East.

China Is Trying To Build A New World Order
The clue is in the name. The Shanghai Co-operation Organisation (SCO) groups six countries--China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan--and aims to be the dominant security institution in its region; but its origin and purposes are largely Chinese.

So it looks rather worrying from a Western point of view that the group has agreed to expand and that India, Pakistan and Iran are all keen to join: the rise of a kind of China-led NATO to which even America's friends, such as India and Pakistan, seem drawn. Yet that is to misunderstand the sort of organisation the SCO aspires to be. It does indeed pose a challenge to the American-led world order, but a much more subtle one.

On September 11th and 12th the SCO held its 14th annual summit in Dushanbe, Tajikistan's capital. It agreed to adopt procedures for expansion, first for those countries that are already observers. India and Pakistan are likely to join in the next year. Iran is at present disqualified because it is under UN sanctions. Another observer, Mongolia, is a democracy and has long had qualms about joining what looks like a club for authoritarians. Afghanistan, the final observer, has other priorities.

The SCO summit came hot on the heels of one held by NATO, in Wales. This gave columnists in China and Russia the chance to tut-tut about the "20th-century" or "cold war" or "confrontational" mentality that animates NATO, and to boast about what makes the SCO different from what Russia's foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, has called such "relics of a past era", with the rigid discipline imposed by particular blocs of countries.

In August the SCO held its largest joint military exercises yet, an anti-terrorist drill in Inner Mongolia in China involving more than 7,000 personnel. The SCO's boosters, however, insist it is not an alliance, like NATO, but a "partnership", with no adversary in mind. That is not entirely true. It has always been explicitly directed against three enemies, even if they are only abstract nouns: the "three evil forces" of terrorism, separatism and extremism. China, in Xinjiang; Russia, in Chechnya; the Central Asian members, in the Ferghana Valley and on their borders with Afghanistan. All SCO members face a threat from Islamist extremism. Continue reading... click HERE.

China As World's Dominant Superpower - Impact On America, Russia And EU
Here is a fact beyond dispute: China is set to become the world’s largest economy. The only debates are by what date and by what measure?

According to the IMF, Asian economies will represent at least 40% of global economic output by 2015, when adjusted for Purchasing Power Parity (PPP - which is just a way of saying that a McDonald’s hamburger should be similar cost everywhere and if it is not, we need to make an allowance in exchange rates to calculate the true relative value of a nation’s economy).

Many economists expect that on PPP calculations, China will overtake the United States long before 2020, probably by 2015-17. All global economists agree it is only a matter of time, by whatever measure. Leaders in developed nations should be ready for a major psychological, economic, cultural and political shift, which will impact the rest of this century.
Reality gap in perception of China’s future

I lecture to tens of thousands of people, in up to 25 nations a year. I also correspond with over 42,000 followers on Twitter, 2,000 on Linkedin, and on YouTube or my own Website bulletin boards with representatives of another million or two a year. Here is what I observe:

Most people I talk to in developed nations are really struggling to understand the deeper implications of the rise of China, to really comprehend what it all means, the scale of this gigantic convulsion on the global stage.

Take the United States: both Presidential candidates fought electoral battles with similar messages about American being the greatest nation on earth, and the need to keep America so. Their messages were somewhat out of step with the uncomfortable reality that China is about to become, on simple economic terms, the most powerful economic force on the planet. Continue reading.. pls click HERE.

MASONIC JESUIT ILLUMINATI VATICAN DECEPTIONS ( in the so-called Philippines).

" MARCOS GOLD is a mixture of the Philippine Gold and the said Asia’s Looted Gold sometimes being called as Yamashita Gold. However, the Philippine Gold which is owned by the Philippine Royal Family (children of King Luisong) was deposited in the Philippine Central Bank somewhere in the 1948 which was illegally brought out by Ferdinand E. Marcos and his cohort Col. Severino Santa Romana or Col. Santy (OSS Agent under William Donovan, also Col. Santa Romana alias Reverend Father Jose Antonio Garcia Diaz." extracted from Karen Hudes and Alexandra Meadors on “Let’s Get the Gold Into The Hands of The People!”

In my recent copy and paste post blog entitled Marcos Speech and Cardinal Sin we have understood that there was a conflict between the Roman Church and the Marcos regime, and at the end the Jesuits who are the army of the Roman Church were successful in their propaganda and terrorism to oust the Marcos Regime. The so-called EDSA REVOLUTION was an instrument to bring many people not only to demonic mariololatry, IDOL WORSHIP in the nation, but a level in where a new form of government that will be used by the Church to corrupt the Malayan race in this part of the world. To make the story short, the "Gold of our Ancestors" remained in the hands of the trusted puppets of the Roman Catholic Church and of course of the "ELITES" - the Masonic Illuminati Jesuit New World Order secret organization. These people are literally the people used by Satan himself and his agents and demons to control the world governments and kings of the earth to push through the ancient satanic plan for a One World Government. A one world government that will be headed by the Anti-Messiah and will fulfill many Biblical prophecies and bring about the end of the age and the literal coming of the Biblical Messiah as the scriptures and prophets foretold.

Since our focus at the moment is in the so-called Philippines, how the government is being shaped by destiny for a New World Order, the next copy and paste post and video from YouTube.com will give you an insight and info of what is the next evil plan for this country... perhaps you may say that the Marcoses are back again in the government to help the people, however we must understand from history that these people were used to usher in another wave of demonic corruption in the islands... there will be no perfect goverment unless God and His Christ will literally rule upon this planet!

Okay, below is my copy and paste blog and Youtube Vid entitled, Imelda Marcos, the CIA, and the Pope: A Secret History and "Tapatan Ni Tunying Tatlong henerasyon ng mga Marcos". Unless we look back in history and read the Holy Scripture... our race will remain deceived by these people who are being used by the Romanists and the New World Order people who are non the less destined to become hungry and greedy for money and power... unsatisfied and will of course usher in an age "like the days of Noah"... " For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage... (SAME SEX MARRIAGE?) - Mat. 24:37-39 KJV


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Imelda Marcos, the CIA, and the Pope: A Secret History by Greg Rushford from Newsbreak SOURCE: Globalbalita.com

This article is based upon formerly secret documents that were declassified without fanfare and published by the U.S. Department of State in 2006, but apparently gathered the proverbial dust on the shelves since then — unnoticed until now by prying journalistic eyes.

In Sept., 1970 Imelda Marcos, then the First Lady of the Philippines, feared that domestic political opposition threatened plans by her husband, President Ferdinand Marcos, to revise the Philippine constitution and thus extend his term in office, which would otherwise lapse in 1973. When Mrs. Marcos flew to Washington, D.C. that Sept., she was able to obtain a private audience in the White House with U.S. President Richard Nixon.

The First Lady also summoned Director of Central Intelligence Richard Helms to her suite in the Madison Hotel — the presidential suite. The declassified State Department and White House documents reveal that in her Sept. 22 private meetings with Nixon and Helms, Mrs. Marcos asked for some $23 million in CIA covert funding. The money was to be used to buy political support to elect pro-Marcos delegates to the Constitutional Convention two months later.

Mrs. Marcos these days is perceived in the public mind as a comic figure, thanks to her famous love of expensive shoes and jewelry. But in her prime, the politically ambitious First Lady was considered a woman with an independent power base who was accordingly treated with respect by heads of state.

Imelda Marcos, who turns 81 on July 2, has just been elected to the Philippine congress, having replaced her son, Rep. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos, who was elected to the senate in the May 10 elections. Bongbong, 52, earned honors at Oxford and an advanced degree from the Wharton business school, and could be poised to run for president in the 2016 elections. Bongbong’s elder sister, Imee Marcos, 56, is the newly elected governor of Ilocos Norte.

Then, Mrs. Marcos was not content to seek only CIA assistance. Before going on to Washington, she had reached out to a higher authority. She flew to Italy where she had a private audience with Pope Paul VI. In that meeting, the First Lady vented her frustrations with internal political opposition from the Catholic Church in Manila, specially, she complained, from the liberal Jesuits. What could His Holiness do to help?

These revelations are hardly likely to be regarded as ancient history. This is because the same Philippine family dynasties that have been jockeying for power for more than four decades are still at it — while the same controversies involving possible revision of the country’s constitution that Imelda Marcos raised in 1970 are still the stuff of current headlines in Manila.

And beyond the little slice of history, there is a broader context for the story. This week the Philippines — which doesn’t get much press beyond Asia — will be in the international headlines. On Wednesday, Filipinos will inaugurate a new president. — marking another opportunity for a fresh start that would get their laggard economy moving in the right direction. It is conceivable — if not likely — that the Philippines could, at long last, be primed to become another Asian tiger, or perhaps a tiger-cub economy.

Plea for ‘crash program’

The fact that Imelda and her husband were presiding over their country’s long economic decline was hardly on Imelda Marcos’s mind back in Sept., 1970. When she flew to Washington that month, the First Lady was thinking in terms of how to dominate the political opposition.

According to a well-received 1988 biography entitled “Imelda: Steel Butterfly of the Philippines,” written by prize-winning journalist Katherine Ellison, Nixon “had acknowledged his guest’s stature by inviting her to stay at Blair House, the White House guest quarters usually reserved for visiting chiefs of state.” But as the Blair House was undergoing renovations, Nixon ended up putting Mrs. Marcos in the Madison’s presidential suite, “where her bill for five days came to $1,068.87, paid for by the U.S. State Department.”

The official documents relating to Mrs. Marcos’s Sept., 1970 trip to Washington, D.C. are contained in a 744-page volume published four years ago by the State Department, as part of its ongoing historical “Foreign Relations of the United States” series. Tucked away in the section of the book that deals with the official U.S.-Philippine diplomatic record is a memorandum of a “conversation between the Director of Central Intelligence and Madam Imelda Marcos, Wife of the Philippines President.” The DCI was Richard Helms. The researchers had found the Helms document in the intelligence files of the National Security Council in Richard Nixon’s White House. It had been classified Secret; Eyes Only.

The memorandum notes that U.S. ambassador to the Philippines Henry Byroade and his special assistant, James Rafferty, “made the introductions” to Helms and an unnamed CIA officer, “and then withdrew” from the suite. In those days, Byroade was known to be close to Ferdinand Marcos, and Rafferty was reputed to be a close associate-of — and even somewhat of a political fixer for — the First Lady.

The CIA officials’ meeting with Mrs. Marcos in her suite at the Madison was on Sept. 22, 1970, and lasted 35 minutes. Earlier that day, the First Lady had met in the White House with Nixon and his national security adviser, Henry Kissinger, although “no other record” of that meeting “has been found,” a footnote in the Helms’ memorandum reported. But the CIA’s memo clearly relates what was on Mrs. Marcos’s mind, as she explained it to the American spymasters.

“Madam Marcos began her presentation by drawing attention to the forthcoming 10 November 1970 elections for delegates to a constitutional convention in the Philippines, planned for June-July 1971,” the memo related. “She said socialist movements sponsored by certain lay and clerical elements in the Catholic Church, particularly the Jesuits, and some Communist fronts are planning to contest administration candidates in the election.”

The CIA memo explained Mrs. Marcos’ pitch: “She believes that the Marcos Administration could lose the election by default unless a crash program is organized to help it win. She noted that the Church has already picked candidates, either priests or lay persons, for each election district. Should those groups succeed in achieving their objectives, it would change the form of government in the Philippines to Socialism or Communism, with only a few people realizing what the real consequences would be. She underscored her view that Philippine democracy is viable but will not survive unless the United States helps the Marcos Administration through this difficult period.”

The memo also related that Mrs. Marcos told Helms that “the Philippines is a child of the U.S. and illustrated this point by describing Vietnam as a French baby, Malaysia as an English baby, and Thailand as everybody’s baby.” In Asia, the First Lady asserted, “one’s creditability (sic) is not measured by how one treats a friend, but how one treats his children.” In those days, Mrs. Marcos let it be known that she considered herself a sort-of political mother to Filipinos; forty years later she refers to herself as her country’s grandmother.

When Helms asked what she meant by a crash CIA program, Mrs. Marcos rolled off the numbers, the memo relates: “Madam Marcos then said funding the election at the barrio level would mean 4,000 pesos for 35,000 barrios and also asked for more arms and helicopters to enable President Marcos to capture a fourth HUK leader, Commander Dante.”

HUK is the acronym for Philippine communist revolutionary forces that the CIA had first worked against in the 1950s. By the late 1960s, the HUK communists had morphed into what is still called the New People’s Army, although the CIA memo writer had not caught up to the distinction. In any event, the declassified documents do not elaborate further on the request for CIA help in capturing Commander Dante, the alias for Bernabe Buscayno, who would remain at large for several more years.

No basis for Imelda’s fears

Helms referred the First Lady’s request to the so-called 40 Committee, which met in the White House on Sept. 25, 1970. Then chaired by Henry Kissinger, the committee was comprised of high-level U.S. security officials who recommended covert actions to the president. Notes from the committee meeting expressed no reservations on moral grounds. Covert CIA support for politicians around the world, including the Philippines, was by then a venerable tradition.

In Sept., 1970 Nixon and Kissinger were busy ordering the CIA’s Helms to do what he could to prevent the election in Chile of leftist Salvador Allende (those efforts failed, but President Allende was subsequently ousted by his own military in a coup three years later, and committed suicide).

The 40 Committee referred the Marcos request to the State Department, for a more detailed analysis. The diplomats at Foggy Bottom quickly concluded that there was no basis for the First Lady’s fears that leftists would be able to dominate the Constitutional Convention: “Mrs. Marcos is the only person who professes to believe that the Philippine Constitutional Convention will be controlled by leftist elements. In fact, there are few observers who believe it will not be controlled by President and Mrs. Marcos.”

When the secret White House covert-actions committee met again on Oct. 6, it decided to reject the First Lady’s request. Mrs. Marcos had basically been “throwing curve balls around a leftist threat to the Constitutional Convention,” the committee’s minutes noted.

The formerly secret minutes from the Oct. 6 White House meeting also observed that President Marcos himself, who had been giving his wife considerable political leeway, felt that this time, she had gone too far. “It was also noted that Marcos was allegedly angered by his wife’s freewheeling; none of this had come directly from him and she might be launching personal political ambitions,” the official 40 Committee minutes reported. The Philippine strongman, the document added pointedly, although “no neophyte at feeding at our trough — had not yet asked for a peso.”

Papal visit

Although it was reported at the time that Mrs. Marcos had had a private audience with Pope Paul VI earlier in Sept., 1970, what was said behind the closed doors, to my best knowledge, has never before been reported. Richard Helms’ minutes of his Sept. 22 meeting in the Madison’s presidential suite give the gist of how the First Lady reported the meeting to the CIA. According to Helms’ notes, Mrs. Marcos’s papal visit “was not for the purpose of piety but to persuade him to make his visit to the Philippines in the third week of November, which would be after the election, to prevent the Catholic church in the Philippines from using his visit to further its political ambitions.”

According to Helms’ memo, Imelda Marcos reported that she had been only partly successful in persuading the Pope to give her some political cover: “She said the Pope suggested prayer as a possible answer but he also agreed to delay his visit.”

Postscript:

Pope Paul VI kept his word to Mrs. Marcos, as the Con-con elections of Nov. 10, 1970 preceded the two-day papal visit to Manila from Nov. 27-29. That visit made a little unintended history itself. Upon his arrival at the Manila airport, the Pope was attacked by a disturbed 35-year old Bolivian painter who wielded a Malay kris dagger. The Marcoses claimed that the knife was deflected by a swift presidential karate chop from an alert President Marcos, a version that was at variance with other accounts at the time, including the Vatican’s.

True to the American predictions, the Marcoses were able to dominate the Con-con, which met in 1971, and which was marked by persistent efforts to amend the country’s constitution to enable President Marcos to remain in office. While there were many reports at the time that the president and his wife had used widespread bribery to influence the delegates, the details of what actually transpired remain elusive (as to the facts behind so many Philippine scandals.”

In any event, President Marcos finally decided to remain in power by declaring martial law in Sept., 1972. He remained in office until he was deposed by Cory Aquino’s People Power demonstrations in 1986 — which were given powerful assistance from the same Catholic Church forces that Imelda Marcos had long complained about.

In 1977, President Marcos finally succeeded in capturing and jailing communist chief Bernabe Buscayno, a.k.a. Commander Dante. Buscayno later rejected violence, and was released in 1986 by Cory Aquino.

During the last several years, President Arroyo and her political allies have made headlines with their persistent efforts to convene another Constitutional Convention — with most of the controversy once again turning on fears of a hidden presidential agenda. But unlike Marcos, President Arroyo was not politically strong enough to impose martial law, and on Wednesday will step down from her office peaceably.

Half-way through 2010, both the Marcoses and the Aquinos are back in power — while their country remains poor.

The Marcos family declined requests for comment.


Below is the video made by a well known mainstream mass media in the country who are obviously being used by them who would like to control the information system in the so-called Philippines. (The video below is intended for educational purposes only, copyright remains to the owner and maker of the video and not used in anyway for commercial purposes.)






Ang Sambingay Mahitungod sa Duha ka Tawo nga Nagpatukod ug Balay  “Busa si bisan kinsa nga nagapaminaw ug nagatuman sa akong mga pagtulon-an, sama siya sa tawong maalam nga nagpatukod sa iyang balay diha sa pundasyon nga bato. 25 Bisag moulan ug kusog ug mobaha, ug kuso-kusohon sa kusog nga hangin ang iyang balay, dili kini maguba tungod kay gipatukod kini diha sa malig-on nga pundasyon. Apan ang tawo nga nagapaminaw sa akong mga pagtulon-an, ug wala nagatuman niini, sama siya sa tawo nga buang-buang nga nagpatukod sa iyang balay diha sa balas. Ug kon moulan ug kusog ug mobaha, ug kuso-kusohon sa kusog nga hangin ang iyang balay, matumba kini, ug mabungkag.” - Mateo 7:24-27

 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it. - Matthew 7:24-27 (KJV)

Marcos Speech and Cardinal Sin

Ang daming nagtataka kung bakit mas lalong sumasama and bansa.. hindi dahil sa corruption.. matagal ng na corrupt ang mga Malay sa pulo-pulong barangay an tinaguriang Pilipinas ng mga dayuhan.. marahil hindi ka magtataka kung bakit pataas ng pataas ang bilihin.. diba si Padre Damaso ang sinasabing ..... ahh.. kawawang pedro.. hindi naman tamad si Juan.. kunware lang para talagang maging mayaman daw si Padre Damaso.. na manloloko at rapist! :)

Note: I have added this video to let you understand what happened before the so-called EDSA REVOLUTION which was orchestrated by the JESUITS and the Roman Church. PLS LISTEN TO the Late President Ferdinand E. Martcos speech.. perhaps you will understand... SOMETHING.. a hidden clue? was it true there was a separation between the Roman Church and Mr. Marcos Goverment?  Were they all hungry for power and money? Mind you am not a politician nor a Marcos supporter but what can you do when a Church own a nation? The 16th Century conquest is getting better? You judge for yourself. :) Happy viewing!

Marcos and the Jesuit ‘Subversives’
Originally posted on February 19, 2010 By Amadis Ma. Guerrero. Source: The First Quarter Storm Library blog.

First published in Graphic, March 18, 1970, p. 6-7.

“Absolute obedience” was the command on which Ignatius of Loyola founded the Society of Jesus more than four centuries ago. Today the word “obedience” is rarely uttered when young Jesuits get together. Their ranks include protest marchers, draft-card burners, bishop-baiters and jailbirds. The community of 8,000 American Jesuits is caught in profound internal ferment …

— from the Atlantic Magazine, November, 1969

THE HEADLINE in the afternoon daily caught one’s startled eye: Marcos Tags Jesuits on Revolt, and the reader’s instinctive reaction was that the President was giving the SJs more credit than they deserved.

“President Marcos today accused the Jesuits of inciting revolution in the Philippines,” the report began, bylined by a veteran Malacañang reporter. “Mr. Marcos hurled the accusation during a conference with newsmen this morning (March 2), adding that he will not countenance the ‘continued acts of rebellion’ by the religious order.’ The story was substantially duplicated in the other afternoon paper, and its lead was even more dramatic: Marcos declared today an open war against the Jesuits…

The Malacañang ploy however backfired, and reaction set in favor of the Jesuits. The following morning the Palace issued a blanket denial of the reports. Its tone was typically self-serving and innocucus:

“The President believes that the Jesuits in the Philippines are fully aware of the separation between the church and the state and will not risk being publicly condemned for interference in the affairs of government.”

Two leading Jesuit officials immediately took up the cudgels for their order. The reaction of Fr. Horacio de la Costa, provincial superior of the Society, was a model of understatement: “If the President has been correctly reported as saying what he did, I would like to state, with all due respect, that he must have been misinformed …

“As for interfering with the affairs of the state, I would simply say that those of us who are Filipinos believe that, as citizens of a free country, we have the right, and occasionally the duty, to speak our minds on what we believe to be the state of the nation, and how we believe that state can be improved to provide justice and a better life for all.”

The rejoinder of Fr. Pacifico Ortiz, Ateneo president, was more blunt: “It would be a tragedy which could bring us even nearer to revolution if no persons or institutions in this land could speak the truth about the state of the nation as he sees it without being branded as inciters of revolution.

“If we have come to such a pass, as indeed this accusation of the President might lead us to believe, then thought-control and fascism are just around the corner.”

An original impression of newsmen was that the President’s remarks had been printed in one of those “onion skin press releases.” In the trade, this means that a reporter’s contacts give him some “background” material, printed on onion-skin paper, “not for attribution.” The real story, however, subsequently filtered out to the press. Marcos had let down his guard, and revealed his feelings during an informal afternoon chat with newsmen while playing golf at the Palace greens.

The radicals were understandably annoyed, feeling that the President had conferred on the Jesuits a badge of honor reserved exclusively for their own militant groups. Those who know the Jesuits well were amused: very flattering really, but we haven’t reached that stage yet and we probably never will, unless we’re driven to it.

There may be one or two far-out radicals among the SJs, but the truth is that most of them have come out for peaceful reforms. And if only for this reason, they constitute no immediate, violent threat to men like Ferdinand E. Marcos.

Why FM Dislikes the Jesuits

The Jesuits for years now have been crying out for reforms, warning that the alternative would be a bloody revolution. This call naturally has not endeared them to the One in Power (and we do not mean the other world), it being a reflection on his Administration.

The Presidential distaste surfaced for all to see during the opening of the Seventh Congress, when Marcos openly seewled while Fr. Ortiz was delivering his invocation, causing newsmen present to exchange meaningful glances. Fr. Ortiz’s phrase — “trembling on the brink of revolution” — may sound a bit poetic, but his invocation also contained the following passage:

“With us into this hall, O God, we bring the growing fears, the dying hopes, the perished longings and expectations of a people who have lost their political innocence; a people who now know … that salvation, political or economic, does not come from above, from any one man or party or foreign ally; that in the last analysis, salvation can only come from below — from the people themselves …”

There are other reasons for the Presidential distaste for Jesuits and Jesuit-influenced laymen. Let us cite them here:

—Mr. Raul S. Manglapus, whom Mr. Marcos tried to win over to his side, unsuccessfully, not too long ago, and whose ideas he does not share. Item: Manglapus’ Decentralization bill, which sought to clip the powers of the Presidency, was opposed by Mr. Marcos. Item: the nationalistic Congressional Economic Planning Office (CEPO), which Mr. Manglapus staunchly supported, was suppressed by Mr. Marcos;

—the National Union of Students (NUSP), headed by an Atenean, Edgar Jopson, and the Young Christian Socialists (YCSP), headed by a Manglapus-influenced Bedan, Ben Maynigo, have been breathing down the Olympian neck of the President;

—A pamphlet by Fr. Vitaliano Gorospe, SJ, entitled “The Morality of Violence and Demonstrations,” which stated that violence on the part of the exploited masses is justifiable as a last resort. Now this may cause concern to those in the Establishment (particularly to those who may have been warned by their seeresses that they will be assassinated by a young man in the guise of a priest), but it is old hat really. It is inscribed in the Catechism books, and even Pope Paul — hardly a revolutionary — is not against it.

—The mysterious figure of one Fr. Jose Blanco, SJ, alleged to have unseated Mr. Sukarno with one fell swoop of his slender arms, and alleged further to have told a CSM seminar: the people better “rise up in arms before others will do it for them.”

In an interview with the Chronicle, Fr. Blanco said he had been misquoted, and that what he had actually stated was “what we need is a revolution of a change of heart… to convert someone to a real Christian, that is the revolution I sell.”

As for the allegations that he had been involved in the student uprising in Indonesia, Fr. Blanco said he had stayed in that country for six years as an English instructor, then had to leave when summoned to be near his ailing father. This slim and tall (for a Filipino) Jesuit is no stranger to controversy. Last year his remarks before another seminar — that Christ is not in the Sacrament but in the heart — were distorted and made to sound “heretical” and “communistic,” leading to a confrontation with the Archbishop of Manila which still has to be resolved satisfactorily.

Jesena and the Sacadas

—The report by Fr. Arsenio C. Jesena, of the Loyola House of Studies, which exposed the miserable conditions of the sacadas in Negros and which alienated President Marcos because his closest political allies belong to the Sugar Bloc.

The exposé opened with this sentence, almost Hemingway-like in its simplicity: “In April 1969 I went down to Negros to live as a sacada among the sacadas.” But as it began to describe in graphic detail the exploitation of the migrant workers under the hands of the hacenderos and the contratistas, the report took on a tone of bitter indictment:

“I saw the injustice of it all, and I began to understand why the Communists are Communists.”

The Jesena disclosures were an outstanding piece of Jesuit enterprise which capped the last year of the decade just over. In its wake came a challenge from the Christian Social Movement to the sugar planters to submit to an investigation. The planters agreed, then resorted to all sorts of delaying tactics. Early last month, impatient NUSP students took to the streets, and one of their demands was the immediate prosecution of sugar planters found violating labor laws.

This time a new task force team was formed, headed by Undersecretary of Labor Raoul Innocentes, and its findings substantially confirmed the Jesena report. From all indications a better deal is in store for the sacadas, thanks to Fr. Jesena and to others like him who in the past tried to secure justice in sugarland. May their tribe increase.

Ang saya naman.. wala na si Marcos.. ayayaman kami.. :P

Through the Pages of History

The Society of Jesus was founded in 1540 by Ignatius of Loyola, the soldier-saint — a symbol, to all Ateneans, of manliness and virtue. Under his unwavering tutelage, the vow of obedience became an asset rather than a liability. Jesuit influence spread, and by 1650, 500 colleges had been established on the European continent. “This was the great baroque period when Jesuit drama, ballet, art and music flourished,” notes the contemporary Jesuit poet and writer, John L’Heureux.

It was also the period, he adds, “when the accusations of ‘Jesuit price’ began, the political machinations of court favorites that would finally lead to the suppression of the Jesuit order.” The Jesuits had become a threat to the absolutist monarchs of France, Spain and the two Sicilies. The autocrats banded together and applied pressure on Pope Clement XIV. Accordingly, in 1773 a papal decree outlawed the Society. The reasons have never been clarified to the present day, and the Pontiff’s statement at the time, since then often quoted by historians, said his move was “suggested to Us by the principles of prudence and which We retain concealed in Our breast.”

The Society was restored in 1814, but the old militancy was gone. “Tradition,” says Fr. L’Heureux, “with its safety and its aura of respectability, embalmed the restored Society of Jesus … The spirit was crushed beneath mountains of legislation, and the Jesuits became a group of dedicated and harmless schoolteachers for the sons of the upper middle class.

“When a few years ago change finally came to the Jesuits, it came with a rapidity and a violence which neither they nor the Church was prepared.”

The history of the Jesuits in the Philippines is divided into two, the period of 1581 to 1768 and that of 1859 to the present. The first period is more colorful, and Fr. De la Costa in his voluminous work on the subject, tells of how a Jesuit secured the allegiance of Portuguese Macao to the Spanish crown, and of how a Jesuit represented the conquistadores of the Philippines.

Jesuits were also accredited ambassadors to the sultanates of Mindanao and the Moluccas. They sailed as chaplains in the Spanish ships that fought the Dutch for the sea lanes of Eastern Asia. The epoch of the Jesuits unfolds before a panorama of “sea battles, native customs, Portuguese rivalry, court intrigue, the opening of China, martyrdom and hard work.”

Although the Society was restored in 1814, the Jesuits did not return to the Philippines until 1859 and they, like their colleagues around the world, confined themselves to the schools, to missionary work and scientific study.

The SJs in the ’50s, ’80s

A Jesuit product acquires an extreme consciousness about his background. The feeling can be an ambivalent (accept-reject), one, and perhaps one could quote here the words of an American correspondent, a hardened newsman, to a young Filipino friend: “A Jesuit education is something to be thankful for, but it is also something to be suspicious about.”

Those fortunate (or, in the view of others, unfortunate) enough to receive an Ateneo education are immediately tagged as “Jesuit boys” — in derision or in envy. But you seldom hear the label applied to the products of the Christian Brothers, the Benedictines and the Dominicans. For when an Ateneo boy goes out into the world, he identifies himself with his Jesuit mentors — or rejects them altogether.

—The author studied for seven years under the Jesuits, during the ’50s, and the pleasant memories of that seemingly distant period go hand in hand with the unpleasant ones. Academic standards were maintained at all costs, and often at a heartbreaking cost. One student was not allowed to graduate because he had a grade of 74 in Social Science, and a 71 in Latin. This youth — an orphan whose mother toiled as a teacher so he could get a good education — was only 14 years old, and so the good fathers decided he was not fit to graduate from High School. He was told to repeat the year. His mother refused, and sent him to another college.

Discipline was exerted most during High School because this is the period when the student’s character is being formed. Punishment was swift, and, depending on the gravity of the offense, could come in the form of expulsion, suspension or the Saturday morning “post.” The latter consisted of strenuous calisthenics, forced marches around the campus, the “gripping” session, during which the student gripped his fingers unrelenting, and other devices worthy of the Inquisition. The atmosphere of the school was rigid, spartan.

But in the ’60s, the winds of change blowing throughout the Jesuit world reached our shores, and what a welcome breeze it was. Student dissent was now tolerated, even encouraged. Ateneans began to expand their horizons, and to involve themselves more extensively than before in social and political issues. A more aggressive nationalism reared its head, and the American Rector — “liked as a friend but disliked as a symbol” — resigned. The torch has been passed on to Fr. Ortiz, the second Filipino to become President of the Ateneo.

Extent of Jesuit Involvement in Social Action

The Jesuits run an Institute of Social Order, whose members conduct courses on credit unions, training programs, agricultural projects, family development and research. Complementing the Institute are the smaller like-minded organizations, like the Corps Youth Group of Fr. Blanco and the Mindanao Community Development Center.

In addition there are individual Jesuits who fan out to the barrios, to the slum districts and other underprivileged areas to improve conditions. You will find a Jesuit working with the parish priest of Sapang Palay, coordinating with Maryknoll students in Pansol, a small barrio behind that school, and with Ateneo students in Barranca another small barrio, in Marikina.

The Jesuits have a common ideology calles SPES, which stands for the Social, Political, Economic and Spiritual aspects of Filipino life. Within his field of competence, a Jesuit is expected to promote the common good in these four spheres.

In their drive to give the people a better life, the Jesuits are armed only with their ideas. Perhaps they provoke so much irritation among those in power because to the totalitarian mind, an idea can be just as dangerous as a Molotov cocktail hurled by an agent provocateur.#