Now it’s time for my comments on the issue.

Proclamation No. 1017 is constitutional, as it is just a statement of a fact. What is unconstitutional is the government actions made because of the said proclamation. The lawyers and the opposition should not file a case in the Supreme Court calling the said proclamation unconstitutional. What they have to ask is for the SC to declare (1) that this proclamation does not grant this government additional powers, such as taking over of news organizations and the suspension of writ of habeas corpus; and (2) that the actions taken by this government in the name of Proclamation 1017 from Friday up to the present be declared unconstitutional.

I told my mother that it is useless to file a case asking that this proclamation be declared unconstitutional, for I contend that the government action is just a repeat of what it did in the course of the May 1, 2001 Siege of Malacañang, which happened on a weekend. The government declared a state of rebellion in reaction. Some lawyers said that it has no constitutional basis. They filed a case in the SC Monday after May 1. Government lifted the state of rebellion. SC dismisses the case, since the lifting of the state of rebellion rendered the suit moot.

I contended that it is useless to file another suit, because this government will lift the state of emergency call tomorrow, to preempt the lawyers and the SC. I am partly validated when Michael Defensor claims that the incident at Fort Bonifacio tonight spoiled the lifting of Proclamation 1017.

The Daily Tribune incident is, for all intents and purposes, a scare tactic, sending a chilling message to news organizations – Little Sister is watching. PNP Chief Lomibao shot himself in the foot, showing the intentions of the PNP (if not of the government) – that they will take over media organizations that would disobey “standards set by the government” in the current state of affairs.

Why, you may ask? Interviewed in ANC special “Media in Focus”, Defensor said that they have no intention of closing down news organizations nor enforcing censorship; they entered the offices of The Daily Tribune and posted police guards so that “it will not be used for destabilization efforts”. If that isn’t censorship, I don’t know what would Defensor call that. Newspapers should be free to publish what they like; if the government finds the article subversive and inciting people to sedition, sue them. Again, read the story about Lomibao’s pronouncements. All because they think Proclamation 1017 gave them the license to do so.

Then, the head of National Telecommunications Commission was interviewed. It was rather circular and rambling; in effect, he said he had called the officers of Kapisanan ng mga Brodkasters sa Pilipinas (KBP) for a dialogue to “draft guidelines”; he also said that those who violate “guidelines” may have their broadcast license revoked, upon orders from the Fortress. ABS-CBN’s Maria Ressa asked “what guidelines?” And the NTC restated the dialogue, which he repeats again and again and again. I think he can’t say the obvious: it all depends on what the Fortress says. Read the Lomibao article again.

As for the arrests: funny that Crispin Beltran was invited, then arrested, because of an arrest warrant issued in 1985. It took the police 20 years to serve the warrant; talk about timing. No wonder our justice system sucks; one pillar of justice is broken and needs repair. Randy David’s arrest is pure and simple harassment; he was released last Friday without any charges filed against him. Again, all in the name of Proclamation 1017.

I believe in Freudian slips: Armed Forces in the Philippines Chief of Staff General Generoso Senga, in an interview, said 1081 instead of 1017. The interviewer, who was no less than the Vice President himself, didn’t even bothered correcting Senga. Now that’s what I call “revelations”.

Comments in blogs are mixed, but majority of those don’t care, as long as there are jobs and there are food in the table. The incident in that Taguig mall is an indication that the people will again choose to be apathetic. Can’t blame them now.

Blogs can take center stage, in case media orgs are censored, if not taken over. But right now we must define blogs that are credible sources of information; like the mainstream media, the blogosphere can be polluted, and it will be easy to do so. All you have to do is to open as many blog accounts as you can, then post false information. Simple as that.

This attack vector has been done before. The Fortress had created its own blog. During the height of l’affair Garci, pro-Arroyo commenters flooded the blogosphere. Though this has wilted down, there are still vociferous commenters who are consistently posting comments.

Comments do not vary, but the most common one is a mirror-copy of the Fortress propaganda line: If not Gloria, who else? It has a variation: who would replace Gloria? Another variation: they are all the same. Bloggers have answered those questions, but hardliners still asks the same questions, posts the same comments.

My stand remains the same: GMA should resign. She was given a chance to clear her name, and she chose the easy way out: (1) her allies in Congress “noting” the objections of the opposition during the canvassing of the 2004 election results; and (2) her allies in the House of Representatives rejected the amended impeachment complaint and disposed of the Lozano complaint. Legal, yes. But the questions remained unanswered. Her spokesman tried to cover-up l’affair Garci, then accused the media that they forced him to play the tapes. She used vague tools to prevent dissent and to stop Congress from asking questions from government executives.

Also, a certain Atty. Lambino appeared in the Fortress, telling the media that as a lawyer for the Koalisyon ng Nagkakaisang Pilipino (KNP or Coalition of United Filipinos), he saw no alterations nor any visible signs of cheating in the KNP’s copy of the election returns. Question: even if it is true or not, is his action a violation of the client-counsel privilege? Even if the relationship has ended, does this free the lawyer from the privilege?

This generation is being tested, and will be judged by history after the smoke clears. How would history view us ten years from now? Twenty years? This generation will probably not know.