Category: nothing
Jose “Pinggot” Zulueta. Tilamsik series, first one-man exhibit. Published with express permission from the artist (thanks much!). Asinta images. Right-clicked from http://www.asinta.netfirms.com
The march of law students today to call for the resignation of Gloria is acronymed ASAR or ASARAN (Advocacy for …. etc.), coming in the heels of the statement of members of the U.P.Law Community on “Truth and Accountability”.
Anyway, I saw this post in Atty. Teddy Te’s blog at www.tedte.blogspot.com
i wonder what this is all about? (well, actually, i have an idea; because of the publicized Deanship tussle; i’m just trying to be cute, ha-ha). Atty. Teddy Te gives us an idea who this person is who doesn’t want the statement on “truth and accountability” to go around not on substantive disagreement but on… oh, read the post, he asks rhetorical questions in the end:
From Atty. Teddy Te, quote
“Would that we were to once again remember what it is that is truly important to us and not be weighed down by minor details like “why call it a law community statement if it did not reflect a majority view?” or even more minor details like “who gets the credit?” or “whose turn is it before the camera?” But I think that might be an even more difficult task than to get Gloria out.” Closed-quote.
It’s so ASAR naman. [i admit i sometimes have my share of pettiness, but during those times, i know i’m being petty and try my best to be professional; at other times i just avoid individuals i don’t like, they’re a waste of time, instead of sowing intrigue that’s unproductive); we go on our merry way and try to rise above it all (ahem, but i still avoid them, ha-ha), there are things far bigger than ourselves, and i’m publishing this just to alert people about these politicians and candidates- wannabes, they are the same kind as Gloria]
From Atty. Teddy Te’s blog, Thursday, February 21
Quote “I have no words . . . (by Atty. Teddy Te)
Quote “. . . to describe just how disappointing it is that some faculty members (I won’t name names here because my source will get into trouble) and students of the law school choose to nitpick instead of 1) being constructive or 2) simply getting out of the way. (For perspective, go to Lobit’s multiply site for her text exchange presumably with some student who, to her credit, she does not identify; for perspective on the faculty member/s, let us just say that media friends have been hounding me for comment on what they have been saying.)
Quote “Yesterday, the Dean and some members of the faculty and students issued a statement that was carried over the media. It was deliberately sub-titled “A Statement from the UP Law Community” NOT “An OFFICIAL Statement of the UP Law FACULTY AND STUDENTS” or “An OFFICIAL Statement of UP LAW.” To my mind, “community” means a group of people united by some principle or purpose; and those who signed the statement were.
Quote “Some have said we should have deliberated–we did.
Quote “Was everyone invited? Yes.
Quote “But not everyone invited chose to go. And I respect that; I respect your silence on the matter–but I would ask that you respect as well the sentiments of those who chose to participate and sign.
Quote “I have my first draft which is radically different from the one that came out to show just how deliberated upon the statement was. Truthfully, and the Dean and the others who were there will tell you–I do not completely agree with everything there. For instance, if that were my statement, it would consist only of the following words–‘GLORIA, GET OUT–NOW!!!” But I was writing for a community and, therefore, my own thoughts and opinions and even style of writing would have to be subordinated to what the others felt they wanted.
Quote “Were contrary opinions entertained? Yes. I have always held the belief that the Senate investigations have outlived their purpose and should be terminated with dispatch; many who were around did not. So, I respected that and did not put that in the final draft that appeared.
Quote “Why did I sign it if it did not exactly reflect what I believed in? Because I believed it was time for UP Law to speak up and because it contained the essential points I wanted said–Gloria must go. Everything else in the statement was a means toward that end.
Quote “It is frustrating to see us fighting each other instead of the common enemy right now. That, by itself, is a victory for Gloria and Mike Arroyo and their minions.
Quote “Unity cannot be legislated or forced because many times egos get in the way. Would that we were to once again remember what it is that is truly important to us and not be weighed down by minor details like “why call it a law community statement if it did not reflect a majority view?” or even more minor details like “who gets the credit?” or “whose turn is it before the camera?” But I think that might be an even more difficult task than to get Gloria out.” Closed-quote.
