Unacceptable history revision

Leandro Quintana

THERE is an op-ed column printed by the Philippine Daily Inquirer that is making the Internet/e-mail “rounds.” It is written by one Aureli C. Sinsuat who identifies himself as belonging to the Upsilon Sigma Phi fraternity at the University of the Philippines.

The article carries a prominent headline “Marcos didn’t order Ninoy’s assassination.” Mr. Sinsuat makes the argument that because both Ferdinand Marcos (in 1937) and Benigno Aquino (in 1950) were members of the UP based fraternity and were therefore “brods,” the consensus that Marcos had a direct hand in the killing of Aquino ought to be considered a “categorical falsehood.”

To buttress his contention, Mr. Sinsuat recalls that Ninoy often invited USP brods to his home and that Marcos too did the same thing even at the “height of his power” in Malacanang. “Brod is thicker than water,” a quote he attributes to Marcos, seems to now be the mantra of the Upsilonians.

It is quite unbelievable that a law graduate from the University of the Philippines, which Mr. Sinsuat is, would want the reading public to believe that past collegiate fraternal ties were strong enough to prevent a dictator of Marcos ilk from inflicting pain and suffering, including death, on personages and parties who are deemed a threat to his grip on absolute power.

While a vast multitude of today’s Filipinos, perhaps those born after 1980, do not have direct knowledge of the carnage and abuses perpetrated by Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos, and by their families, cohorts and followers upon our nation, there are still many older millions who do.

Mr. Sinsuat seems to forget (or merely fails to mention) that immediately upon the declaration of martial law on Sept. 21, 1972, the very first person Marcos ordered arrested and imprisoned was his great and prominent Upsilonian “brod” the then Senator Benigno Aquino Jr. Where were the esteemed, by Mr. Sinsuat’s insinuation, fraternal ties then?

Using his logic that “brod is thicker than water” should Ninoy not have been kept free and perhaps even invited to Malacanang by Marcos for a cup of coffee (Doroy Valencia was still alive and active then hence the pun) to thresh out their, and here we quote Sinsuat again, “wildly different political philosophies”?

And by all accounts Ninoy Aquino’s time in prison was not at all a period of idle repast. He was deprived of all liberties and the pain and suffering his incarceration brought upon his wife Cory and their minor children for over 10 years was impactful to say the least. Said suffering was later mitigated only upon Ninoy’s exile to Boston where for a few too brief years the Aquinos lived as a normal, loving family.

While I do find Aureli Sinsuat’s op-ed premises quite laughable, I will concede him this: to some people, Ninoy Aquino perhaps, membership in Upsilon must have meant something. As I recall it the late Raul Manglapus, a close Aquino ally, had said that Ninoy wanted to fly home and actually meet with Marcos. The story goes that Aquino felt he could talk to Marcos about a better future for the Philippines after Marcos had left this earth (he was known to be suffering from a fatal case of lupus at the time). Yet the bonds, Aquino believed, were not just based on collegiate fraternalism, they were also both Philippine politicians previously belonging to the same Liberal Party (until Marcos bolted to the Nacionalistas in 1964 to take on the incumbent Macapagal).

Stories circulating post Aquino’s assassination/murder has it that Ninoy was prepared to have the Marcoses keep some of their wealth which they could bring abroad if they wanted to, or even that the two of them would work as partners to manage the post-Marcos transition to a true Philippine democracy. Ninoy did not want a bloody revolution to oust the Marcoses. He wanted what was best for the Philippines and its people.

Needless to say, all that turned out to be a pipe dream on Ninoy’s part. Upon landing in Manila he was hustled off the plane and in a few short minutes lay dead on the tarmac of the airport that now bears his name.

There are all kinds of rumors, stories, accounts etc about what exactly happened and who was the prime mover in the assassination/murder. Was it Imelda? Was it Ver? Whoever it is who hatched the plot all fingers must continue to point to Ferdinand E. Marcos. He may have sported the title “president” but in reality he was the absolute dictator and ruler of the Philippines. Nothing major moved without his say so or direct knowledge.

Marcos would not have sat and talked with Ninoy and would have been totally impervious to any suggestions of a transition. They owned the country, they bled and milked it of its wealth, they controlled almost everything… all that power. They could not, and would not give it up. And to ensure they kept it, Ninoy had to go. No ifs and buts about it. And the consanguinity somehow mythically formed via a college fraternity was puny compared to the opiate fed by greed and power.

Mr. Sinsuat may want to begin the rewriting of history, perhaps as a prelude to the eventual return of a Marcos to Malacanang. It is thus incumbent upon all those Filipinos who lived and suffered under the Marcoses for some 21 or so years to ensure that this blatant, if weak kneed attempt at revising history does not move forward. Ninoy Aquino must be remembered for the life he lived and the death he suffered in the hands of a man, Ferdinand Marcos, whom history has judged as his assassin and murderer. Blood is thicker than water and Aquino’s are on the Marcoses hands and ought not be washed away regardless the relentless flow of the rivers of time and the fading of memories.

E-mail: Ldq44@aol.com