contrasts

there's much beauty to be found in the contrasts that surround life:

shards of purple rocky mountains sticking out behind an expanse of lush green rice paddies

a sincere act kindness and generosity in the midst of a sea of indifference and greed

a band of colorfully clad nomads marching through an interminable stretch of desert sand

cheerful tunes from a harmonica breaking the whispers of rustling leaves and gurgling water

multi-racial expressions of thousands of passengers moving down the halls of a major airport

crisp sheets on a warm bed after a long day's work

more skies awaiting better moons

the sky is dim, and i look out from the rooftop disappointed and defeated. my first moon has failed to bloom; the moon rock i planted remains underground, moist and soiled and moldy. a shooting star passes. then another. i watch blankly at each life-changing wish that flashes and fades beyond the horizon, opportunities for others to reach out for and cherish.

taking the elevator down to the ground, i then step out of the building. i rummage through the overgrown grass and untended shrubs that conceal the spot. it doesn't take me long before i locate it, having marked the ground previously with a big, red cross, similar to those of old pirates' treasure maps.

after burrowing through the cool, damp soil, i retrieve the moon rock, its surface as pale as it was the moment i buried it... yet somehow, unexpectedly, it begins to pulse. faintly. almost unnoticeably. a weak, rhythmic beat to its increasing phosphorescent glow. life begins to stir as the gentle breeze erodes particles of dust that cling to its face.

there are still more skies awaiting better moons.

noticed the missing musketeers?

chocolates are one of man's greatest inventions. and it was an inseparable part of my childhood as tooth cavity is to excessive sweets. from nutty big bang to chewy cloud 9. rich serg's chocolate bars and sweet nips choco candies. affordable silver and gold wrapped goya bars as well as the "i still need scissors" jack and jill chocolate pretzels. soft choco mallows, tedious yet exciting yan-yan and powdery chocnuts. to the imported caramel lion bar, crispy round maltesers, triangular toblerone and ubiquitous nestlé (fondly pronounced "nessel") crunch. to unmeltable m&m's, snappy kit kat, sticky snickers and heavenly mars (pun intended). milky hershey bars, crunchy krackel and dull mr. goodbar. even to the more pricey cadbury chocolates, brittle ferrero rocher, uber-sweet almond roas and wide variety see's candies. and sometimes to the sophisticated european-branded sinful treats that come in fancy boxes and small quantities, leaving you delighted yet unsatisfied ("ubos na?!"). each chocolate recipe is truly a unique experience on its own.

but through the years, i've outgrown my insatiable craving for sugar-rush moments. and i have successfully numbed myself to ignore those tiny bundles of ecstasy waiting to be released. little by little, my old childhood friends moved further and further down a longer list of gastronomic favorites, dejected and recalled only on occasion.

it does not mean though that i have lost my love for chocolates. in fact, if one happened to be lying around the house unattended and with no one's name on it, it would most likely find itself popped into my mouth before you can say, "m&m's melt in your mouth, not in your hands!"

after staying clear of buying and consuming excessive amounts of chocolates, it was only recently that i discovered the missing musketeers!

i was attending an inauguration of a friend's art exhibit at megamall. pretty intimate; with family, supporters, friends, fellow artists and a couple of political figures gracing her event. goblets of cabernet and merlot were passed around (rather generously if i might add), and if for that alone i would have already enjoyed my evening. an unspectacular ribbon cutting ceremony. some annoying flashes of light. but truly an inspiring display of creativity, revealing inhibited thoughts and emotions through a mix of colors and various strokes. there in the middle of it all, i bumped into two friends i have not seen for quite some time. since we weren't feeling very sociable that evening, we decided to take our seats away from all the bustle of the party.

the queue to the cocktail table was pretty long, so we opted to wait before falling in line despite the complaints of our bellies. it so happened that J had some chocolates in her bag. she asked if we wanted some. and without a second thought i replied with a no, thank you. she dropped a few bars on the table anyway. there were two bite-size bars each of toblerone and 3 musketeers. of which i took one of the latter realizing that i haven't had one of those in a while.

with the right balance of sweet and bitter,
a sensual bite of tough layer and smooth filling, the soft fudge 3 musketeers melted away my present indifference to chocolate. hmmm... love with indifference... sounds like many modern-day marriages. and it's probably the most accurate way of describing my relationship with chocolate.

as the sugar raced through my veins like molten lava down a steep slope, J said, "don't you just miss those? they no longer sell 3 musketeers here in the philippines." then the lava flow just stopped... cooled... hardened. and i found myself frozen in mid-action like the poor victims of vesuvius who had been preserved like statues in the middle of doing their daily chores.

say what?!

"they haven't been around for more than a year. so i had to have my mom bring some home from the states," she added. "not that i really eat them. i actually just like carrying them around." her motherly instincts very apparent in that last statement.

so there. 3 musketeers are no longer in the philippines. not that i bothered verifying this in stores or anything. and the last remaining piece of the chocolate that night i had to savor bit by bit, even if it could have easily fit in my mouth whole.

towed away

i'm one of those overgrown kids who appreciates the sheer fun of watching magic shows. from the huge, elaborate mega-productions to the spontaneous, informal street magic to those colorful kiddie-party entertainments, i am drawn to performances that leave me mesmerized and speculating on the whole process of unfolding a trick. one type of trick which has particularly eluded my logical sense and intellect (which either goes to show how good the trick really is or how embarrassingly inadequate my grey matter works) is the disappearance of huge objects -- such as an elephant or a tiger or simply a long-legged beautiful lady in a sparkling costume. and i'm not referring to those disappearing acts that deal with exotic and colorful dark boxes where one has to step into -- we all know how those work. i'm talking about the simple act of making a huge object vanish -- into thin air.

one local group that's particularly good at doing this (but does not end up getting the same enthusiastic response from its audience) is the city government of makati. every month, hundreds of drivers find themselves wide-eyed and wondering as they stand on the exact empty spot where they last left their vehicles. for those familiar with this heart-stopping phenomenon, they would know to immediately search for chalk markings scribbled on the asphalt as the only clue to where they could retrieve their SUVs and japanese sedans. for first-timers, however, this experience could be truly shocking with fears of a carnapping rushing through them like the flood.

last friday night, my car was towed. before finding that out for myself though, a friend called and interrupted what was a wonderful indian meal i've been craving for for more than a week. "i just saw your car being towed," he said.

i felt incredulous at first. what were the odds of a random friend actually witnessing my car being hauled away from its behind? are you sure, i asked. are you in dela costa too? (i was parked along dela costa avenue.) by asking the latter question, i was hoping he'd reply that he was somewhere far away like quezon city or marikina, in which case he was clearly just mistaken. it wasn't more than 15 minutes since i had parked.

"yes, i'm in dela costa. i'm sure it was your car," he replied. and just for emphasis, he dictated the alphanumerics of my plates.

i was stunned. i remembered parking properly inside the box of a legal slot. in fact, the area i parked in was a usual location for me to park my vehicle whenever i was in the neighborhood. something wasn't right. i thanked him and hung up.

i had to repeat the story to my companions if only to verbalize and convince myself of the news i had just received. no, i didn't feel panicked. neither was i saddened nor afraid. i had actually experienced having my car towed before (about seven years ago) and yes, that did prove to be nerve-wracking for me. but this time, i was simply... confused. i had parked in a legal slot at a proper hour. i was absolutely sure i wasn't violating any law.

coming out of my stupor, i stepped out of the restaurant and marched down the street to verify the injustice and forthcoming inconvenience of all this. i was also secretly hoping that it was just some sick joke my friend decided to throw at me to kick off the weekend. but, no... evidence number one: i saw my friend actually standing across the street waiting for a cab. i waved at him and hollered my thanks. a few meters later, evidence number two: a towing crew was working on a pajero -- that was also parked inside a legal slot! what was going on? i approached the men and asked them why they were ganging up on the vehicle. they said it was illegally parked. i pointed at the very clear paint marks indicating that it was not. they said the vehicle was -- evidence number three -- "facing the wrong direction". WTF?! i recalled my car had also faced the same direction the pajero did. according to the accompanying cop, vehicles had to park facing the direction of traffic of the lane they were in. i mean, i've been aware of this exact rule to exist in some US cities, but this was the first time i was hearing it implemented in metro manila. i started an argument. there are no signs, i said. you have no information campaign. if it's new, you don't even have a grace period. i've been parking here for the past 5 years! i soon realized it was pointless lecturing to a bunch of men who were just doing the dirty job of hauling the cars away. i continued walking to my parking slot to complete evidence number four: my car was missing. i headed back to the restaurant where a bowl of unfinished spicy lamb biryani awaited me.

is it really necessary to tow a car that is parked in a legal slot only because it faced the opposite direction? towing vehicles is indeed a responsibility of the local government, but it has to be enforced properly and with due reason. here are some valid circumstances that would call for the need of a tow truck (and why parking legally but facing the wrong way should not be included!):

1. obstruction of traffic - when a vehicle is parked in such a way that it creates a bottleneck resulting in heavy traffic. this occurs when a vehicle breaks down and is stalled in the middle of the street (can forcibly be towed), or when a vehicle is inconsiderately parked in areas where it shouldn't be parked (no parking signs) because the passage isn't wide enough for other vehicles, or because there is a driveway.

2. hazard and emergency - when a vehicle is parked beside fire hydrants or hospital, police and fire station driveways. self-explanatory enough i suppose. also, when the driver himself requires towing services due to car breakdown, road accident or simply because he's too drunk to drive back home.

3. private property - when private individuals or corporations who have jurisdiction over an area declare the place a no-parking zone.

4. abandonment - when a vehicle has collected all the dust and grime of other vehicles that have passed by it and when the government (or complainant) has "enough reason" to believe that the vehicle has been abandoned completely by the owner.

5. ex-girlfriend's boyfriend's car - when you see the brand new car of your ex-girlfriend's boyfriend parked in an area where there are no other slots for you to park in.

other than that, a ticket should suffice, assuming that drivers have been adequately informed of the implementation of such ordinances. as it is, however, the ticketing system is not in place in metro manila -- or has not been properly executed.

so after dinner, i had a friend drop me off at the impounding yard along yakal street. i had two girl-friends accompany me to the office. i outlined the strategy we were to undertake as i had no intention of paying the full fine (which was a P1,000). since i had a pretty logical argument (on the absurdity of the violation and how it was carried out) in my head, my first approach was to debate with the officials. i wasn't expecting them to actually waive my fine. but i was hoping i could get some sort of a discount if i got my point through. if that didn't work, i told the girls to work up their charms. sometimes pretty faces and sweet talking could outdo logical reasoning. and lastly, if that also did not succeed, i asked the two to get prepared for some girl-on-girl action which should certainly get us off the hook.

as soon as we were presented to the "officer-in-charge" of that evening's towing operations, i demanded to see the regulations booklet. there is no such law, i said. the officer calmly opened an old-looking manual to the page where my violation was listed (and even highlighted in green marker!). i asked when this was put into place. and he said that it had always been in place. i insisted that i had been parking in the same area for the past 5 years with no incident whatsoever so it was not possible that this ordinance had been active for very long. he wouldn't budge or bat an eyelash. ignorance of the law may not hold in court, but it is the government's responsibility to create an awareness of its laws and regulations. i enumerated every single argument i had loaded myself with. i even mockingly asked how many violators they were able to apprehend that evening (for i had seen several chalk markings along the street where i had parked, in addition to the pajero i witnessed being hauled). and they proudly replied they had plenty. to which i responded that it was proof that a majority was not aware of such an ordinance. the city government was cheating its very own citizens. the officer started to get impatient with my bickering. i refused to pay my fine. he then said through clenched teeth that if i had any complaints whatsoever, to forward it to so and so since they had no authority to make any decisions about my concerns... i hate it when they do that. it's unfair. how else could i argue when they flip the cap of responsibility to someone else who's not in the room and I couldn't get in touch with immediately? i failed my first strategy. needless to say, i opted to no longer proceed with the other two approaches we discussed (not that my friends actually agreed to it in the first place). i ended up shelling out the thousand bucks anyway. those buggers.

so, warning to all motorists: aside from ensuring that you park at the right time at the right place, make sure that you also park facing the right direction. and since i can only be sure of this ordinance's existence in makati, it would be best to get used to the same practice in any other city you visit anyway. our metropolitan traffic system is flawed and not transparent. you have so many different cities outdoing each other, on top of having an mmda's futile attempts at governing things centrally.

now if i can only get a magician to make these stupid politicians disappear...

if a man were to kill the murderer of his wife, will he not be convicted just the same?

let's put the middle east crisis into perspective.

say, for example, hizbollah is the ku klux klan (kkk). its members, definitely caucasian, pretty much look like the average bob, carl or bill (without the white masks of course). no doubt, they're part of the kkk because they believe in its principles, twisted as it may seem to the rest of us. they've terrorized before, but hey, for as long as they aren't very active, let the government grant them their liberties to coexist with the rest of peaceful america.

one saturday evening, kkk-member carl (fictional) who lives in little rock, arkansas (non fictional) decides to have some fun... he convinces his friends and fellow kkk-members bob and bill (made up characters) to drive all the way to memphis, tennessee (real place). why memphis -- who really knows? perhaps they've all had a little too much to drink at the local tavern. or maybe the thought of a little adventure outside little rock seemed more exciting than spending the rest of the night with the wife at home while she gossiped about the neighbors, with rollers in her hair.

so the three agree and head east to memphis in an old rusty pickup. after two toilet stops and a purchase of marlboro reds in a 7-11, they finally arrive in the outskirts of memphis.

to make a long story short, the three kidnap two city cops (both black) and torch the patrol car they were in. they drive back to little rock and are not heard from since. (the two cops' names, by the way, are tyler and ray -- both fictional.)

as dawn approaches, the governor of tennessee is awakened by a call from the memphis mayor. he relays what has just happened about two hours ago. according to witnesses, they saw three white men carry the cops into a rusty pickup with arkansas plates. police intelligence suspects they are from the kkk based in little rock. (don't you just love how efficient these intelligence networks are?)

the governor, flustered with the news, gets out of bed and paces around his room. this isn't the first time this has happened, he thinks. and on several instances before, the kkk has created widespread terror among his citizens with their eerie marches, burning effigies, and occasional murder. (but for the sake of this exercise, let's include the following charges: kidnapping citizens, burning government installations across tennessee, bombing public places such as parks and malls.) although these are pretty serious charges, these occurred across twenty years and with several years in between each attack, and so the federal government was never compelled to act harshly against it except label the group as a terrorist organization. but the governor will not stand for that now. he needs to act. and fast. he needs to show that tennessee has muscle. and whoever dares step on him shall feel his wrath.

without delay, tennessee governor sends arkansas governor an email stating that if arkansas does not disarm the kkk within a day, then tennessee will be forced to do it for them. arkansas governor is aghast. for he is powerless in completing this demand before the given deadline. his intelligence network is not as efficient as tennessee's and therefore cannot be relied on identifying key members and officers of the kkk. he implores tennessee to stand down. but the latter would not hear of any reason why they should.

tennessee, then, sends out more emails. this time to the citizenry of little rock. they also distribute flyers and pamphlets and k-mart coupons warning the civilians of little rock to evacuate within the day, for the state of tennessee will soon bombard their city with rockets to finally extinguish the terrors of the kkk. scratching their heads, the little rock folks don't really know where else to go. they've lived in little rock all their life. with their ancestral houses. their shops. their institutions. all the memories and history stored within the bricks and concrete of their city hall, monuments and homes. and so most decide to stay anyway, since they figured tennessee would be bombing kkk infested areas (not that anyone can properly identify where these really are). there are some though who do decide to evacuate... and so they pack up and leave (for unknown refuge). but then the attacks begin...

first the bus depots. then the freeways. afterwards, the airport. tennessee declares it has to destroy all infrastructure that the kkk might use to its advantage. but how are these refugees supposed to leave then? some are forced to return home. others decide to walk until they drop. for as long as they're out of the heat of the attacks. the kkk retaliates. on one occasion, they gather their friends' wives, children and elderly to shelter in a schoolhouse (which of course these people trusted) from which they launched their own rockets. the following day the school house collapses after a series of missiles hit it from tennessee. many innocent people die. tennessee wonders how that can happen. they're sure rockets were launched from that schoolhouse. well. they never really bothered verifying with intelligence in determining who exactly were inside. so, tough luck. so the war escalates. rockets from little rock create havoc in memphis. and missiles from memphis destroy little rock. casualties rise on both sides.

meanwhile, the federal government looks on, pleased that finally tennessee decides to eradicate the terrorists. but for humanitarian reasons, and so as not to be completely condemned by the international community, it sends a high government official to broker a ceasefire between the two states (more of a farce really, but truly serves as a decoy to further delay any moves towards real peace). but arkansas refuses to welcome this official. for it knows well that the federal government has in its power the ability to carry out the ceasefire instantly if it wanted to (by stopping tennessee to attack).

almost a month later, hundreds of fun-loving, fast-food grubbing, peaceful civilians have been killed, both from arkansas and tennessee. and despite tennessee's initial convictions that the way to settle the issue (which we may have forgotten goes back to the kidnapping -- on top of the other previous charges) was how it decided to act, trigger-happy kkk is still very much alive and kicking. and little is still known about the whereabouts of carl or bob or bill, or the state of either tyler or ray.

---

has the world come closer to attaining sustainable peace through a holocaust of innocent civilians (israeli or lebanese)?

do you really believe that this war will eradicate terrorism?
... when a son or daughter of a killed civilian decides to dedicate his life to bring down israel (and the west) because of his loss (oh, looky here, new recruits for al qaeda!)
... when israel's display of might convinces existing terrorists that israel has to be brought down because of its arrogance in the middle east (and you'll never convince arabs to think otherwise)
... when terrorists realize that the way to create division in the world is to bring countries to war (so that sides will be taken as the world is showing now) which hopefully might escalate to new world wars

do you really believe peace can be attained?
... when perhaps hizbollah wanted this to happen from the very beginning in order to obtain the sympathies of its arab neighbors and islam brothers
... when this war can only highlight the chasm that exists between israel and its neighbors
... when the wars in the middle east never ever ended in peace anyway

---

by condemning israel's attacks, it does not mean we agree with what hizbollah or hamas or the palestinians (or whoever) has done to similarly terrorize the israelis.

by condemning israel's attacks, it does not mean we are ignorant of terrorist propaganda. on the other hand, it may simply prove that governments are vulnerable and blindly responding to the silent intentions of these terrorists to awaken violence in the region.

by condemning israel's attacks, it simply means the world expects israel to rise above its (sorry to say) more savage (???) neighbors who are out for blood, and to act accordingly. no other country may have experienced persecution and terror as much as israel has and had (since the birth of its civilization), and it should be very much aware that retaliating at such a scale will not win them peace.

we condemn america's apathetic stance because it is supposed to defend the defenseless, as it claims. while we do not include hizbollah under the list of defenseless people, the lebanese are suffering israel's wrath.

we condemn america's apathetic stance because if this happened within its soil, it would have acted much differently to defend the innocent and save its citizens at the soonest possible time.

we condemn america's apathetic stance because it does not consider the scenarios that brought the region into the crisis (do they think they're still playing the world? or haven't they considered that the terrorists are beginning to move them like pawns?) and is still not considering scenarios that should bring the region to peace. (perhaps america is simply studying its options on how to further take control of the region? by leaving israel to attack hizbollah, america expects iran to soon interfere. once iran interferes, america again has reason to condemn iran and perhaps conduct another iraq invasion. let's de-nuke iran!)

so is iran playing the region or is america still in-charge? we do not really know for certain.

what's for certain is that war is not the answer. call me an idealist. i don't care. as i said before, you can't talk peace and have a gun. you can't teach kids to enjoy signing rockets just because they themselves are victims... we are bringing the world to a culture of revenge, when it should be about justice. if a man were to kill the murderer of his wife (in the states), will he not be convicted just the same?

tig-tatlo po

(tagged by tomatotoes)

3 people who make me laugh: mia, bimbo, vera

3 things I love: creative writing, empty beaches, great conversations

3 things I hate: hypocrites, grandstanders, mongo

3 things on my desk (at home): a postcard from paris, a 3000-page dictionary, a cashbox with little cash

3 things I am doing right now: slacking off, listening to tycho, preparing a shot of gin

3 things I want to do before I die: skydive, visit tibet, fly a plane

3 things I can do: change a flat tire, cook a decent meal, fold t-shirts

3 ways to describe my personality: open, easy-going, extroverted

3 things people might not know about me: i sleepwalk, i fear flying cockroaches, the magic 3 (that's all i can say. an appropriate number for this survey, yes? hahaha.)

3 things I think you should listen to: thomas newman, bossa nova, waves crashing on the beach

3 things I don't think you should listen to ever: promises made by politicians, britney spears, george w bush

3 of my absolute favorite foods: roast beef, steamed lobster, ebi tempura

3 things I'd like to learn: bartending, mandarin, the kfc original recipe

3 beverages I drink regularly: water, coffee, beer

3 shows I watched when I was a child: uncle bob's lucky seven club, voltes v, sesame street

3 people I tag to do this crap: vera, tatin and dj