Toilet paper


It explains his tense demeanor and his constantly constipated countenance. We can commiserate with his discomfort and perhaps his virtual need for tissue paper of any sort on hand and within reach from his uncomfortable seat at the Senate. We would look just as similarly constipated, if not seriously disturbed, if every endeavor we embarked on were a senseless failure.

Like the self-indulgent born losers of the Liberal Party (LP) who rally to his call, their own toilet paper must be yellow-stained with disgusting discharges — an apt description of the fake papers recently passed off as a contract signed between the Philippines and China on exploration and profit-sharing activities.

The irony, if not absurdity, isn’t lost on the public that the failed putschist who can’t find a copy of his own application for amnesty would conveniently have on hand a copy of high-level State documents he has no business possessing. Debunked as a bogus contract, it’s now filed among the Antonio Trillanes library stacked with other fake or non-existent documents backing all his previous false claims.

Paper, or the Pilipino papel, has double entendres in the local lexicon. One is to draw attention to oneself. Both apply to Trillanes’ history of producing falsified papers from when he was recruited as a desperate counterfoil against the impending victory of an unlikely presidential candidate running against the LP’s all-powerful electoral machine.

To the dismay of the losing LP standard bearer, Trillanes was no Kamikaze or “Divine Wind.” Just hot air.

Toilet paper squares are packaged to be dispensed sequentially. Trillanes and questionable or tainted documentation have a long history. Allow us to review the sheets Trillanes has pulled from his personal roll.

In the recent constitutional nullification of an ill-advised amnesty granted him by his political benefactor, we now realize he may neither have filed the requisite application papers, much less a documented deposition admitting to his crimes. Absent those the public is left to deduce from nothing save for hearsay and inferences. Like other documents he pulls from thin air these papers may or may not exist.

In 2016, when it had become inevitable that Rodrigo Duterte would be the next President, in an act of desperation Trillanes accused Duterte and subsequently brandished pieces of paper showing Duterte had P2.2 billion from 2006 to 2015, with one showing a P193 million transaction in 2013. He also claimed his papers showed from P40 to P50 million entered Duterte’s bank accounts “every April to October” totaling P118 million.

The contents of his papers were proven false. An official statement from the bank showed a balance of P17,668 as of March 2015, increasing to P27,024.09 by April. The official bank numbers were nowhere near the Trillanes totals.

What might not be false, however, are deposit certificates in a number of secret offshore accounts alleged to be Trillanes’. The veracity of those is based on vetted intelligence reports. Rather than directly deny the report, he defended himself by deflecting the issue to similar accounts held by an LP senator accused of trafficking in illegal drugs. Trillanes also subsequently attacked those he thinks provided the exposé on his offshore deposits.

Most of the foregoing fiascos were intended to harm the President. Trillanes’ bogus papers on the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Cooperation on Oil and Gas Development between the Philippines and China, however, undermine us all and attempt to sabotage the trust established between two nations.

Note falsehoods his bogus papers foist.

The Trillanes papers declare a consummated and settled agreement “to conduct joint oil and gas exploration” in parts of the West Philippine Sea.

The real and official document is merely an “agreement to agree” MoU that “does not create rights or obligations under international or domestic law.”

The difference is critical. An MoU is not a contract which Trillanes’ paper purports to be. The MoU offers diplomatic legroom and economic flexibility. Trillanes’ does not. His bogus provision on “outcome sharing” exposes the Philippines to disputes on the operational protocols of a prospective agreement.

Designed to sabotage our international standing, Trillanes’ documents, through its timed release and in its objectives, are no different from his past acts of betrayal and the toilet paper he constantly rolls out.

What are your thoughts?

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here