El Embarque (Himno a la Flota de Magallanes)

No hay ninguna descripción de la foto disponible.

EL EMBARQUE
(Himno a la Flota de Magallanes)

–José Rizal–

          En bello día
Cuando radiante
Febo en Levante
Feliz brilló,
En Barrameda
Con gran contento
El movimiento
Doquier reinó.

          Es que en las playas
Las carabelas
Hinchan las velas
Y a partir van;
Y un mundo ignoto,
Nobles guerreros
Con sus aceros
Conquistarán.

          Y todo es júbilo,
Todo alegría
Y bizarría
En la ciudad;
Doquier resuenan
Roncos rumores
De los tambores
Con majestad.

          Mil y mil salvas
Hace a las naves
Con ecos graves
Ronco cañón;
Y a los soldados
El pueblo hispano
Saluda ufano
Con affección.

          ¡Adiós!, les dice,
Hijos amados,
Bravos soldados
Del patrio hogar;
Ceñid de glorias
A nuestra España,
En la campaña
De ignoto mar.

          Mientras se alejan
Al suave aliento
De fresco viento
Con emoción;
Todos bendicen
Con vos piadosa
Tan gloriosa
Heróica acción.

          Saluda el pueblo
Por ves postrera
A la bandera
De Magallán,
Que lleva el rumbo
Al océano
Do ruge insano
El huracán.

5 de diciembre de 1875.

THE EMBARKATION
(Hymn to Magellan’s Fleet)

–José Rizal–

          On fair day
When radiant
Phoebus in the East
Happily shone,
In Barrameda
With great contentment
Movement
Reigned everywhere.

           ‘This because on the shores
The caravels
Swell their sails
And shall depart;
And an unknown world
Noble warriors
With their steel
Shall conquer.

          And all is jubilation,
All happiness
And gallantry
In the city;
Everywhere reverberate
Hoarse sounds
Of the drums
With majesty.

          Thousands and thousands of salvos
Greet vessels
With echoes grave,
Of hoarse cannon,
And to the soldiers
The Spanish people
Render proud salute
With affection.

          Adieu, she tells them,
Beloved sons,
Brave soldiers
Of the native home;
With glories crown
Our Spain,
In the campaign
On sea unknown.

          As they sail away
To the gentle breath
Of the fresh wind
With emotion,
All bless
With pious voice
So glorious
Heroic action.

          The people salute
For the last time,
The flag
Of Magellan,
That is enroute
To the ocean
Where rages insane
The hurricane.

(English translation by Alfredo S. Veloso)

Inauguration of the historic Alberto Mansion

La imagen puede contener: texto

The much-awaited opening of the Historic Alberto Mansion is on Friday! Guest of honor and speaker is H.E., Vice President Leni Robredo. Everyone is invited to attend and witness the culmination of a 10-year battle for our local heritage.
Bryan Jason Borja
(Head of the Biñan City Culture, History, Arts, and Tourism Office)

¡Follow me on FacebookTwitter, and Instagram!

Spanish and the Filipino Identity

The blogpost that I wrote about Andrés Bonifacio received too much backlash (even from a writer friend whom I thought has already freed herself from Hispanophobia). But it was to be expected because the Supremo has been highly revered for many decades as a freedom fighter who went up against “tyrannical Spain”. In the said blogpost, I also took the opportunity to include how Spain virtually created our country, that we were united under one language which is Spanish. That line also triggered another emotional comment from a well-known academic whom I also thought to know better than I do.

No, they’re not united under one language!” he said.

Time and again, I have always contended that the Spanish language is the basis and the foundation of our Filipino National Identity. Why? Because it is the language that united our various ethnolinguistic groups, forming themselves into one “Filipino nation”. To begin with, one must first understand that the term Filipino is merely a concept; there is no such thing as a Filipino race because our country, even up to modern times, is made up of several “races” or “tribes” (anthropologist Jesús Peralta would rather call them ethnolinguistic groups) such as the Tagalog, Cebuano, Bicolano, etc. Secondly, the early history of our country, much of it written in Spanish, serves as basis for my views. In our history under Spanish rule, these tribes became united under one umbrella group which we now call FILIPINO. To make a long story short, our identity was forged during the more than 300 years of Spanish rule, and not before nor after it. There were no Filipinos yet before the Spanish advent. And even if we were not colonized by the US, our identity was already in existence — created, completed. It was already intact. Buó ná ang paguiguing Filipino natin bago pa man tayo sinugod at sinacop ng Estados Unidos de América. There was nothing more to add to it.

La imagen puede contener: 6 personas, personas sentadas

A typical Filipino family during the Spanish times (photo supplied by the Biblioteca Nacional de España to ABC).

But to make it more clear, the Filipino Identity is the product of the Filipino State that began to exist in Spanish on 24 June 1571. The Filipino State was founded together with Manila on that same date, with the government having Spanish as its official language. Since then, the tedious process of cultural amalgamation among the more than 170 tribes / ethnolinguistic groups (particularly those who accepted the King of Spain as their rightful sovereign during the Manila synod of 1599) began. Cultural dissemination (which included Christianization and the Humanities) from the West assisted in this long process.

We Filipinos are essentially Hispanic —have become Hispanic— by virtue of History and Culture. And even Faith. And the Spanish language, more particularly its literature as embodied by the works of Rizal, del Pilar, Mabini, Guerrero, Paterno, Apóstol, Balmori, Bernabé, etc., proved to be the unifying thread in this development. No wonder former Senator Recto wrote that “el español ya es cosa nuestra, propia, sangre de nuestra sangre, y carne de nuestra carne“.

At this point, I should say that realizing the importance of our national identity will give us more dignity and nobility than this so-called “Pinoy Pride” that we have been harping around since the arrival of social media in our country. Let me just add that because of the Spanish language, together with the Culture and Faith it brought with it, I now know where I stand in the midst of the ongoing onslaught of neocolonization/globalization. 😉

It is, therefore, wrong and anachronistic to say that Islam arrived in our country first. What country? As mentioned above, there was no Filipinas yet when the first Muslim scholars, traders, and imams arrived. And they were not scattered all throughout. They were only in limited places such as those very few areas in Mindanáo. Even Manila wasn’t a practicing Muslim enclave (they were to some extent converted, but those who converted them did not stay long enough, unlike the Spanish friars who remained here and died with the natives). Also, and quite obviously, Islam did not unite our disunited tribes (that was one of the greatest errors of the Arab missionaries). Because if they did, then we wouldn’t have those heritage churches and bahay na bató that we marvel at today. Besides (then as now), the Moros were into looting and pillaging towns and kidnapping non-Muslims (most especially the Visayans) for their slave trade.

The foregoing is in no way anti-Islam but simply history. They really did it. And up to now, the Abu Sayyaf is still continuing that “legacy”.

To cap this off: by not using Spanish, by not incorporating it to our daily lives, we are in effect betraying Rizal and those many other great personas from that bygone glorious past who we have either enshrined or accepted as our national heroes. Much of our country’s (true) history is written in that language. Moreover, it is one of the most widely spoken languages all over the globe and is even the second most spoken language in neocolonialist United States of América. Indeed, the Spanish language opens up not just a gateway to appreciate our oft-misunderstood past but also a path towards the opening of new trade horizons with more than a dozen Spanish-speaking countries that will surely enliven our economy.

Follow me on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram!

Today in Filipino History: The Battle of Tirad Pass

TODAY IN FILIPINO HISTORY — 2 December 1899: The Battle of Tirad Pass took place, almost wiping out all the troops under General Gregorio del Pilar who himself perished in the said battle. Eight out of sixty Filipinos survived the ordeal while only two out of more than three hundred US WASP invaders were killed in the lopsided battle.

GREGORIO DEL PILAR

One of General Goyo’s men saw him killed instantly by a sniper’s bullet — but that was due to his carelessness!

“If the ancient Greeks had their valiant King Leonidas and the Battle of Thermopylae, Filipinos have their General Gregorio del Pilar and the Battle of Tirad Pass,” wrote historian Jesús C. Guzon in the book “Eminent Filipinos” published by the National Historical Commission (now the National Historical Commission of the Philippines) in 1965. But with regard to his comparison of King Leonidas to the boy general, National Artist for Literature and historian extraordinaire Nick Joaquín wrote the following in his controversial “A Question of Heroes“:

“The wrong thing to do about Tirad Pass is invoke Leonidas and Thermopylae, because we would be invoking to our hurt another people fatally flawed with the inability to unite and organize. Besides, the parallel with Leonidas, king of the Spartans, is neither exact nor flattering: it was not Aguinaldo who fell at Tirad. Moreover, the annals of war show that in mountain warfare, especially in actions on a mountain pass, the advantage is with the defender, not the invader, and victory must be expected from the defender.”

Nick went on by citing several other historic mountain battles that happened in other parts of the globe. And he showed that in all those mountain battles, it was the defenders who always won. There was this particular case, for instance, that happened in World War II when the British took two years to dislodge the Japanese army from the mountains of Burma.

“But Tirad Pass was taken in six hours.

“There were, you will say, only 60 men to defend it. Precisely. And that was the stupidity. Our improvidence always forces us in the end to improvise, when it’s too late even to improvise. We will not plan ahead, we will just muddle through, and then at the last hour we send men to die for our blunders, our lack of foresight. If there were any justice, it’s Aguinaldo, it’s Mabini, who should have perished on Tirad. But so that Aguinaldo can flee in futile flight, 60 men are sent to pay with their lives for the monstrous botch he has made of the Revolution. And now we read Tirad as a symbol of heroism, not stupidity.

“A few more Tirads and we’ll be the most heroic people in extinction.”

PASO DE TIRAD

Tirad Pass: Thermopylae it is not.

And according to the diary of Telésforo Carrasco, a Spaniard enlisted in President Emilio Aguinaldo’s runaway army, the boy general, who in stories was said to have died heroically and fighting to the last bullet, died due to his own carelessness:

“At dawn we saw the enemy climbing the slope and moments later the firing began in the first entrenchment, which was under Lieutenant Braulio. At around nine in the morning two Igorots climbed to the peak and told the general that the Americans had suffered losses at the first entrenchment and could not advance. Heartened by the news, the general decided that we were to descend in his company and take part in the combat.

“This we did and an hour later found ourselves where nine soldiers were defending the left flank of the mountain in the second entrenchment. Hardly had we got there when we saw the Americans climbing up, only fifteen meters away, whereupon the soldiers started firing again.

“The general could not see the enemy because of the cogon grass and he ordered a halt to the firing. At that moment I was handling him a carbine and warning him that the Americans were directing their fire at him and that he should crouch down because his life was in danger — and that moment he was hit by a bullet in the neck that caused instant death.”

But this stupidity described by Nick was just the tip of the iceberg. He went on to say that Goyo del Pilar was actually one of Aguinaldo’s high-ranking hatchetmen. Murdered under General Goyo’s helm were the allies of the fallen General Antonio Luna such as the Bernal Brothers (Manuel and José). And some of Luna’s staff were harassed, tortured, and ordered arrested.

I wonder most of the time what the word heroism really means in this country. Marami tayong mga bayani na hindí namán dapat tinítiñgalà. What should be the attributes of a true national hero? But to be fair, while it can be said that Goyo del Pilar started out as villainous —if the hatchetman tag was indeed true—, we might as well still regard him as a hero for standing his ground against the US WASP invaders, even if the circumstances surrounding his death and his army’s loss were limned with “stupidity” (to borrow Nick’s description).

As an ardent observer of Filipino History, there is one shocking fact that I have learned: countless villains in this country are regarded as heroes, and the integrity of the true heroes of the nation is perpetually besmirched. This will not stop until we have freed ourselves from the fetters of neocolonialism and the blind Hispanophobic rage that we have against our glorious past.

Follow me on FacebookTwitter, and Instagram!

What makes a hero?

Many years ago, while rummaging through costly books in one popular bookstore, I found for the first time Dr. Onofre Córpuz’s famous work, “The Roots of the Filipino Nation”. I didn’t have money then, so I just leafed through the pages. On page 223 (of volume II), I found a commentary of his about the “Kataas-taasang, Kagalang-galangang Katipunan ng̃ mg̃á Anak ng̃ Bayan“, popularly known as the Katipunan. On that page, Córpuz wrote that this time-honored “revolutionary group” was “the first active embodiment of the Christian Filipino nation”.

During that time, I had just reconverted to the Catholic Church (after a couple of years toying around with godlessness and other “isms”). My zeal back then towards the faith of my forefathers was freshly strong, and so I immediately sensed —with much chagrin— that there was something disturbingly wrong with Dr. Córpuz’s assertion. I asked myself, how could someone like him, a giant in the academe, had written something as incomprehensible as the Katipunan embodying a Christian nation when that group was an offshoot of Freemasonry? As many Dan-Brown-educated kids should know by now, Freemasonry is the ancient enemy of the Church. As a Christian student of history, I was deeply intrigued toward the extent of the late Dr. Córpuz’s knowledge about the role of Freemasonry during those tumultuous final years of our country’s history under Spain. But was Dr. Córpuz really unaware of the Katipunan’s Masonic roots as well as its motives? I find it hard to believe that. Or did he leave that fact out conveniently because he was a Freemason himself, or perhaps its sympathizer? But if he was, wouldn’t it still be ridiculous for a Mason like him to say that a violent group who tortured and chopped off the heads of friars just because they were Spaniards embodied the Christian Filipino nation?

To those who are still unaware, Freemasonry has been condemned numerous times by the Catholic Church. To my knowledge, there had been at least 24 papal pronouncements regarding this matter (perhaps the most famous was Pope Leo XIII’s papal encyclical  “Humanum Genus” which was released in 1884). As one of the best academicians our country ever had, it strikes me as odd as to why Dr. Córpuz had failed to emphasize the Masonic origins of the Katipunan in that controversial conclusion of his. A little research will show that the Katipunan’s third and final Supremo, Andrés Bonifacio (you read that right: he wasn’t the first), joined the Logia Taliba (No. 165) and from there imbibed his radical and anti-friar ideas. Bonifacio also joined Rizal’s Liga Filipina in 1892. The group was in fact a Masonic lodge in the making (or was it already?). These organizations, not to mention their members, were hardly Christian at all, if we are to view them from Catholic lenses.

La imagen puede contener: una persona

After the failure of the Liga Filipina and the arrest and deportation of Rizal to Dapitan, the campaign for peaceful reforms had hit the glass ceiling. Thus, an agitated and disenchanted Marcelo H. del Pilar, himself a high-ranking Mason and a rabid propagandista who had been on self-exile in Spain for years, wrote to his brother-in-law Deodato Arellano and urged the latter to form a much more radical and violent group to finally end Spain’s reign in Filipinas. Arellano thus gathered other members of the beleaguered Liga to form the Katipunan (yes, it was Arellano, and not Bonifacio, who founded the Katipunan as instigated by del Pilar).

When government forces discovered the existence of the Katipunan in late 1896, what happened next was bloodshed and the senseless killing and torture of innocent Spanish friars and other individuals who went against the Katipuneros’ way. Did ordinary civilians welcome the “revolution” participated in mostly by Tagálogs? No they didn’t. For most Filipinos living far from where the action was, life went on. There was no national sentiment that supported the Katipunan rebellion against Spain (see “One Woman’s Liberating: The Life and Career of Estefanía Aldaba-Lim” by Nick Joaquín).

It should be noted in the preceding paragraph that the Katipunan was discovered by accident. Keep in mind that it was an underground organization. Simply put, the Katipunan was an ILLEGAL ASSOCIATION no matter how hard one tries to paint it with dainty colors of patriotism and love of country. One might say that it had lofty ideals of freedom and nationhood, thus excusing it from illegalities. But so does the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and the Abu Sayyaf who try to picture themselves as the martyrs of their delusional Bangsamoro. Should we consider them heroes too?

Mimicking the Katipunan’s belligerence towards lawful society, Senator Antonio “Sonny” Trillanes IV and his Samahang Magdalo did the same thing twice in the past against the administration of then President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. Should we, therefore, erect monuments to Trillanes as well and consider his rebellious friends as the new Katipuneros? After all, they fought corruption and injustice, didn’t they?

Seeing now that the Katipunan was a bastard child of Freemasonry, the ancient enemy of the Christian religion, how in the world did Dr. Córpuz come up with the idea that the Katipunan was the first active embodiment of the Christian Filipino nation? The Katipuneros made incisions on their arms to sign membership papers using their own blood. They swore loyalty to the Katipunan in front of a human skull. They swore to kill even members of their families for the sake of the Katipunan’s secrecy. Where is Christianity in all that?

This is not to say that Bonifacio was an evil man; only God can judge whether he was or not in spite of the many friars he had shamed and ordered tortured and killed, and churches burned and desecrated. Going beyond the rebellion, we will never know much about his character for he was not as chronicled as Rizal. For all we know, Bonifacio could have been a virtuous man. But that is not the point. Whatever personal distinction he may have had was not the reason why we now have several monuments for him, nor was it the reason why we commemorate his birthday every November 30th.

On 16 February 1921, the Philippine Legislature, under the auspices of US Governor-General Francis Burton Harrison, enacted Act No. 2946 making November 30 of each year a legal holiday to commemorate the birth of Bonifacio. The holiday has since been known as Bonifacio Day, ultimately making the Katipunan a Filipino national hero.

But in view of the foregoing Masonic events surrounding Bonifacio and the Katipunan, especially from the lens of a Christian observer, should a Catholic still consider him a hero?

It is, of course, difficult to accept that Bonifacio should be removed from our pantheon of heroes. After all, we’ve been hearing about him even before we started going to school (I still remember clearly how my dear paternal grandmother —may she rest in peace— was teaching me how to recite that “Andrés Bonifacio / hatapang hatáo” mock poem when I was around three years old so that it would evoke in her a hearty laugh!). But isn’t it about time that we all start to think on our own instead of relying on years of spoon-fed artificial food? You will say, of course, that the Katipunan was formed as a reaction towards Spanish tyranny. But what tyranny to be exact? I’ve been hearing about this tyranny all my life yet no one could still point out accurately what exactly it was all about. What’s always been taught to us are hazy and hasty generalizations. Is there tyranny in the towns that Spain created for us? Was Spain tyrannical when it shipped to our country countless items (tomato, calendar, piano, wheat, books, polo, pantalón, chico, bougainvillea, violin, watermelon, guava, printing press, etc.) and concepts (chivalry, palabra de honor, philosophy, law, land ownership, Western art, age/birthday, Christianity, etc) that have made us what we are today — as Filipinos? We adore old mementos from our past (bahay na bató, traditions, etc.) and decry their dwindling number and alarming disappearance. But such mementos were from the hated Spanish period. So why bother saving and conserving them if they all come from such a tyrannical era?

We all miss our grandfathers who used to bring us to Church on Sundays and carry us on their shoulders so that we’d be able to see saints’ processions from right above a thick crowd; we all miss our grandmothers who never tire praying the rosary day and night. All these are vestiges from that tyrannical period. Why bother missing them at all?

Spain virtually created this country. We wouldn’t be having Luzón, Visayas, and Mindanáo today if not for Spain. What kind of tyranny is that? Numerous tribes (the politically correct will tell me it should be called ethnolinguistic instead) such as the Tagálogs, the Visayans, the Bicolanos, etc. were united under one language (Spanish), under one government, under one faith (Roman Catholicism) so as to keep us one, so that we will no longer be at war against each other. We were given schools (escuelas pías, Universidad de Santo Tomás, etc.). Pray, tell, where is the tyranny in that?

This is not to say that all Spanish officials and even friars during the Empire days were all good and just. No, of course not. But that is not the point. The point here is what untold promises did Freemasonry inspire upon Rizal and del Pilar to rebel, and for Bonifacio and his band of Katipuneros to rise against civil society. “For the sake of freedom”, is the usual answer. But what freedom did violence bring? No wonder the late Fidel Castro was both hated and loved by his people. The support for and against him is heavily polarized to this day.

We have had so much distrust towards our government. From Ferdinand Marcos all the way to President Rodrigo Duterte. Shouldn’t we all follow the Katipuneros of old and organize stealth groups to undermine the present government, all for the sake of freedom?

If I will use the hashtag #NotAHero, it would be appropriate to attach it to that Masonically misled man from Tondo whose birthday we methodically commemorate today, because instead of thinking something that would have truly helped and uplifted the lives of the unfortunate Filipino masses of his time —by establishing something such as the Kadiwa Public Market, for instance— Bonifacio brought instead bloodshed which led not only to his own death but also to the downfall of what Spain had strongly forged for more than three centuries.

And if I may add: no, he was not our country’s first president. Don’t even start with me.

So what makes a hero? ¿Mag-rebelde ca lang, bayani ca na caagád? At capág nasa poder ca at nilabanan mo ang isáng rebelión, ¿masamá ca ná?

Follow me on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram!

Serendipity in ketchup

Yesterday afternoon, I was strolling along María Orosa Street where the Court of Appeals is located. That Ermiteño street was named after a Filipina food technologist and chemist from Taal, Batangas who invented banana ketchup. Little did I know that yesterday was the eve of her birthday. How serendipitous!

I still prefer tomato ketchup, though. 😂✌️

Google honors María Orosa e Ylagan today on her birth anniversary (29 November 1893).

Ayer por la tarde, paseaba por la calle María Orosa donde se encuentra el Tribunal de Apelaciones. Esa calle ermiteña lleva el nombre de una química filipina que es también una tecnóloga de alimentos de Taal, Batangas quien inventó el kétchup de plátano. Poco sabía yo que ayer era la víspera de su cumpleaños. ¡Qué casualidad!

Sin embargo, todavía prefiero el kétchup de tomate. 😂✌️

¡Síganme en FacebookTwitter, e Instagram!

Hoy en la Historia de Filipinas: el establecimiento de la República Cantonal de Negros

HOY EN LA HISTORIA DE FILIPINAS: 27 de noviembre de 1898 — Los libertadores de la Isla de Negros se reunieron en Bacólod para promulgar una constitución y establecer la República Cantonal de Negros tras la rendición incondicional del pueblo el 6 de noviembre de 1898 por las autoridades españolas a los Negrenses.

Previamente, el 3 de noviembre de 1898, los líderes rebeldes de la Isla de Negros planeaban rebelarse contra las autoridades españolas encabezado por el gobernador político-militar, el Coronel Isidro de Castro. El levantamiento comenzó dos días después, el 5 de noviembre.

Se decía que los revolucionarios encabezados por el General Juan Araneta (del pueblo de Bago) y el General Aniceto Lacson (del pueblo de Talísay) llevaban armas falsas compuestas de rifles tallados en hojas de palma y cañones de esteras de bambú enrolladas pintadas de negro. Utilizaron estas armas falsas para asustar a sus enemigos, y la guerra psicológica funcionó.

Es por eso que los Negrenses celebran la derrota de Negros cada esa fecha, llamándola como “Cinco de Noviembre“.

No hay ninguna descripción de la foto disponible.

La bandera oficial de la revuelta negrense. Esta bandera se cambiaría cuando se estableciera la República Cantonal de Negros.

Por la tarde del 6 de noviembre, el Coronel de Castro y sus tropas gubernamentales (tanto europeas como nativas) entregaron incondicionalmente la ciudad y sus defensas. Firmó también el Acta de Capitulación el mismo día.

Los siguientes fueron elegidos como funcionarios de la nueva república:

Aniceto Lacson Presidente (sólo de Negros Occidental)
Demetrio Larena Presidente (sólo de Negros Oriental)
José Ruiz de Luzuriaga Presidente de la Asamblea Constitucional
Eusebio Luzuriaga Secretario del Tesoro
Simeón Lizares Secretario del Interior
Nicolás Gólez Secretario de las Obras Públicas
Agustín Amenábar Secretario de la Agricultura y Comercio
Juan Araneta Secretario de Guerra
Antonio Ledesma Jayme Secretario de Justicia
Melecio Severino Gobernador Civil
La imagen puede contener: una persona

Señor Don Aniceto Lacson y Ledesma, el presidente de la efímera República Cantonal de Negros.

 

El 27 del del mismo mes, la Cámara de Diputados se reunió en Bacólod y declaró el establecimiento de la República Cantonal de Negros. La Cámara de Diputados actuó como una Asamblea Constituyente para redactar una constitución. Finalmente, la constitución propuesta de la República Federal de Negros no se implementó. El 1 de enero de 1899, después de la breve insurrección de la Isla de Negros en noviembre del año anterior, la República Federal de Negros fue proclamada como un estado soberano o un cantón con dos provincias.

No hay ninguna descripción de la foto disponible.

La bandera de la República Cantonal de Negros se basa en la bandera del Presidente Aguinaldo.

En efecto, Negros se convirtió en un país aparte. La república también ha reunida la isla que fue separada en dos (Negros Oriental y Negros Occidental) en 1890. Pero el 4 marzo de 1899, los invasores estadounidenses se disolvió la república, y Negros volvió a ser parte de Filipinas.

¡Síganme en Facebook, Twitter, e Instagram!