Previous posts in this discussion:
PostOur First History Quiz Response, and a New Quiz (Bienvenido Macario, USA, 07/06/14 4:17 am)
One of the quotes cited in Ángel Viñas's history quiz might be from Richard M. Nixon, when he was discussing the need for the European Common Market (ECM).
In those quotes, the operative word is "economic." The inoperative word is "political." This is the major difference between the ECM and the EU. The EU's primary concern is democratic control over its members. Unfortunately, a democratic process does not guarantee the election of the best leaders appropriate to Western Europe's situation.
Now if I may, I'd like to give a quiz based on an obscure fact. Attached is a list of donors to the victims of Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines. The numbers are provided by the UN.
1) Name two countries that surprisingly did not give a penny.
2) Of those two countries, name that country that instead sent medical teams and relief workers but did not give a penny.
3) Bonus question: Why do you think these or this country did not give a penny?
See: Who's Giving to the Philippines--and Who Isn't
by Brandy Zadrozny, Nov 18, 2013
JE comments: This morning I realized that I don't know the answer to Ángel Viñas's history quiz! So I asked him off-line for a few hints. Ángel hasn't written back yet, but I'm pretty sure it isn't Richard Nixon, although there's something very uncanny about Bienvenido Macario's response...
As for the Typhoon Haiyan quiz, I'll venture some guesses:
1. China? (Admittedly, Bienvenido already telegraphed this answer.) I have no idea about the second one, but looking ahead to Question 2, I'll say Cuba.
2. See #1. Cuba? Human capital is about the only thing the Cubans can give, although they usually prefer to "rent out" their medical teams.
3. China and Philippines are in a territorial dispute over maritime rights and off-sea oil and gas fields. (?)
From the above table, I'm surprised that the Vatican gave only $150,000. That's rather miserly for Asia's largest Catholic country (and the third largest in the world, after Mexico and Brazil).
So WAISers: we have three quizzes in the works. Need a refresher? Here's Ángel's post from yesterday:
Answers to WAIS Quiz(zes)
(Bienvenido Macario, USA
07/09/14 7:18 AM)
With regards to the Typhoon Haiyan donors (see my post of 6 July) almost immediately China was heavily criticized for contributing only $1,000. A lot of promises came from China, but everyone knew they were not going to give another penny.
The country that never gave a pfennig but sent a medical team, relief workers and supplies is Germany. The other country to my knowledge that never gave a franc or sent a team was France.
Talking about global competition in the aftermath of the relief and reconstruction efforts, the UK wasn't only the biggest donor in the Philippines, but offered to help in the rehabilitation of the disaster areas.
But unlike the US that spends American taxpayers' money like drunken sailors, the UK is "competitive."
The Philippines got so used to the loose money policy of the World Bank, IMF and the UN and thought the British are easy picking. The British are the best colonizers. Americans do not stay long enough to make a lasting difference. Just look at Afghanistan and Iraq.
Now look at former British colonies like Singapore and Hong Kong. Like the Philippines, their respective economies are dominated by ethnic Chinese. Even Canada, Australia and New Zealand are former British colonies. The best example of course is the US, which started with the 13 British colonies.
JE comments: Bienvenido Macario is perhaps the biggest Anglophile in WAISworld. I fondly recall our time together in Torquay, which was almost exactly three years ago (31 July 2011).
But...were the British the best colonizers? They had undeniable success stories (US, Canada, Australia, Singapore), but how about Zimbabwe, Pakistan, and Iraq?
New topic: The weekend's WAIS quizzes didn't generate much interest. I'm disappointed; have WAISers been too busy watching soccer? (David Duggan gets the Good Sport award for his entry.) In addition to Bienvenido's quiz on typhoon relief, here's the answer to my Declaration of Independence question: On July 8th, 1776 (238 years and one day ago), John Nixon read the Declaration to an assembled crowd at the Pennsylvania State House, Philadelphia. Nixon is best remembered as the financier who founded the Bank of Pennsylvania and later the Bank of North America. He is not to be confused with his contemporary, John Nixon of Massachusetts, an officer in Washington's Continental Army. I'm curious if either is an ancestor of Richard Milhous.
I'm not going to reveal the answer to Ángel Viñas's quiz on European union, primarily because I don't know it! Here, once again, is the link. And Ángel: when you get the chance, please send me the answer. In the meantime, I await your educated guesses. WAIS trinkets go to the winner!
WAIS Quote Quiz: A Hint...
(Edward Jajko, USA
07/10/14 9:56 AM)
With reference to Ángel Viñas' s four-question quiz of July 5th on the EU, to which I have no answers, can he tell the world of WAIS if those statements were made originally in English?
JE comments: Ángel gave me the answer, and I'm pleased to announce that my hunch was almost (but not quite) correct. But I'll give WAISers 48 hours to send their guesses. In response to Ed Jajko's question, the answer is no: the original statements were not made in English.
Here, once again, is the quiz:
- John Nixon and Richard Nixon (Randy Black, USA 07/10/14 10:06 AM)
To answer John Eipper's question (9 July) as to whether or not John Nixon, who read the Declaration of Independence on 8 July 1776, was a relation to President Richard M. Nixon a few centuries later, I turned to the Internet.
John Nixon's father was a wealthy shipping merchant and owner of a wharf on the Delaware River. He was coincidentally named Richard Nixon. This is from the archives of the University of Pennsylvania.
Additionally, John Nixon was a trustee of the College and Academy of Philadelphia, which united with the University of the State of Pennsylvania to form the University of Pennsylvania.
Colonel John Nixon saw action during the Revolution at the Battles of Trenton and Princeton and commanded the defenses of the Delaware at Fort Island and elsewhere. He appears to have been super-wealthy before and after the Revolution. He was president of the Bank of North America, the nation's first national bank. He died in 1808.
There is apparently no connection between the John Nixon of 1776 and President Richard Nixon of California.
I used Ancestry.com, which showed President Nixon's ancestors under the Nixon name back to the 1780s and stopped with George Nixon of Delaware (1784-1863). It seems unlikely that those Nixons might be related, as the President's lineage story is one of a very humble, far less than wealthy bunch of folk.
The John Nixon story seems to be one of immense wealth.
JE comments: A big thanks to Randy Black for the fine Internet work. I had assumed there was no relation, as the Independence Hall docents would be eager to point out any kinship, no matter how distant.
Still, the Delaware/Pennsylvania (and possibly Quaker) connection makes you wonder. Time to check the DNA, and call Geraldo...
- More Monetary Shenanigans in Philippines (Bienvenido Macario, USA 07/30/14 1:05 AM)
I never gave a full answer to the "bonus" question posted earlier this month, namely, why do you think certain countries (Germany and France) did not give a penny to the Philippines Typhoon Haiyan relief?
Germany didn't give a penny probably because Marcos's heirs Irene Marcos-Araneta and husband Greggy Araneta reportedly tried to transfer at least $13.2 billion from the Union Bank of Switzerland (UBS) Account no. 885931, into a new account with Deutsche Bank at Koenigsallee 54, Dusseldorf, in February 2001. The account number Deustche Bank assigned was 7690779. The Marcos couple tried to negotiate for several day visiting the bank five times from February 12 to 20, 2001. An anti-money laundering task force was watching them.
In the meantime in March 2001, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo tried to deposit $32 billion in various US banks. Again unaware of strict banking laws and perhaps stretching diplomatic immunity or substituting the deposit for an economic program that Arroyo doesn't really have, she was shocked when the American banks surrendered the $32 billion to Federal authorities.
Of course there is the 25 trillion cubic meters of natural gas reserves in the Spratlys areas alone, plus all the geothermal resources areas in the Philippines that my late wife explored. These have no been taken over by ethnic Chinese and ethnic Spaniards.
There is also the Sabah claim that Martin Storey and I discussed in September 2002.
But my main claim is the pre-war Philippine treasury asset of "some two million dollars in gold bullion and $360,000 in silver."
--20 tons of gold bars and silver pesos
--319 40-pound gold bars and 630 bags each containing 1,000 silver pesos.
These were shipped to San Francisco in the ballast tanks of the submarine USS Trout. The Trout reached Pearl Harbor on 3 March 1942, the submarine transferred her valuable ballast to the cruiser USS Detroit (CL-8).
I hope to use these funds, among others, to finance the repossession of my ancestral land, the Philippines, and establish a government-in-exile for the Philippines based in London, UK.
JE comments: What is the official US statement on this treasure? Haven't many Philippine nationals attempted to reclaim it? This reminds me of the Spanish Republic's shipment of its gold reserves to Moscow. I like to think that the United States doesn't "steal" in such a crass fashion, but perhaps I am mistaken.
And where did Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo get the $32 billion? (That's with a "b"?) This, Dear Colleagues, is a significant chunk of cash, which would place her among the world's richest individuals.
Monetary Shenanigans in Philippines
(David Duggan, USA
07/30/14 1:02 PM)
Bienvenido Macario's comments (30 July) on the Filipino aristocracy's spiriting out of their country of billions of dollars calls to mind a well-oiled conversation I had with him at last October's WAIS conference regarding the importance of those islands in the run-up to US involvement in World War II. Without giving away the store as to the premise suggested by my former professor and colleague, Anthony D'Amato, WAISers may be interested to know that the current political divide in the Philippines is a reprise of the World War II divide between the collaborators with the Japanese and the American loyalists. That the oligarchs have access to untold billions should surprise no one who is familiar with the Philippines' extractive industry, and the well-founded rumor that the Japanese shipped tons of looted gold from China and buried it in a vault somewhere on the archipelago (known as Yamashita's gold; he was executed for war crimes in early 1946, so he isn't telling its whereabouts).
While Prof. D'Amato and I were preparing our suit claiming war crimes by the Japanese empire during World War II, we learned lots of details about this trove: that the Japanese had executed those Filipino laborers who had constructed the vault (à la the fate of those who built the Taj Mahal, although for less "noble" reasons); that Gen. Douglas MacArthur had found it, perhaps using enhanced interrogation techniques (which enabled him to live according to the style to which he was accustomed in the Waldorf Towers on the same floor with Cole Porter--not exactly retired military digs); and that various "internationalist" interests in the United States had access to this stash (some of it supposedly wound up in Richard Nixon's suitcase in 1964 when he went to Vietnam to visit his 1960 running mate, Henry Cabot Lodge, then the American ambassador, which Nixon then used to pay for the release of several prisoners of war held by the Vietcong [note--not the North Vietnamese]). Some of this may have been folkloric, but there was a civil suit filed in Hawaii against the Marcos's by Rogelio Roxas, claiming that the Marcos's had interfered with his right to extract this booty conferred on him by a Marcos relative. Roxas won an eight-figure judgment against Imelda (reduced from $22 billion after an appeal and remand). Good luck collecting that, however. Manolo Blahniks and Jimmy Choos are worth only so much.
JE comments: When it comes to pilfered gold, we've focused so much on Spain, that we haven't looked enough towards Asia. A fascinating comment from David Duggan. There's enough intrigue here to fill a week's worth of WAISing.
Philippines and Yamashita's Gold
(Bienvenido Macario, USA
07/31/14 12:29 AM)
I'm so glad David Duggan brought up our discussion in Adrian last fall about the post-war Philippines. (See David's post of 30 July.) It's true the political division in the Philippines was between "pro-Japanese" oligarch-traitors and American loyalists. But when Pres. Ramon Magsaysay died, the American loyalists were wiped out. After 1957 the division was between the two factions of oligarch-traitors: the ethnic Spaniards and the ethnic Chinese.
Being well-known Japanese collaborators, Marcos, Aquino, Roxas and even Diosdado Macapagal, who worked as legal assistant for JP Laurel, the Japanese-appointed president of WWII Philippines, could not claim the gold or even the so-called Yamashita's gold.
It was the Chinese group that promoted the story that Yamashita looted the gold in China and brought it over to the Philippines to justify their stealing gold from the natives of the Philippines.
Chiang Kai-shek brought China's gold with him when he and his Kuomintang army fled for their lives to Formosa. Chiang stole the whole group of islands from the natives who mainly spoke Tagalog. Again, the US government was well aware of the genocide of the Austronesians on Formosa but didn't do anything.
Rogelio Roxas is related to Manuel A. Roxas, Sr., from whom he got the information about Yamashita's gold. There were three locations Yamashita was said to bury gold on his way to Baguio. While Marcos indeed fought in Bataan and was on that infamous Death March, his father Mariano Marcos was a Japanese collaborator. He also knew about Yamashita's gold, among others.
Yamashita's gold belong to my people. And I am hereby claiming the same in their name.
In 1935 after the disastrous dispersal of the Bonus Army marchers, whose demands were responsible for the creation of the Veterans' Administration, Gen. Douglas MacArthur retired and accepted Manuel L. Quezon's job offer to be the Philippine Commonwealth's military adviser with a salary equal to 1/4 of 1% of the total defense budget of the Philippine commonwealth plus expense account and accommodations. He lived in the penthouse of the historic Manila Hotel. He also asked for the title "Field Marshall" of a still-to-be-formed army. Then he worked with FDR to have Col. Dwight Eisenhower named as his aide-de-camp.
Then America entered WWII and on January 3, 1942 while trapped in Corregidor, the Commonwealth Pres. Quezon issued an executive order to transfer $500,000.00 from the Philippine treasury's account in New York to Douglas MacArthur's Chase Manhattan bank account.
Gen. Douglas MacArthur received his bank's confirmation that the funds were transferred on February 19, 1942. MacArthur's party left Corregidor for Australia on March 11, 1942. He never saw a penny of that $500,000 until he went back to the US mainland in April 1951.
In fact when Pres. Quezon was in Washington DC, he sought out Gen. Dwight Eisenhower and offered to pay the future president a bonus salary for helping the Commonwealth build an army. Gen. Eisenhower politely declined, saying he could not accept additional pay as he was still in active service, unlike Gen. Douglas MacArthur who from 1935 to 1942 was retired from the US service. He was recalled by FDR, remember?
By the way I'm sure of the amount of $32 billion that Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo tried to deposit in March 2001.
My question to David Duggan: What was the nationality of the natives of the Philippines before July 4, 1946?
JE comments: I'm still confused: where is Yamashita's gold presently? Somewhere in the United States? Buried at an undisclosed location in the Philippines? Or on the bottom of Manila Bay?
Philippines and Yamashita's Gold
(Eugenio Battaglia, Italy
07/31/14 5:00 PM)
I was fascinated by the posts from Bienvenido Macario (30 and 31 July)
and David Duggan (31 July). Unfortunately, in spite of all my efforts, I
remain mostly Western-centric with my information, which is problematic.
Therefore I have a couple of questions for each of them.
Bienvenido Macario, I would like to ask why he seems to be against the
independentist Filipinos collaborating with the Japanese Army to defeat
the occupying American colonial forces.
Generally I assume that
for the Filipinos, as for any other nation, it was much better to be
independent even if within the structure of the "Asiatic Cooperation,"
rather than be dominated by a far-away Western country.
Duggan, I would like to ask if when preparing the lawsuit claiming war
crimes by the Japanese, he ever had the thought that if it was correct
to punish the war crimes of the losing "Yellow Monkeys" (remember the
movies of good old Marine John Wayne and the democratic war
propaganda?), shouldn't it also be appropriate to punish the (numerous)
war crimes of the winners?
JE comments: Eugenio Battaglia often
forces me to challenge my historic assumptions. I know that the
better off under US domination than as part of the brutal "Co-Prosperity
Sphere," but should I be so certain? Those who Bienvenido Macario calls
"loyalists" to the US could also be labeled as "collaborators."
Philippines and Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere
(Francisco Ramirez, USA
08/02/14 12:14 AM)
The historical reality is that Filipinos rejected the Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere project. This is not about what ought to be the case, but what in fact was the case. Despite Eugenio Battaglia's assumption (1 August), geographical proximity did not breed solidarity.
To this day there is more anti-Japanese than anti-American sentiment in the Philippines. This is true despite the fact that much of the destruction of Manila was due to less-than-precise American bombing.
Before Pearl Harbor there was a Commonwealth in the Philippines and a degree of self-government that included elections of both the legislative and executive branches. There was an agreement that the Philippines would become independent by 1945. One can argue that it was not in the best interests of the Philippines to become independent. But there were no mass demonstrations in favor of remaining a colony or becoming a USA territory. That is why I have never accepted the abandonment thesis of my kababayan, Bienvenido Macario. I do agree with him that rule by oligarchy has severely damaged "La Perla del Oriente, Nuestro Perdido Edén" (from José Rizal's "Mi Último Adiós").
Regarding collaboration, the standard defense for someone like Jose Laurel (president during the Japanese occupation era) is that his collaboration prevented Japan from drafting Filipinos into the Japanese army, as many Koreans were. After World War II, Laurel was elected to the Senate repeatedly. These elections are national, not provincial. So, either most people did not know how bad his government was or did not share the negative judgment of its critics. My guess is that people distinguish between collaborators who personally gained from the collaboration and those who did not. Of course, people could be dead wrong in making this assessment of motive.
JE comments: Except for a Quisling or two who benefited directly from Japanese rule, I don't know of anywhere in Asia where "Co-Prosperity" was received with enthusiasm. A parallel question about the Philippines in WWII: were there significant numbers of Filipino "volunteers" who fought for Japan?
- Citizenship of Filipinos Pre-1946 (David Duggan, USA 08/01/14 2:02 AM)
Bienvenido Macario (31 July) asked as to Filipino citizenship before its 1946 independence from the United States, and while I am not well-versed in the law of citizenship, so far as I can tell, Filipinos were not US citizens during either the time that the US administered the islands as a territory, nor in the period when the Philippines were a "commonwealth" created by US law in 1935, with its own legislature and court system. This would not have been unusual at the time the Americans "acquired" the Philippines following the Spanish-American War: the French had a similar system in Algeria after colonizing the country in the late 1800s. "White" inhabitants were deemed citizens of France (though called "pied noirs") while "les Arabes" had to apply for citizenship (they were deemed "subjects"). In doing so, they had to renounce their allegiance to sharia law. Unsurprisingly, as of 1930, only 2,500 had done so. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pied-Noir
The 1940 US Nationality Act did not name Filipino natives as having US citizenship, although citizens of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, among others, were so granted. The inference to be drawn is that Filipinos were not US citizens, although they assisted greatly in the war effort against the Japanese two years later. In 1952, citizenship was conferred on inhabitants of Guam.
- Citizenship of Filipinos Pre-1946 (David Duggan, USA 08/01/14 2:02 AM)
- Philippines and Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere (Francisco Ramirez, USA 08/02/14 12:14 AM)
- Philippines and Yamashita's Gold (Eugenio Battaglia, Italy 07/31/14 5:00 PM)
- Philippines and Yamashita's Gold (Bienvenido Macario, USA 07/31/14 12:29 AM)
- John Nixon and Richard Nixon (Randy Black, USA 07/10/14 10:06 AM)
- WAIS Quote Quiz: A Hint... (Edward Jajko, USA 07/10/14 9:56 AM)