Login/Sign up

World Association of International Studies

PAX, LUX ET VERITAS SINCE 1965
Post More Monetary Shenanigans in Philippines
Created by John Eipper on 07/30/14 1:05 AM

Previous posts in this discussion:

Post

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.



SHARE:
Rate this post
Informational value 
Insight 
Fairness 
Reader Ratings (0)
0%
Informational value0%
Insight0%
Fairness0%

Visits: 71

Comments/Replies

Please login/register to reply or comment: Login/Sign up

  • 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.
    Please login/register to reply or comment:

    • 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?

      Please login/register to reply or comment:

      • 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.


        To
        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.


        To David
        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
        Filipinos were
        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."

        Please login/register to reply or comment:

        • 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?


          Please login/register to reply or comment:



      • 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.


        Please login/register to reply or comment:




Trending Now



All Forums with Published Content (41991 posts)

- Unassigned

Culture & Language

American Indians Art Awards Bestiary of Insults Books Conspiracy Theories Culture Ethics Film Food Futurology Gender Issues Humor Intellectuals Jews Language Literature Media Coverage Movies Music Newspapers Numismatics Philosophy Plagiarism Prisons Racial Issues Sports Tattoos Western Civilization World Communications

Economics

Capitalism Economics International Finance World Bank World Economy

Education

Education Hoover Institution Journal Publications Libraries Universities World Bibliography Series

History

Biographies Conspiracies Crime Decline of West German Holocaust Historical Figures History Holocausts Individuals Japanese Holocaust Leaders Learning Biographies Learning History Russian Holocaust Turkish Holocaust

Nations

Afghanistan Africa Albania Algeria Argentina Asia Australia Austria Bangladesh Belgium Belize Bolivia Brazil Canada Central America Chechnya Chile China Colombia Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark East Europe East Timor Ecuador Egypt El Salvador England Estonia Ethiopia Europe European Union Finland France French Guiana Germany Greece Guatemala Haiti Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran (Persia) Iraq Ireland Israel/Palestine Italy Japan Jordan Kenya Korea Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Latin America Liberia Libya Mali Mexico Middle East Mongolia Morocco Namibia Nations Compared Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria North America Norway Pacific Islands Pakistan Palestine Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Polombia Portugal Romania Saudi Arabia Scandinavia Scotland Serbia Singapore Slovakia South Africa South America Southeast Asia Spain Sudan Sweden Switzerland Syria Thailand The Pacific Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan UK (United Kingdom) Ukraine USA (America) USSR/Russia Uzbekistan Venezuela Vietnam West Europe Yemen Yugoslavia Zaire

Politics

Balkanization Communism Constitutions Democracy Dictators Diplomacy Floism Global Issues Hegemony Homeland Security Human Rights Immigration International Events Law Nationalism NATO Organizations Peace Politics Terrorism United Nations US Elections 2008 US Elections 2012 US Elections 2016 Violence War War Crimes Within the US

Religion

Christianity Hinduism Islam Judaism Liberation Theology Religion

Science & Technology

Alcohol Anthropology Automotives Biological Weapons Design and Architecture Drugs Energy Environment Internet Landmines Mathematics Medicine Natural Disasters Psychology Recycling Research Science and Humanities Sexuality Space Technology World Wide Web (Internet)

Travel

Geography Maps Tourism Transportation

WAIS

1-TRIBUTES TO PROFESSOR HILTON 2001 Conference on Globalizations Academic WAR Forums Ask WAIS Experts Benefactors Chairman General News Member Information Member Nomination PAIS Research News Ronald Hilton Quotes Seasonal Messages Tributes to Prof. Hilton Varia Various Topics WAIS WAIS 2006 Conference WAIS Board Members WAIS History WAIS Interviews WAIS NEWS waisworld.org launch WAR Forums on Media & Research Who's Who