Your VOICES.

In an email sent last August 17, 2007, Mr. Elson T. Elizaga replies, point by point, the Statement of UP-ASP posted earlier in ‘Your VOICES’ (see entry, “So That the People May Know: Two Statements on ‘Huluga’ Issue”). This is a follow-up post.

All is fair here. CDOKAY sees it as a healthy debate.

(ASP statements are in italics and Mr. Elizaga’s replies are in bold text)

———————————————————

Statement of the Members of the
University of the Philippines-Archaeological Studies Program
Cagayan de Oro Project

August 14, 2007

We write in response to the specific statement in the Philippine Daily Inquirer article entitled “Cagayan de Oro’s Lost Treasure” (PDI August 12, 2007 p. A17). It was stated by the writer, Ma. Cecilia Rodriguez, that the Heritage Conservation Advocates (HCA) called our archeological report a “mock report”.

The HCA does not call the ASP report a “mock report”. The phrase I used during the interview with Ms. Rodriguez was “debatable and not scientific”. This is my opinion. Other HCA members might have a different view.

My reasons for describing the ASP report as “not scientific”:

1) The report does not mention the midden discovered by Dr. Erlinda M. Burton on August 5, 2003. At the time of the discovery, ASP archeologist Leee Anthony Neri and Clyde Jagoon were present at the midden site. This midden is only about 20 meters away from the ASP excavation in 2004. It is known also to the National Museum.

2) The ASP report ignored the fossils and artifacts found by HCA in 2003, such as the whale harpoon.

3) The ASP dug only on top of Obsidian Hill, which is heavily eroded. Burton said the cliff had eroded. There is a need to have a geomorphologist, said Burton, to study the site. I don’t know if ASP brought a geomorphologist during their research.

4) ASP jumped to conclusion when it stated that Huluga Open Site is not the Himologan site described by the Spanish missionaries in 1622. Even if ASP is correct, Huluga is still an archaeological site that deserves protection under Philippine Law. I would welcome the discovery of the “real Huluga”, if that is the case, but it wouldn’t refute the fact that Huluga is an archaeological site.

The UP-ASP team was invited by the Historical Commission of the city of Cagayan de Oro, (CdeO) to help improve our basic knowledge of CdeO’s early history.

HCA has no copy of the HISCCOM invitation to ASP. We also have no knowledge that the City Council ever made a discussion and resolution to invite ASP. HCA has no copy of the ASP project proposal to HISCOMM, which should contain the proposed project cost. HCA, however, has a copy of the draft contract between ASP and City Hall. In short, the deal made by ASP with City Hall was largely secret. The amount of P450,000 paid to ASP was not even revealed. I had to get information about it myself.

(Follow-up email on August 18):

In my email yesterday, I wrote, “We have no knowledge that the City Council ever made a discussion and resolution to invite ASP.”

I just checked my archive and found this information:

“On January 19, 2004, the City Council — monopolized by members of the mayor’s political party– enacted an ordinance authorizing the mayor to hire the ASP for the research and excavation of Cagayan de Oro …”

Monopolized because all councilors, the vice-mayor, and the mayor were members of the same political party that time, PaDayon Pilipino.

We reviewed the literature, followed protocol, secured the proper authorization from the National Museum of the Philippines, and conducted our research work from October to November, 2004.

ASP didn’t follow archaeological code of ethics when it made a secret negotiation with then mayor Vicente Y. Emano, didn’t consult local historians, anthropologists (one happens to be an archaeologist also), and other people interested in heritage conservation. It didn’t ask permission from Edna Dahino and the Gales family to dig in Obsidian Hill. One Gales member drove about 10 kilometers from her government office to rebuke the group.

A reinvestigation of the Huluga site was done, as well as new site surveys. At Huluga, we were interested to know if systematic investigation of the archaeological site can support the idea that there was a dense, permanent settlement on the hill top of Huluga that could represent the remains of the earliest site of Cagayan de Oro settlement.

This is a valid purpose. But the decision to exclude the midden and found relics in 2003 is questionable.

Unfortunately our systematic excavation could only tell us that there was human habitation, but it was not likely that the hill top was ever extensively populated for any period of time. On the other hand, through the surveys we conducted, we were able to find denser archaeological deposits just north of Huluga along the Cagayan de Oro River. These sites can also be candidates for the location of the old settlement of Cagayan de Oro, for they also fit the description of the landscape written in early Spanish accounts. In the course of our study, we also recovered stone tools that belong to a very old technological tradition. If more examples of these tools are found in their original context, they can tell us that humans, and most likely pre-modern humans ( i.e..Homo Crecus), were present in the Cagayan de Oro landscape. This can possibly push the history and heritage concern of the region by tens of thousands of years.

ASP should be congratulated for this discovery. The site should also be protected and preserved. This finding, however, should not decrease the importance of other archaeological sites, which by law also deserve protection.

All of these findings are detailed in our site report and in a special edition of our peer-reviewed archaeological journal, Hukay (Volume 7, 2005). The site report contains the complete account of our methods, data, illustration, interpretations, limitations and the future prospects for the study of CdeO’s early history. We cannot understand, therefore, the statement coming from a member of the HCA that calls our report “mock” and that “the ASP team should themselves be investigated for bungling an important scientific study”.

Not only ASP, but the National Museum (where some ASP members also work) should be investigated. The National Museum mysteriously stopped its promised plan to file a case against Emano in November 2003. In January 2004, HCA discovered that ASP and the National Museum had made a deal with Emano to have ASP dig in Cagayan de Oro.

We wonder how the members of the HCA, specially Elson Elizaga can tell a mock report from a real one, when they have not done analysis of archaeological raw data or written an archaeological report at all.

I don’t write archaeological reports. I’m not an archaeologist. But anyone who knows the five steps of the scientific method can tell.

The most that a member of HCA has done is a very preliminary report on an excavation of the site way back in 1975.

This report was written by Burton.

This, despite the fact that excavation have been conducted by certain HCA members as late as 2004, without securing authorization from the National Museum and without a properly disseminated site report.

After observing the destruction of Huluga, and seeing the damage on the midden site, Burton sent a request to the National Museum to secure a permit to do excavation in Huluga. The National Museum, however, replied only after three months, and told Burton to send found artifacts and fossils to the museum in Butuan City. Government offices are required by law to reply to letters within 15 days.

I took photos of some of the pits dug by Burton and her students in 2004.

We will be more than happy to read a report, of any sort, that gives us an idea of the archaeological context/merit of all the artifacts and investigation that they have done (and proudly placed on the web) at the Huluga site all these years. In fact, ethics that practitioners of archaeology should write and share reports, or they are no better than your average treasure hunter.

I’m sure Burton can write a report of the findings. The information I got so far was plain, clay pottery shreds were found.

The way we see it, the damage that our scientific report can only have done is on the spirit of the HCA members who are holding uncritical belief in a self-proclaimed truth that the Huluga hillside is the location for the earliest settlement linked to present Cagayan de Oro. We see the value of this archaeological site within the fundament fact that it is a known heritage site of Filipinos and not because of the claim that it is the “oldest” or the “original”. We therefore will not blindly accept a belief for settlement origin when the archaeological evidence does not support it.

I’m not certain also that Huluga is the oldest and original settlement of Cagayan de Oro. When I was interviewed on-air by Nits Arancon of DxJR in 2003, I told him that there could be older archaeological sites in Cagayan de Oro, way ahead of ASP’s suspicion that Huluga may not be Himologan. But again, any present or future discovery will not decrease the value of Huluga as an archaeological site. The law does not say that archaeological habitation sites or camp sites with relics should be destroyed.

Burton, on the record, told me she knows what a camp site is, and strongly states that Huluga is not a camp site, but a settlement site.

There is so much to learn about our collective past in the Cagayan de Oro landscape. Much more study is needed; the potentials are really looking good. We fully support and join the appeal to all institutions in the position to stop the continuing destruction through quarrying of the Huluga site. We also show our solidarity to those sensitive to the heritage of Cagayan de Oro that were maligned by the HCA, and support any effort to end the HCA’s selective and arrogant claims as protectors of Cagayan de Oro’s Heritage and of our collective heritage.

HCA members never claimed to be protectors. The HCA is a private advocacy group. It has no legal authority to protect and preserve. These duties are assigned by law to the National Museum (and I think also to the local government). Which is why when Helen Dahino asked me what to do with her claimed portion of the hill this month after a landslide, I told her “We can only tell you what the law says. We have no authority to tell you what to do. We can only make requests.”

We are concerned that such an important issue such as heritage protection is being hijacked by a narrow-thinking group. Their outright dismissal, rather than engagement, of a new data seems to miss the fact that diverse interest can cover under a heritage protection position. We are also of the mind that as more data and knowledge are put to light through sustained study of the Cagayan de Oro past, reality will definitely be more exciting than fiction.

HCA has no informal nor formal dismissal of the ASP report.

My view — and this is not the HCA view — is the ASP archaeologists who came to CDO to dig in 2004 and the National Museum that approved this project should be investigated, by the Senate if possible, 1) for making deals with Emano, 2) for violating the archaeological code of ethics, 3) for making what appears to be a report meant to please Emano, 4) for not recommending the protection of Huluga and other archaeological sites, 5) for using a treasure hunter as guide, 6) for not asking permission from claimed landowners of Obsidian Hill, and 7) for jeopardizing the reputation of ASP as a science institution and the University of the Philippines as a reputable school.

The HISCCOM and Emano should also be investigated for using the ASP report as basis for the continuous “development” of Huluga, and for tolerating treasure-hunting made by a City Hall employee only about 100 meters from Kagay-an Resort, which is managed by a member of the HISCCOM.

I encourage the ASP and the HISCCOM to request a Senate inquiry on this issue, and to include Burton, her students, and myself in the investigation. We can handle that.

We are furnishing you a copy of the statements issued by the UP-ASP and the HISCCOM regarding the Huluga issue.We hope that through your help, our people may also be informed about the other side of the story, all in the spirit of impartiality.

Thank you very much.

CITY INFORMATION OFFICE

————————————————————
Statement of the Members of the
University of the Philippines-Archaeological Studies Program
Cagayan de Oro Project

August 14, 2007

We write in response to the specific statement in the Philippine Daily Inquirer article entitled “Cagayan de Oro’s Lost Treasure” (PDI August 12, 2007 p. A17). It was stated by the writer, Ma. Cecilia Rodriguez, that the Heritage Conservation Advocates (HCA) called our archeological report a “mock report”.

The UP-ASP team was invited by the Historical Commission of the city of Cagayan de Oro, (CdeO) to help improve our basic knowledge of CdeO’s early history. We reviewed the literature, followed protocol, secured the proper authorization from the National Museum of the Philippines, and conducted our research work from October to November, 2004. A reinvestigation of the Huluga site was done, as well as new site surveys. At Huluga, we were interested to know if systematic investigation of the archaeological site can support the idea that there was a dense, permanent settlement on the hill top of Huluga that could represent the remains of the earliest site of Cagayan de Oro settlement. Unfortunately our systematic excavation could only tell us that there was human habitation, but it was not likely that the hill top was ever extensively populated for any period of time. On the other hand, through the surveys we conducted, we were able to find denser archaeological deposits just north of Huluga along the Cagayan de Oro River. These sites can also be candidates for the location of the old settlement of Cagayan de Oro, for they also fit the description of the landscape written in early Spanish accounts. In the course of our study, we also recovered stone tools that belong to a very old technological tradition. If more examples of these tools are found in their original context, they can tell us that humans, and most likely pre-modern humans (i.e..Homo Crecus), were present in the Cagayan de Oro landscape. This can possibly push the history and heritage concern of the region by tens of thousands of years.

All of these findings are detailed in our site report and in a special edition of our peer-reviewed archaeological journal, Hukay (Volume 7, 2005). The site report contains the complete account of our methods, data, illustration, interpretations, limitations and the future prospects for the study of CdeO’s early history. We cannot understand, therefore, the statement coming from a member of the HCA that calls our report “mock” and that “the ASP team should themselves be investigated for bungling an important scientific study”. We wonder how the members of the HCA, specially Elson Elizaga can tell a mock report from a real one, when they have not done analysis of archaeological raw data or written an archaeological report at all. The most that a member of HCA has done is a very preliminary report on an excavation of the site way back in 1975. This, despite the fact that excavation have been conducted by certain HCA members as late as 2004, without securing authorization from the National Museum and without a properly disseminated site report. We will be more than happy to read a report, of any sort, that gives us an idea of the archaeological context/merit of all the artifacts and investigation that they have done (and proudly placed on the web) at the Huluga site all these years. In fact, ethics that practitioners of archaeology should write and share reports, or they are no better than your average treasure hunter.

The way we see it, the damage that our scientific report can only have done is on the spirit of the HCA members who are holding uncritical belief in a self-proclaimed truth that the Huluga hillside is the location for the earliest settlement linked to present Cagayan de Oro. We see the value of this archaeological site within the fundament fact that it is a known heritage site of Filipinos and not because of the claim that it is the “oldest” or the “original”. We therefore will not blindly accept a belief for settlement origin when the archaeological evidence does not support it.

There is so much to learn about our collective past in the Cagayan de Oro landscape. Much more study is needed; the potentials are really looking good. We fully support and join the appeal to all institutions in the position to stop the continuing destruction through quarrying of the Huluga site. We also show our solidarity to those sensitive to the heritage of Cagayan de Oro that were maligned by the HCA, and support any effort to end the HCA’s selective and arrogant claims as protectors of Cagayan de Oro’s Heritage and of our collective heritage. We are concerned that such an important issue such as heritage protection is being hijacked by a narrow-thinking group. Their outright dismissal, rather than engagement, of a new data seems to miss the fact that diverse interest can cover under a heritage protection position. We are also of the mind that as more data and knowledge are put to light through sustained study of the Cagayan de Oro past, reality will definitely be more exciting than fiction.

UP-Archaeological Studies Program

Victor Paz PhD.
Lee Anthony Neri, Msc.
Jun G. Cayron, MA.
Anna Jane Carlos, Graduate student
Michelle Eusebio, Graduate student
Vito Paolo Hernandez, Graduate student
Andrea Malaya M. Ragrario, Graduate student
Emil Charles Robles, Graduate student

—————————————————————-
Statement of the Members of the
Historical and Cultural Commission
Cagayan de Oro City

We, the members of the Cagayan de Oro Historical and Cultural Commission deplore the biased and questionable article written by a Ma. Cecilia L. Rodriguez entitle “Cagayan de Oro’s Lost Treasure” that appeared in the Phil. Inquirer, Augu. 12, 2007 issue.

We condemn the quarrying by the Dahino family in their land in Huluga, sitio Taguanao for we believe that their land is part of the cultural treasures of our city.

We condemn the Heritage Conservation Advocates (HCA) for their high-handed and bullying tactics in handling sensitive heritage issues. They only want to divide and confuse Kagay-anons instead of helping to promote our culture.

We condemn the seemingly endless and vicious “Emano bashing” over the Huluga issue for we see this as having strong political undertones. In 2004, then Mayor Vicente Emano funded the archaeological exploration and excavation of the Huluga open site to find out once and for all if the place was the ancient settlement of the city as claimed by Dr. Burton and her HCA group. The archaeological findings showed that Huluga is a habitational place and not a settlement site of ancient Kagay-anons. But still, this place should be protected from quarrying and the like. What is HCA’s part in the protection of the area aside from maligning and bashing individuals and conjuring tales to support their stand?

We condemn the malicious and libelous portrayal of Wilson Cabaluna as some kind of a treasure hunter who after digging for gold and pottery in Huluga left and could not be located. Mr. Cabaluna is an employee of good standing in the city government since 1981 under then Mayor Aquilino Pimentel Jr. and is a resident of Taguanao since the 1950s.

We condemn the claim of Elizaga that the UP-ASP has given a mock report about Huluga and should be investigated for bungling in their work. The team of archaeologists from UP-ASP has been working closely with the National Museum around the country for years. They are highly respected among their peers worldwide and are known for their professionalism and academic integrity.

The article clearly shows that Ms. Rodriguez never bothered to research on the findings of the team of archaeologists from the University of the Philippines in Huluga. Instead, she heavily relied on the highly improbable and fantastic theory about the obsidian source and the Irawaddy dolphin yarn of Elso Elizaga of the HCA. This is an example of irresponsible journalist at its “best”.

Like Antonio Montalvan of the HCA, we are not angry anymore but sorrowful over the fact that there are indeed individuals with high academic titles who are consistent in their yarns and half truths just to support a claim that has been scientifically proven to be untrue.

From the:

CAGAYAN DE ORO HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL COMMISSION
Ramon P. Chaves – Chair
Members:
Sandy R. Bass
Thaddeus A. Bautista
Paulita R. Roa

Republic of the Philippines
Cagayan de Oro
City Tourism and Cultural Affairs Office

PRESS STATEMENT dated August 13, 2007
This clarification is issued to clear up the following statements written by one Ma. Cecilia L. Rodriguez of Cagayan de Oro City in the Philippine Daily Inquirer entitled “Cagayan de Oro’s Lost Treasure”; page 17; August 12, 2007 issue.

——————————————————–

What Ms. Rodriguez wrote in the Inquirer:
“A former National Museum staff and Emano’s appointee in the city tourism office named Wilson Cabaluna… “ (first sentence, paragraph 20 of the article)

The Truth:
Mr. Wilson Cabaluna has never been a staff of the National Museum. In 2004, he was temporarily detailed to the City Historical and Cultural Commission to assist the archaeology teams from the University of the Philippines and the National Museum in their work at the Huluga site. This is per Memorandum Number 1116-2004, issued by then City Mayor Vicente Y. Emano in October 28, 2004.

Mr. Cabaluna is not an Emano appointee. When he joined the local government in 1981, he was appointed a casual employee by then City Mayor Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr. When he was appointed permanent employee in the City Tourism and Cultural Affairs Office in 1995, the appointing officer was then City Mayor Pablo P. Magtajas.

What Ms. Rodriguez wrote in the Inquirer:
“Cabaluna has since transferred residence and could not be located.”
(fifth sentence, paragraph 20)

The Truth:
Mr. Cabaluna has not transferred residence. He can also be easily located in his station of work.

What Ms. Rodriguez wrote in the Inquirer:
“The original caves are now part of Lawndale Spring resort …” (third sentence, paragraph 23)

The Truth:
The Huluga Caves have never been in the resort. Also, there is no cave in this newly-redeveloped Kagay-an Resort.

———————————————————

This is to clarify that Mr. Wilson Ebonia Cabaluna, 50 years old and married, has been a permanent employee as Metro Aide 1 of the City Tourism and Cultural Affairs Office of the local government of Cagayan de Oro City since 1996. He first started in 1981 as a casual employee of the City Engineer’s Office assigned to the Lawndale Spring Resort in Sitio Taguanao, Barangay Indahag, this city. From 1982-1991, he was a casual employee in the City Tourism & Cultural Affairs Office. From 1992-1994, he was a temporary employee of the same office. In 1995, he was appointed a permanent staff of the office.

Mr. Cabaluna is also a long time resident of Taguanao. In the 1950s, his father brought Wilson and the rest of the family to settle in Indahag as the elder Cabaluna was then a cowboy of the Garciano Neri and Pacifico Bual families who operated a pastureland in that place.

To date, Mr. Cabaluna lives in Taguanao. Also, he is still employed with the city government.

Further, the Huluga Caves have never been part of the Lawndale Spring Resort, now Kagay-an Resort. The caves are approximately 1.5 kilometers from the place. There is also no cave in this community resort.

———————————————————-
IMMA RAE D GATUSLAO
Officer-In-Charge
City Tourism & Cultural Affairs Office
Basement, Barangay Tourism Hall, City Hall compound
Telephone Number: 857-3164

By Ben Emata, Contributing Writer - San Francisco, California

When I was a very young man during my high school days, I had a taste of that famous brandy imported from Spain called Fundador or Pedro Domecq. The brandy always had been the star in any kind of party in the Philippines. The smell alone is terrific and the taste to me is beyond comparison, superlative to say the least. The bottle is perfectly designed and surely a masterpiece of a creative mind, as its color matched perfectly with its label. And as a very curious and aggressive young fellow, I fell into the whim and caprices of that drink. Fate, however, was not ready for me and being a jobless youngster, buying Fundador, a sophisticated bottle that belongs to the high echelon of the elite, was just impossible.

Years later when I was a young adult, I encountered again what I described as truly a miracle item, Fundador, the same drink that I cherished and adored for years. I still admire it as the king of all kinds of first class imported liquor and to drink it, is giving you outright pride. I still like to hold it in my arm, drink and enjoy its scent as much as I need but still I cannot have it. The reason was I had so little income barely enough for my board and lodging in a big city and attending college education. In short,  Fundador was a forbidden drink because I cannot afford to buy it.

Many more years later when I was a full pledge adult, married with some kids running up and down at home and with a better income, I was reminded of that famous Fundador. I dreamed sometimes of the drink of the kings and the more I remember it, the more I fall into its shadows. It gives light that guides me the way to a liquor store. I bought a bottle to stop my stubborn cravings, which I thought would be followed by more bottles in the coming days. It was not and it could cause a disaster in the home if I pursue drinking the still forbidden drink. The reason was my wife was not happy about it as it adds to the family skyrocketing budget while we plan to have better days for the education of our growing children. Besides, she said it is destructive to my health, which I readily agreed. In short, that lovely Fundador remains a drink beyond my reach. It was like a bright star so near and lovely, yet so far and unreachable.

My life improved over the years and my income climbed more than triple, I think even more. I said Fundador, here I come and am ready because I can buy you any number of bottle and drink with only the sky as its limit. Proudly, I said at last I could afford it and make the best enjoyment in my life. I wanted to fill the gap and see myself happy in the era of better times to replenish the deprivation and emptiness of my youth. After all, I was already maintaining three good-paying jobs and I was so in demand in my profession. By any language, I was really ready to hug and kiss the Fundador, or to engage it in a wresting bottle for bottle without worry. The trouble again was my small kids who used to be noisy running up and down at home were already attending college courses and with the bills for tuition, books, uniforms, and other stuff they need, just made me frown and ponder of a dream that was indeed impossible. In short, my lovely Fundador even became more unreachable. Still like that bright star that moves even farther now.

Many, many more years later, when I was not so young anymore and some of those noisy kids at home had graduated from college, the family immigrated to the wine-rich nation known in the book as United States of America. The battle for the education of the remaining kids continued. It raged beyond imagination that my little income as a new immigrant almost wholly went to school and books. I work in a government office and enjoying good pay and benefits but still these graces do not match well with the school expenses. I had to do other jobs to meet other obligations like rent for shelter, food, etc. I aged faster and what was the shadow of a good-looking man back in our city was now reduced to a topsy-turvy individual that looks no better than a scarecrow - - haggard and tired. Fundadaor is priced so low in the stores but the frightening cost of living in my new country made it even more impossible to buy a bottle. My family needed more than anything else every penny of my income.

Five decades and five kids all registered professionals later, I got very much older. I was bald, have gray hair and my inviting smiles are no longer there. They were replaced by what look like canals on the surface of the moon but actually were wrinkles every inch of my skin. I feel not so many people that I meet in the streets would give me a second look like they did before. I am engulfed by a sense of sadness and isolation of that feeling in state of being old. I look at my shadow and realize that I am seeing the structure of an old man. I said where are you Fundador? I am ready even if I die now!  I just want to while my thirst away and take with me to my grave that feeling of satisfaction. As I said my new country was rich in  wines and surely I find Fundador anywhere in the malls, supermarkets and even in small liquor stores. I can buy and drink it 24 hours a day. My desire to grab a bottle grew stronger defeating in the process the odds that hindered me for years. Welcome to my world my lovely Fundador!

But my doctor said No, No to any alcohol because I have hypertension that sometimes go wild, my cholesterol that is extraordinarily high, my sugar count is abnormal, and I was twice hospitalized for stubborn ulcer. Wow, I said they are all life-threatening and I can die from any of them. But I was ready to violate my doctor’s advice as I said, “even if I die now.” So I thought there was nothing now that bars me from drinking the brandy of my dream. By that belief, I bought and planned to drink it in small amounts everyday, say half a glass only with ice to reward me after years of hard work. To me giving myself the pleasure of little entertainment by way of the Fundador is just fair, after all I am already retired. I look back to the size of my footsteps and saw not so ugly the achievements I had in life.

The trouble again is my children who are taking care of my health by remote e-mail control as they are now scattered worldwide, are unhappy if I drink alcohol. They reminded me that when I painfully abandoned smoking many years ago, I made the best decision. My nurse-daughter in Germany who is more affluent on health care motivates me well into avoiding what are bad for my health. My son a mechanical engineer married to a Nurse speaks well too against the drink. He always researches for anything good for me and sends me the printout like the guideline of health food, how to reduce snoring and how to live with diabetes. My two other daughters, one from Canada, who are both engineers but well versed in health by way of internet researches and my other son-accountant would send me a barrage of publications about how exercise and vegetables can make me young and strong. And by reason of too much attachments to them since they time they were tiny babies, I could not just say no to their statements of facts and concerns. Parents when they get old belong to their children. It is the other way around.

In short Fundador remains as elusive, as it was fifty years ago when I first met it. I still cannot drink my glamorous brandy but I remained as passionate and a lover to its taste. At times during formal gatherings when the drink is served, I graciously get a shot or two to satisfy my lust and love of the drink but never indulge with it on one-on-one basis even if I want. I think my life is more important than that lovely Fundador and this beautiful brandy can never take my place in the heart of my family. At all times, I refrain from saying farewell to Fundador because someday, somehow behind the rainbows or from the clouds might emerge a beautiful day for a dream that refuses to die. (Ben Emata)