Minors traveling to the Philippines

There are specific immigration concerns for minors traveling to the Philippines.

The Philippines recognizes the family as a basic unit of society and emphasizes on family unity. Also, the country has strict child trafficking, smuggling, children protection laws. So Philippine immigration law dictates that children under 15 years of age, unaccompanied by or not coming to a parent shall not be allowed to enter the country, except that such children shall be admitted in the discretion of the Commissioner of Immigration, if otherwise admissible (PIA of 1940). The prevailing practice is that children under 15 years of age who are NOT accompanied by a parent shall NOT be allowed to enter the Philippines.

However, the same law authorizes the Commissioner of Immigration to allow the entry of unaccompanied minors (minors not traveling with a parent) on his discretion upon application of a WAIVER OF EXCLUSION GROUND (WEG). The guardian of the minor may apply for this waiver of exclusion ground in the latter’s behalf. This is the process where an applicant pleads the Commissioner of Immigration that the unaccompanied minor be allowed to enter the Philippines even though he/she is not traveling with a parent.

If a child has a different name from that of the parents, prove that you are the parent/s of the child by bringing a family registry and/or birth certificate and/or adoption papers or any other document which, to your mind, will prove to the immigration officer that you are the parent/s of the minor.

WEG applications may be lodged upon arrival at the airports. It will require the passport of the minor, the passport of the guardian, application form, and a PhP 3,120.oo application fee.

Maximum validity of Philippine ACR I-Card

The Philippine ACR I-Card or the Alien Certificate of Registration Identification Card is the ATM card-size identification card for aliens who are required by law to register (see: http://immigration.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=114&Itemid=61). It contains all documentary requirements of an alien in the Philippines. It is somehow like the USA’s green card, Canada’s permanent resident card, Italy’s Soggiorno card, or Spain’s Permiso card. However, it does not contain the visa. As a rule, Philippine visas are stamped on a passport visa page or pasted, if a sticker. The I-Card only complements the visa. It is NOT the visa. The I-Card’s MAXIMUM validity, unless otherwise indicated, is 5 YEARS from the date of issuance. So, if your ACR I-Card was issued sometime in year 2006 it is most probably already expired even if it does not specify a date on the VALID UNTIL portion of the card. 

If your I-Card is expiring, or is already expired, you MUST apply for renewal of card. If it is lost or damaged, apply for re-issuance of card. This will save you the inconvenience of being denied admission to the Philippines during arrival or disallowed to leave the country on departure. Usually, the validity of the I-Card is consistent with the validity of the visa. Its validity is always within, never beyond, the validity of the visa.

When you are coming to the Philippines with a permanent resident or non-immigrant visa and your I-Card is expired you may be excluded or denied entry depending on the assessment of Philippine immigration officers upon your application for entry on arrival. If you have a valid visa however, you may be allowed to enter the Philippines but ONLY as a tourist/visitor and not as a permanent or resident visa holder. So, even if you have a valid resident visa or immigrant or non-immigrant visa but your I-Card is expired or is not presented, you will be accepted to the Philippines only as a tourist with a limited number of days of allowed stay. During such allowed stay you must be able to apply for the re-issuance or renewal of your I-Card. You must also apply for a change of status from that of a tourist/visitor to your status based on your valid visa.

When an I-Card holder is departing the Philippines, he must secure an emigration clearance certificate (ECC) and re-entry permit (RP). Every departure requires an ECC. RP is valid either for 6 months or 1 year. Both documents are automated and incorporated into the I-Card. Subject to payment of required fees (PhP 2880.00 for those with no RP yet or PhP2170 for those with valid RP), you may secure both documents at the airports prior to departure. Always take note of the validity of your re-entry permit. You may not be allowed entry, upon return, when your re-entry permit is expired.

CAVEAT: Holders of expired ACR I-Cards will NOT be allowed to depart the country because you cannot be issued an ECC and RP. Most probably, your I-Card is expired because your visa is expired. So if your visa is expired and you plan on leaving the country before the visa renewal is approved, you must apply for a grace period. The grace period is the period in which you will be allowed to enjoy your visa status while your visa renewal is on process. If your grace period is expired, your visa renewal is pending at immigration office, your I-Card is expired, and you are planning to leave the country, apply for another grace period. Without the I-Card and without the visa, you will not be allowed to depart the country so that you can comply with your immigration documentary requirements. 

As I see it: My right to travel

Why regular travelers should not be offloaded by executive officers.

Section 1, Article III, 1987 Constitution: No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.

Section 6, Article III, 1987 Constitution states: The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to travel be impaired except in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health, as may be provided by law.

In societies such as ours, rights are held dear. Rights are sacred. So impositions against such rights should only be made upon justifications beyond the rationale of such rights. But what is the justification for disallowing a regular tourist who has sacred rights guaranteed by basic human dignity and by the organic law of the land, the Constitution? For the valid impairment of the right to travel, there must be exigencies against national security, public safety, or public health as may be provided by law. There is no doubt a person may be prohibited to travel to other countries to prevent possible international misunderstanding and conflict and, perhaps, to prevent another world war, or to prevent an imminent pandemic or the simple spread of diseases, or to prevent imminent dangers or threats against national security, or so as not to frustrate the ends of justice as in the case of bail bonded respondents- all as may be provided by law. 

Image via Wikipedia

What is the law that gives an executive office to deny the travel of passengers to other countries? What is the clear distinction of the so-called offloadable passengers compared to other travelers? There is no economic requirement for the exercise of the right to travel. There should be equal protection of the law. A provinciano has the same rights as the Manileño.

Sec. 30, RA 9208 (Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003) provides: Nothing in this Act shall be interpreted as a restriction of the freedom of speech and of association, religion and the right to travel for purposes not contrary to law as guaranteed by the Constitution. Sec. 60, Article XVII, Implementing Rules of RA 9208 mirrors the same provision.

Offloading of regular tourists has been mainly based on the Anti-Trafficking in Person Act of 2003. But this law specifically states that it should not be interpreted as a restriction of the right to travel.

Economic incapacity may be an indication of trafficking. But economic ability is neither an indication of a negative trafficking situation. There is no law that provides that only those who are economically sufficient shall be allowed to travel. There is also no law that says those who do not have enough pecuniary capacities shall be prevented from travelling. Liberties are not dependent upon bank accounts and securities of an individual. Anyone can exercise his liberties whether he has money or not. The right to travel is a human right. It stems from basic humanity. To deny one’s right to travel is to deny his humanity. An executive officer definitely has not the power to deny anyone his humanity.

To prohibit travel based on economic incapacity is a purely discriminatory practice. Discrimination belongs to the Jurassic era. It is no longer in fashion.

In the same implementing rules, Sec. 17, Article V (f), the Bureau of Immigration (BI) is mandated to: (i) Strictly administer and enforce immigration and alien registration laws; (ii) Adopt measures for the apprehension of suspected traffickers both at the place of arrival and departure; (iii) Ensure compliance by the Filipino fiances/fiancees an spouses of foreign nationals with the pre-departure and counseling program requirement of the Act; (iv) Strictly implement the requirement for a parental travel authority duly processed by the DSWD for minors traveling abroad unaccompanied by one parent, and the travel clearance for minors traveling abroad unaccompanied by both parent; (vi) Ensure compliance by Overseas Filipino Workers of the departure requirements of the POEA. (…)

The Bureau of Immigration is indeed mandated to detect possible human trafficking situations. But it is not mandated to offload passengers. Mandate to offload a passenger only springs from the mandate to detect a possible human trafficking situation. In other words, if there is no possible human trafficking situation, BI should not offload passengers. In others words too, if BI offloads passengers, it is saying that it detects a possible human trafficking situation.

So if BI detects a possible human trafficking situation, it should pursue a case anchored on such detection of a human trafficking situation. Do BI officers take into consideration the elements of the crime of trafficking in persons? Detection of a human trafficking situation should be based on the law. The law provides the elements of trafficking in persons. So detection of a possible human trafficking situation means detecting the ELEMENTS of trafficking in persons. In this sense, when BI offloads passengers it is only saying that it is rescuing a possible victim and/or preventing the departure of a possible human trafficker and subsequently effecting arrest. Of the thousands offloaded, how many cases had been filed?

It is not for BI to require passengers the submission of additional documents  to show whatever it is looking for in a passenger.  A passenger does not need to prove he can exercise a constitutional right. There is no law that empowers any officer to ask a citizen to prove he can exercise a right. Doing so would arrogate unto its officers the power to decide on who can exercise a human right.  BI officers have no such sweeping power. The practice of requiring passengers to submit additional documents is reminiscent of The Special Committee on Travel Abroad during our past repressive regime. So you see, prohibition on travel belongs to despotic regimes who want to keep citizens on a tight leash. Is our government despotic? Repressive?

Article 127, Revised Penal Code says: The penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed upon any public officer or employee who, not being thereunto authorized by law, shall expel any person from the Philippine Islands or shall compel such person to change his residence.

The Penal Code punishes expulsion. No person may be compelled to change his residence. The opposite holds true, no person may be compelled (or prohibited) NOT to change his residence! The rationale behind this law obvious. No public officer or employee , may compel any person to change his residence. Thus, no public officer or employee may compel a person NOT to change his residence. Ergo, no officer may prohibit a passenger to change his residence.

Isagani A. Cruz, Constitutional Law, 2000 said this as the purpose of Sec. 6, Art. III of the Constitution: The purpose of the guaranty is to further emphasize the individual’s liberty as safeguarded in general terms by the due process clause. Liberty under that clause includes the right to choose one’s residence, to leave it whenever he pleases, and to travel wherever he wills. Section 6 is a specific safeguard to these rights and is intended to underline their importance in a free society. Justice Cruz continues to say, this time on limitations: It is now required, to avoid abuse, particularly by petty administrators with less than the proper regard for the Constitution, that the ascertainment of the grounds for the exception should be made by the executive officers only “as may be provided by law”, specifying strict guidelines and appropriate standards. This is in keeping with the principle that ours is a government of laws and not of men and also with the canon that provisions of law limiting the enjoyment of liberty should be strictly construed against the government and in favor of the individual.

The first question is, what is the law that empowers offloading of passengers? The second question is, where are these strict guidelines and appropriate standards that allows denial of the exercise of the right to travel?

The Constitution is clear. Impairment of the right to travel should be provided for by law. What is a law? According to Jurado, Civil Law Reviewer, 1999, “The term law, in its general sense (derecho), is defined as the science of moral laws based on the rational nature of man, which governs his free activity for the realization of his individual and social ends, and which by its very nature is demandable and reciprocal. (1 Sanchez Roman 3.) In its specific sense (ley), it is defined as a rule of conduct, just and obligatory, promulgated by legitimate authority, and of common observance and benefit.”

In English, it only means, it is an enactment from Congress, duly signed by the President of the Republic, subsequently observing requisite publications. For our consumption here, it means, it is a law promulgated by Congress to regulate the right to travel. As of press time, there is no such law.

Article 13, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state; (2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Justice Perfecto in Caunca v. Salazar (82 Phil. 851) declared: Human dignity and human freedoms are essentially spiritual notwithstanding their material manifestations in the external world, and the universal concept of the spirit is inseparable from the idea of the eternal, of the unlimited by space or time.

Suum jus summa injuria. The abuse of right is the greatest possible wrong. 

Man kisses bride, shocks groom

Windy and rainy Tuesday afternoon.

Katipunan.

White plains, Temple Drive.

Green Meadows, Christ the King Church.

Car parking.

Hiss of tires rolling on the watered pavement, frolicking to and fro their usual business of less dramatic transport from offices and homes.

Sprays of water all over the roads and wet people eager to go home and even more eager to get wetter at home.

A guest, a man of 28 with aquiline features, arrives at Christ the King Church at a wedding of a young couple late Tuesday afternoon, October 11, 2011. Apparently, said  man was not in the couple’s guest list but managed to squeeze himself into the crowd and mingled with the principal sponsors which included a Supreme Court justice, a congressman, a judge, a vice governor, a couple of medical doctors, and several lawyers. Introducing himself as a law school classmate of the bride, he joined conversations with the wedding guests sharing stories on how he met the bride, on his friendship with the groom, among others.

He is accommodatingly gracious.

Reception.

He volunteers to lead a toast for the couple in this manner: “To all of us here tonight, we will remember this day as the greatest day of Jenny and King’s lives. Two people who, with alacrity, plunged into love like sweet and mellow whisper sounds piercing through the ears at a most silent darkness, of a most significant and sanctified significant human (giggles and moans). To the couple, may you enrich each other’s richness and lives. May you two never forget that despite your union, there are other people you can count on whenever one of you wants to smack the other’s face with an ax (laughter). But if you must, smack the other with only the handle of the ax, and please, never with the head of the ax (laughter)! But! like the ax head, may you, individually, be sharp to feel each other’s needs and supplications. Always solemnly forgiving, but never quickly assailing. Cheers (thundering applause)!”

He walks to the newly weds’s table at the stage and grabs King by the neck and kisses him on the lips. It look a few moments before King could withdraw from the grapple and wet tongue engulfing his supposedly poetic moments.

Then, “owww!!”

Then silence.

Silence.

Sobbing.

That is the scene at a wedding.

A wedding where the bride is the groom.

Sobbing.

Ang putang mayaman at ang putang mahirap

Image via Wikipedia

Caressing carefully everything inconsequential and titanic in that Ramsey-Reyes-Curtis flick, I feel compelled to ease out some thoughts which might never be as revealing tomorrow as they are today. Although adrift with the recent news on flooding in the provinces up north and the recent conundrum Sen. Leon Guerrero suffered and relished so painfully at the Senate floor, sticking to his side of the chamber  for fear of distancing from his “whisperer”. I didn’t know how we could be amused about his performance but I feel disturbed. Not by his obvious lack of luster in parliamentary grandstanding and what not but by the fact that I am amused too and without also knowing why. Although I will never venture into constructing or even justifying any semblance of exculpation for my inability.

No Other Woman. Sino ba ang mas mahirap na kalaban? Ang putang mahirap, o ang putang mayaman? I don’t know if I got that right but that sounds right anyway. Well, the difference is that, according to the character played by Martin, a putang mayaman has an authentic Hermes, while a putang mahirap has an Hermes from the recesses of a place called Greenhills. So it comes to mind then how we are all putas in one way or another, that we are all guilty of deep, dark, and dirty kaputahan, again, in one way or another. In general, we are no different from the night crawlers of Malate, Q. Ave, Circle, and Makati Ave. WTF. How do I know these places? Public knowledge, of course! But that is not the point. My point is, we can all be putas in a socio-sexual context (That, according to Miss Honorato).

It doesn’t matter if one is a man or a woman. Or a mahirap or a mayaman. Or hailing from the secure enclaves of posh gated communities or from the squatters where, accordingly, revolution always brews. Men can also be prostitutes. Men of the cloth can also be prostitutes. Miss Honorato, a philosophical realist character in F. Sionil Jose’s Ermita and who, in this novel was described as a Ph.D. whose research was not only confined in academic cemeteries said, “Who then are the real prostitutes if prostitution is defined as making money – perhaps – lots of it – by doing something without conviction or morality? Look around you (…) and you will find them everywhere under the guise of respectability, as statesmen, as men of the cloth, entrepreneurs…”

Like the common puta who does rounds at night to reach the darkness’s quota, at least for the time being, we also do rounds with life without any morality, much less conviction. Morality, as meant here is not the religious-spiritual kind that pulpiteers homilize, sounds like profiteers ain’t it?, but no, it is a coinage from pulpit and preachers. What is meant here is that, we do not remain true to ourselves even suffering tropism to our own questions and doubts. Not that tropism is evil but we no longer remain honest to ourselves, to what we really are, to what we really want. We lose morality even to our own beliefs. We sin even against our own personal mores. We lose credibility in front of the familiar men and women that we see when we face the mirror. That is immorality, living without belief. In that way, we are putas.

We look not at straight paths in our lives  but a series of choices. That is a product of our time’s stupefaction on the touchscreen and aps  where everything may be downloaded and installed and deleted in one big commercialization cycle. But that is not so in life. The choices that we see are what they are. Choices. Now, we never look at these choices right on the eyes and become contentious of the end product as planned. For the sake of the easy way out in our transactions we easily give in sacrificing our conviction. When we live life without conviction, we are prostitutes.

As a result, living side by side with our fellow putas, the whole society becomes nothing but a big organized taxed brothel with no real commodity  but our penises and cunts. Government, for example will prostitute itself before citizens only to provide temporary shelters to calamity victims but not sufficiently addressing long term issues. Government knows it is not doing enough but is still supplying programs only to satisfy primal needs and the needs of the press.

In the absence of conviction, lives become nothing less than being alive but without really living. Cliche. Living becomes fucking money-making leaving the essence of living behind and enclosed in high school yearbooks where ideals were still fresh and bubbly they could start a revolution. Living without conviction is living in a flame that consumes not only the years but the sup of life itself. Drying to the very core the joy of breathing and suffering. It is drowning on up the necks without hope of getting rescued. It is living without the fruits and colors of being alive.

It does not really matter now if you are mayaman or mahirap.

Must you be a puta?

The turbo in Turbo Cafe ver. 2.0

There is an oddity somewhere in a road called Mindanao Avenue in the Neopolitan Business Park in Fairview. Amid the thatched cogon-inlaid houses and huts selling beer and sisig in the area, there stands a brick-stoned citadel that is Turbo Cafe. Passing thru this distinct and straight road between gated Fairview villages you’ll be welcomed by an array of facts and fallacies about a Nicolas Cage movie featuring a sexy car, if cars could ever be sexy, Eleanor, a 1967 Ford Mustang with a V8 under the hood. The movie? Gone in 60 Seconds.

Although there is certainly nothing in this café that will have you squirming out, as in gone, once you get in. That is another oddity here. The theme of this café’s interior is Gone in 60 Seconds alright, but the interior alone will invite you to a highly relaxing rendezvous with everything familiar in lounging away time the way the Spaniards enjoyed their siestas not with roasted corn coffee as the poor tenants in their haciendas had but with the real thing, roasted coffee coffee.  Perhaps it is the cozy interior and feel of the inside of the cafe. Perhaps it is the smoothness of their smoothies that does not only freeze the brain but kill boredom itself! Or perhaps it is the welcoming smile of its owners, Lalai and Rain.

The owners took pains in personalizing the cafe’s theme, or at least making it uniquely theirs and not some copy of megalomaniac capitalist coffee shops now turning populist because of so much popularity and after having been made a symbol of the good life for a lot of people. Their furnishings are uniquely designed for the shop-the wash basin, water container, vanity mirror, and even the trash bin. Add to that the car wash stop for only Php40. Park your car, have it washed, be treated to a sweet on-the-house brownie .

But, whatever it is, this is Turbo Cafe. It’s likable oddity and charisma are two things for the palates.  It is a very transient yet welcoming connection to one’s inner self. Turbo café is a refreshing escape away from the dungheap that is the metropolis. Here, coffee is great, people are themselves divine. Turbo Cafe is a welcome addition to Fairview’s culinary polish. At this café, you’ll devour your drink and pastry with so much gusto with no Sampaguita-laired sires bugging you. Here, you’ll be at peace with your coffee the way it should be at tea breaks.

Like.

Pakaagi

Diin ka pakaka-agi hin balay nga waray raysang kundi gugma?

May ko nahibaruan nga usa nga yarakanun tikang ha am. Kuno, it usa nga kalag kun di natatambal hit iya tanan nga buruhaton, di nakakaluyo ngat ha langit. Siring han kalagsan, pirmi la ini hiya magpipinakita ngan magpapa-abat. Iya ini bubuhaton para hiya mabuligan han mga buhi hin pag-ampo o pag-buhat han mga kinahanglanun para makaluyo ngadto han sunod nga kinabuhi.

Namatyan hin tatay an ak sangkay, hi ate Belen. Listo in hi ate Belen ha kinabuhi ngan di napatalumpigos bis gutiay. Yakan pa han mga Tubignon, nakinagutiayan la. Han akon pag-paabot han kanan-kamagsarangkay nga pagduyog han iya kasubo, usa la an iya yakan, “Aadto na hiya hin lugar kun diin it ul-ol usa nga langyawanon”. Iya ini baton han yakan ni Rizal nga, “It kamatay, pagpahuway”.

Diin ka man pakaka-agi hin balay nga waray raysang kundi gugma?

It ak pag-abat, antes pa man bumulag it kalag hit lawas, nakaka-agi na ini hin puruy-anan. Antes hiya mag-padayon maging usa nga misteryo, naka-uli na hiya. Kay it kalag, nakaka-uli dayon ha gugma hit iya pamilya. It kalag di nagikan ha iya panimalay. Pirmi may pag-paabat. Diri an pag-paabat nga kanan hit sugad diri ha aton, kundi an pag-paabat hin gugma nga bis ano it mahitabo, bis ano it hinungdan hit ngatanan, magpapabilin dara han iya ha pamilya dara han gugma.

Sugad hit usa nga amay nga nalakat, in usa nga tatay nga binmaya hin nga kalibutan pirmi la nga pamumulaton han iya mga anak. An mga anak pirmi la nga mamimintana para manhimangraw kun naka-uli na an tatay. Magpapadayon nga aadi ha kasing-kasing it usa nga tatay bisan kun kinuha na hiya han Gamhanan. Mayakan ka man hin pag-sarit pero an im tatay, ate Belen, pirmi la aada ha iyo. Magkikinita ha imo sugad han iya pagkinita han gintutuduan ka niya pag-lakat. Sugad han iya pag-ngirisi han ginhuhungit ka niya hin samporado han guti ka pa. Kay hi tatay, nakayakan nga dinmangat na hiya.

Kami nga imo mga kasangkayan aadi gihapon para ha imo. Bisan di mo kami kinahanglanon dara nga maaram kami nga nagsusulwak ka hin kusog, aadi kami kay kami it nanginginahanglan ha imo.

An imo tatay, naka-uli na ngadto han iya balay nga waray raysang kundi gugma. Nakaagi na hiya han iya kinahanglan kitaon.

Morir es descansar.

Remembering

“A vestige of the thoughts that once I had,

Better by far you should forget and smile

Than that you should remember and be sad.”

-Christina Georgina Rossetti

Someone is really never gone. Someone is still there waiting for lunch or saying you will go the distance or has a note to tell you there’s someone watching your back or wanting a plane ride.

Just how do you remember someone gone? When the tenderness has faded and gone to solitude, just how do you revive warmth and affection? When longing for that faint caress on your palm, just how do you recall sensation? When someone has bid love on you, just how do you recover that snail smile it made you and your day. Even when someone is gone, as moonlight recedes for day, you remember that once there was someone who made everything so adorable and expect to see a lovely sight again even in darkness.

So you think what could have been had things happened so differently, had the Sun never set on you. You muse now if things would have been different, perchance you would have had the chance to admit reciprocity of desire. Perchance you would have the guts to admit it bears you down to say next time. Nights would have been different too. Days would have been a lot brighter. Moments would have been a lot lighter. Maybe you would have shared more moments side by side talking about sweet and good things that only occur in sincere devotion. You bear the loneliness of a cerebral love that never really came true. But it leaves a lovely loveliness footprint that are unlike footprints in the sands of time.

Imagination stretches to a childish wandering when you try to remember someone who could have been. There is no limit to fatalism that only you could justify. So you think that if only you could hold your someone, it would have been so tight that it would leave a mark on the wrist and wherever your someone goes, you will always be tagged along. You think of triumph of the hearts much like musings of a future long gone but now may only be recalled in a thought. You are cognizant that you may never become as before.  Yet, you remember as if longing for an opportunity to be together again, to be together again for one last goodbye.

Remembering is a parting gift you never open.

Going the distance with Bottom’s Up and Doc. E

What started 2 years ago as a dream turned out to be a thriving party place and hang out for many loyal patrons. It livened up the area and gave opportunity for other businesses to open. I am, hence, inclined to say, it fertilized the area. It’s got good music, good food, welcoming ambiance, and the best pulutan! With nightly live entertainment, Bottom’s Up Bar and Grill is sure to take your blues away even at dead air moments. This place is serious of delivering sincere service to every client.

Bottom’s Up will go the distance. It’s owners are hands-on managers and impressively well-equipped to manage a business. With it comes choosing the right people, making the right decisions, and learning the right cranial software.

The most impressive thing about Bottom’s Up is their pulutan. All pulutan on their menu is virtually a must-try. I was told that each dish on the menu is a family recipe of owner Alvin Milan who also serves as the resto’s chef. I have tried a lot from the menu and every time I order a new taste I get excited and never disappointed. They have a way of doing tilapia that’s, I would say, mysterious.

Bottom’s Up invested a lot in inviting really good musicians. Opinyonista’s favorite is Doc. E. Doc. E is a medical doctor who’s soul really belongs to music. He was forced to pursue a career in the medical profession because of, well, compelling forces early on in his life. But now that he has the guts to really do what he wants, he sings and his audience at Bottom’s Up always scream for more. Caveat: Doc. E does not do consultations at Bottom’s Up. Doc. E can sing any song. Versatility is his middle name (cliche intended). And, almost all the time, he sings from memory. He does not use any lyrics sheets.  Doc. E will go the distance.

Bottom’s Up Bar and Grill is going the distance. It has already survived many challenges. Ondoy was the most exacting of these troubles. But this bar has been reborn to be become stronger and tastier for its loyal patrons, Opinyonista included.

Bottom’s up is for both the serious and the light inuman. It’s a sincere place for friends and family to have a nice chat and a good laugh over a couple of bottles of beer or more. It does not have any pretensions like most resto bars have. At Bottom’s Up, you’ll always go the distance.

Bottom’s Up is located along Felix Avenue in Pasig City near Sta. Lucia East Grand Mall.

They Are Never Like Fruits that Fall Off a Tree

Words are elusive. Very elusive. Writers and speakers will never think words are easy to come by. Words are elusive. They are never like fruits that fall off a tree-seen and appreciated even before they are ripe. Words should be beautiful. Never mind function. Never mind form. Words should be beautiful. Function will never make a word beautiful. It only makes the castle of words beautiful. Form is like function. Not the word itself but is like Mongolian wool that embraces warmly.

So when an aggravated emotion arrives, words are hard to come by. They take the form and function of things other than words. They become something else. They lose their beauty like arid dessert with only a form but bereft of essence. They metamorphose into very bad things. Very very bad things. So. So, in the heat of these aggravated emotions words never realize their destiny. They become ugly. Ugly, like the ugliest duckling in the world.

At a very o so special moment, words deliberately hide. They cower for fear of discovery. They hide in teeny-weeny brain cells decided never to come out ever. So words are persuaded. They like persuasion. But the persuasion that they like is irritating. They want to be persuaded like cousins who could not be persuaded by like to be persuaded nonetheless. They know they don’t want to accede to the persuasion but they like the importance that persuasion entails-entrails. No matter how the persuader die of puking his entrails, words would never come out. So? The speaker, like a dog hiding its tail when there is a thunderstorm, espasolizes! You know espasol?

Damn words! Why are they ever so elusive. They are never like fruits that fall off a tree. Like these fruits, you know how they taste. You visualize the colors and the signs of ripeness. You satiate on their juiciness! Yet they can  never be tasted because they are never like fruits that fall off a tree. They are geckos capacitated to stick on your pink gums until forever. Why are they so elusive!

Historical moments are best described not by words because of the latter’s elusiveness. Historical moments are described by their essence, their meaning. Even personal historical moments are well-remembered by pretty chemical concoctions inside our chests. Happy and/or sad. Words can never describe these concoctions. The latter are best felt than said. Even feelings that make us slave-maids following our masters can never be expressed in words. These words make us suffer. They make us suffer the agony of not being able to tell our own tales. But will we afterwards find pleasure in our pains, after suffering long (concocted from Homer’s Odyssey)? Words may never satisfy.

Words are tasty. Although elusive, they are tasty. Although words are never like fruits that fall of a tree, they are like fruits that hang on ze (because I have French accent right now) branches of a tree! Words are so tasty they are always at the tip of your tongue! O how lamentable the elusiveness of these words are. Tasty words are good. Tasty words are beautiful. But words are elusive. So damn elusive. They are distant and confused resemblance of what is inside every being.