THE BAGO
(Presented by Vic Buaquen at Third Bago Congress in San Emilio, Ilocos Sur on April 23, 2003)
Introduction
The task that I have before you today, is to present to you my findings about the Bago. I know however, that you, the audience, if you knew from where I speak of, you would better appreciate and understand what I have to say. Let me therefore say a few words about myself.
My father is 100% Bago who was born in Sigay, Ilocos Sur in 1908. My mother is a half Ilocano and half Tagalog. She was born in Baguio City in 1912. I was born in Baguio City, grew up there and finished my studies there too. That, therefore, makes me a 50% Bago by blood and not very much in upbringing in the ways of the Bago. My exposure to the Bago is limited to my one-year study in grade 3 among the Bagos in Tabuk, Kalinga, and the frequent overnight visitors in our home of Bagos in transit from the Ilocos going to Tabuk and those going to Ilocos from Tabuk. I can remember many nights in my childhood where it is difficult to move about in the house because all the rooms and floors, including the kitchen and stairs, were occupied by sleeping Bago visitors. Of course I was exposed to a Bago father who behaved like a Bago. I believe that because of his Bago character he is a successful father, respected in his job as a police officer and much sought after by many Bagos from everywhere asking his help to find a job, go to the doctor, resolve legal problems, approach important personages and a lot of other reasons.
My mother grew up in Guisad in Baguio where they had a Bago neighbor named Baket Maria. Everyone in the neighborhood was afraid of Baket Maria and avoided her for supposedly being a "manggagamud," a witch. My mother also told me that Baket Maria liked to cook and eat tadpoles from the nearby creek. So, having such regard of the Bago, my mother said that she had the biggest surprise upon learning that the man she married is after all a Bago. She told me how she would confine herself after cooking meals for visiting relatives of my father who come in their g-strings. She said she never imagined having Igorot for visitors in her house.
In later years when I was already grown, my mother told me that she had a total change of heart about the Bago. She told me that she eventually found them to be a loving and gentle people. They are industrious, fair in their dealings and are very straightforward people. That she is much closer to a whole lot of Bago relatives than her own relatives on her side of the family. Today, my mother in her dwindling years wants to come home soon from Texas to spend her last years with Bago relatives in Tabuk. And because of all these, you can see why I am now a 100% Bago, by choice.
The focus of my presentation is more on who is the Bago and what are the choices confronting him today. I might be delving back to history every now and then to feature or emphasize some matters but I will basically be touching on current and recent history - meaning events that have transpired which many of us have witnessed during our lifetime.
Background
Let us at this point have a brief look fifteen years back from the first organizational stirrings of the Bago which was the establishment of the Bago Cultural Society, Incorporated in Baguio City in 1987. The highlight and culmination of the efforts of this organization was their coordinating the First Bago Congress under the sponsorship of the Office of the Northern Cultural Communities then headed by the very active Regional Director Rosalina Bistoyong. Director Bistoyong has espoused the cause of the Bago and has much credit for spearheading many of the Bago movement today. The purpose of the First Bago Congress was to establish the formal identity and tribal delineation of the Bago. It was a very good beginning that provided a solid foundation for much of our ongoing organizational efforts at present. It also gave birth to the Bago National Cultural Society of the Philippines, Incorporated (BNCSPI) that is now serving as the people’s organization for the Bago as contemplated in the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act or IPRA. Our continuing organizational efforts has led us to the Second Bago Congress in Saytan, Pugo, La Union in the year 2000 which unfortunately was hampered by the non-cooperation and hostile attitude of the Region I National Commission for Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) Regional Director David Donrique towards the Bago and the BNCSPI. This controversy with Director Donrique has resulted in the failure to document the proceedings of the Second Bago Congress. This problem seethed on until in October 10, 2002 Donrique issued Memorandum 083, which withdrew recognition of the Bago as one of the indigenous peoples of Region I. This resulted also to the termination of all Bago scholarship in Region I to the disgust and anger of many Bago scholars and their families. BNCSPI opposed and denounced Memorandum 083 until no less than the NCIP Chairman Reuben Lingating issued Memorandum 58 on March 20, 2003 revoking Donrique's Memorandum 083 and officially confirmed the Bago as one of the indigenous peoples of the Philippines. Incidentally, the appointment of this official is a case in point of how insensitive and thoughtless political patronage can cause widespread harm and havoc among our own people. We could therefore say that Donrique has unwittingly caused the accomplishment of the objective of the two previous Bago congresses - the formal and direct acknowledgement of the Bago identity, which I would say, is resoundingly unprecedented. I say resoundingly unprecedented because while the government has previously included the Bago among its listing of indigenous peoples in the Philippines, this is the very first time that an official government pronouncement has singularly cited and confirmed that the Bago is an indigenous people and an ethnic group. I think that without Donrique's Memorandum 083 it would probably take us countless congresses before we can even attain this.
I would like to take the opportunity at this time to disabuse the minds of many among us of their hostile regard and their anger towards Doctor Jesus Peralta. Many of us are angry with this poor fellow because Donrique was quoting him or citing his research as his basis for declaring that there is no Bago tribe. Dr. Peralta, however, never did say nor mentioned in his work that there is no Bago. He has never completed an ethnological research on the Bago. Dr. Peralta is an anthropologist with the National Commission on Culture and Arts and he was asked in 1996 to do a research on the Bago purposely to provide the proper ethnological documentation of the Bago as a tribal group. Unfortunately, Dr. Peralta did only a four-day quick survey of six Bago communities and interviewed some 46 informants or people living in those communities. He never did a research as should have been properly conducted which would have taken several months if not years and voluminous documentation. Using his own words in his endorsement letter of his four-page report to the Office of Northern Cultural Communities dated November 8, 1996, and I quote, Attached please find the preliminary report on the Bago of Region I, stemming from the quick survey done with your office, unquote. Dr. Peralta was in effect saying that he did not do a proper research on the Bago but just a quick survey and he never stated that there is no Bago. He, in fact, affirmed that the Bago exists as a people. The conclusion of his four-page report was that, I quote; the ethnic boundaries of the Bago cannot be defined clearly, unquote. His report of only four pages was actually very scholarly done and there is nothing therein that would give the faintest suggestion of any bias against the Bago. We cannot fault nor blame Dr. Peralta for anything and we should, therefore, not be angry with him.
The Bago
Let us get back on track and proceed by asking, who in the first place are the Bago? Let me first answer this from a source that is quite proximate to me - my family. My father, who I think should have told me more about the Bago or about my Bago relatives, has at least said that his forebear originated from Agawa in the vicinity of Besao in Mountain Province. That this forbear was a trader with the lowlanders who eventually intermarried with them and finally settled in Sigay, Ilocos Sur, in the hilly regions adjacent to the lowlands. Trade with the lowlanders was then, for the mountain tribes, a matter of survival for they could not obtain many basic necessities otherwise.
I got a pleasant surprise one time when I spent the night at the Horeb House behind Saint Luke's Hospital in Quezon City when the inn keeper, Florence Gusadan, on seeing my name said that she still has a grandfather with the same name in Agawa who still wears his g-string. This confirms that one of my main ancestral lines did come from Agawa. This being the case I would say that the Bago is a product of trade and are the offspring of intermarriages between the Cordillera mountain tribes and the lowland Ilocano. They dwelt in the border regions of the lowland Ilocos and the Cordillera Mountains. These offspring must have gone on to evolve their own unique culture and traditions, which are the merging of the ways and practices of their upland and lowland ancestors including their spoken dialect. That is why, indeed, their dialect is not an original dialect per se but a mixture of mountain tribe dialect with that of the Ilocano. This is the reason why many would say that the Bago has no original dialect and go on to make the fallacious conclusion that there is therefore no Bago. And I dare say that whoever is saying that there is no Bago is also a non-entity himself because every dialect or language he can speak is also tainted with borrowed words from other dialects and languages.
This postulation on who is the Bago is confirmed by the research done by one of our officers in the Bago Cultural Society, Dr Eulalio Austin, where he stated, and I quote, Besao folks went back and forth to either Santa Lucia, Candon or Santa Cruz to either buy salt or cotton, collect rentals or as day laborers, unquote. We could glean from here that the highlanders were going to the lowlands not only for trade and business but they were also doing it for work or employment. Even Dr. Austin's definition of the Bago lends support to this proffered definition. Let us allow Dr. Austin, however, to tell his own story about the Bago as he will be doing so in a short while.
Even for the Bago of Bakun, Benguet who are still settled in the mountains, their origins are still attributed to the Besao area. Maurice Malanes in his INDISCO case study entitled Power from the Mountains and published by TOPLINQ of Baguio City quotes that for Bago-Kankanaey of Bakun, I quote, many trace their roots to Pingad and some to Kagubatan and Besao, all of which were part of the old Lepanto district and now part of Mountain Province, unquote.
I would like to cite the masteral thesis of Carmen Vibar-Basco on the Bago entitled Two Bago Villages, which was heard and accepted by the University of Manila in March 1954. The subject of her study was actually the adjacent barrios of Saytan and Cuenca of Pugo, La Union. This is a very interesting study for it goes to details of several social, economic, religious and other cultural aspects of Bago community life. She also said in effect that these two Bago villages came into existence because of trade between Cordillera highlanders and the lowlanders of Rosario and nearby places.
She also said that the Bago descended from the Igorot. And I would like to delve a little on this. The noted historian, scholar and writer H. Otley Beyer, in his article The Non-Christian People of the Philippines, said that the word Igorot has often been used to designate the majority of the pagan inhabitants of northern Luzon but in the Census of the Philippine Islands published by the Bureau of Printing in 1921, the word Igorot was, I quote, confined to the native inhabitants of the subprovinces of Benguet, Lepanto and Amburayan - with a few across the borderline in neighboring provinces, unquote. The greater part of these three subprovinces is actually Bago land. We can then claim to be among the true Igorot groups together with the Ibalois, Kankanaeys and the people of western Bontok. It happens that in the information sheet filled up by all the applicants for membership in the Bago Cultural Society except the non-Bago who got married to a Bago, their ancestry come from within this particularly defined Igorot territory.
Even the Rev. Charles J. Beurms, I. C. M. writing in Pugo, La Union and transcribing from issues No. 1 and No. 2, Volume 2 of the Primitive Man published in January and April of 1929, calls our practices of begnas, mangmang, singa', bagat, sangbo, etc as Bago-Igorot sacrifices which affirms further our Igorot connection.
The late Roger Salibad, our first President of the Bago National Cultural Society of the Philippines, Incorporated, in his treatise "Emergence of a Forgotten Hilltribe - The Bagos of Northern Philippines," in his turn, defines the Bagos, I quote, Ilokano-speaking Igorot, unquote and also, I quote, hilltribe dwellers in the borders of the Cordillera and the Ilocos region, unquote.
E. L. Morr Tadeo Pungayan, in his article The Bago's Struggle for Distinct Recognition published with the SLU Research Journal Volume 30, No. 2 of 1999, says that the Bago has at least four versions to consider regarding its genealogy but goes on to say as part of his Postscript that the Bago nonetheless, and I quote, they are the mixtures of many other Philippine languages and cultures, unquote.
An explanation why many Bagos in Ilocos and Pangasinan claim their origins from the general vicinity of Bontok and Lepanto could be found in an article entitled A Breath of Free Air by Fay Dumagat in pages 1681 to 1687 of Volume VII of the Filipino Heritage published by Lahing Pilipino Publishing Inc. And I quote from page 1683 “For about five years in the 1660’s the Spaniards under Monforte occupied Cayan and the adjacent Lepanto and Bontok areas. This was the largest and most extensive expedition to the area. It even reached the borders of Cagayan. During the expedition converts were made and eventually resettled in the Ilocos and Pangasinan.” These passages were discussing the longest and biggest Spanish expedition to obtain gold from the Cordillera which ended in failure and also proved to be their last concerted attempt to do so. It should be noted at this point that the converts of the friars that were resettled in Ilocos and Pangasinan came now under the protection of the friars and were no longer subjected to the forced labor imposed upon the pagans and “remontados” or those who fled from Spanish subjugation. William Henry Scott further writes in his article entitled Igorot Responses to Spanish Aims: 1576-1896 “…having reached the inner limits of their mountain fastness, the Igorots began running away to the lowlands. The Commandante of Amburayan complained in 1894 that 21,500 of the 1890 population of 30,000 had fled the district to evade forced labor.” It becomes easier therefore to understand that those Bagos that later on fled from their homes in the foothills of the Cordillera to evade the forced labor imposed upon them, joined their relatives that were earlier resettled in Ilocos and Pangasinan. They correctly reasoned that if they were with the favored flocks of the friars they would also be free from the forced labor. Note also that more than two-thirds of the inhabitants of those places fled from their homes which practically is equivalent to transplanting the Bago communities of Amburayan to other places. Carmen Vibar-Basco confirms such migration in her Two Bago Villages: “The history of these two villages further show that the later migrations came from the eastern towns of Ilocos Sur and from northern Luzon.”
I have had the opportunity to lengthily discuss the origins of the Bago with the Provincial Planning Officer of Abra, Mr. Felipe Tinggonong, and he affirms that the Bago is the result of trade and intermarriage between upland tribes and the Ilocanos of the lowlands. Accordingly, the Tingguians of Abra regard the inhabitants of the western border towns of San Quintin and Pidigan that are adjacent to Ilocos Sur and Nueva Era in Ilocos Norte, as Bago for being the offspring of intermarriages between the Tingguian and the Ilocano. And I found a confirmation of this with the census records of the NCIP, which shows that there is a greater number of Bago in Ilocos Norte than in Ilocos Sur. I purposely checked this when I went to Ilocos Norte last month and I learned from the NCIP Provincial Officer, Jane Lando, that the reported Bago population of that province must be the mixture of Tingguian-Ilocano and the Apayao-Ilocano cultural communities who are true residents of the province. The definition of the Bago by several writers to include the definition in this presentation qualifies such cultural communities of Ilocos Sur and Ilocos Norte as Bago.
With all these citations, I proffer that the key to the seeming perplexity as to the ethnological boundaries of the Bago or to the problem of the Bago identity itself, is the fact that many of us refuse to admit that we just devolved from upland tribes and lowlanders. As if not arriving to these shores as original tribal group negates our ethnic identity or dignity. Many, if not all of us, can only trace our origins as a mixture of mountain tribes and lowlanders so we might just as well face up to it. I don't think there is anyone among us who can claim a Bago ancestry that was already Bago before his or her arrival to Philippine shores. Our very dialect will bear this out - it is a mixture of mountain tribe dialect and Ilocano. And where did the mixing of the dialects occur? Did the Kankanaey and the Ilocano, for example, meet before arriving in the Philippines, had offspring and arrived here as Bago tribe? This does not seem plausible and is very unlikely.
Pursuing this matter of mixed dialect further, I cite Volume One of the Census of the Philippine Islands of 1903 where talking about the Igorot it states in page 458, and I quote, On the western slope of the Cordillera, we have in Lepanto several dialects differing somewhat from one another and approximating those of the neighboring tribes. In the north, the Igorot, is very like the Itneg of the Tinguian of Abra. In the eastern rancherias it approaches the Ipukao of Bontoc, while in the southern rancherias it is the Kankanaey dialect, which is spoken in northern Benguet and Amburayan, unquote. These particular region and location is actually Bago land. And these supposed Igorots were actually our forebears, the Bago. And their dialect with Ilocano as its main matrix borrowed words from neighboring tribes according to the proximity of Bago localities to said tribes.
Let us not be overly worried. To assuage our fears and apprehensions, I would like to inform everyone who may not know this yet, that even if we just descended from existing tribes in the country, we still qualify as indigenous cultural community or indigenous people (ICCs/IPs) by definition of the IPRA. Item h, Section 3, Chapter II of the IPRA after its main definition of the ICCs/IPs goes on to say that such ICCs/IPs shall likewise include, I quote, peoples who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, at the time of conquest or colonization ... unquote. Let me inform you as well, that even under the main definition of ICCs/IPs by the IPRA we qualify as indigenous people because Bago communities existed in the country before the arrival of the Spaniards.
We don't have any problem as to our identity actually except that which we made for ourselves. Even including the problem of non-recognition of the Bago by Donrique because even he is a Bago himself. Our first BNCSPI President, Roger Salibad, in his book about the Bago has characterized the Bago as a “forgotten hilltribe” which is more deprecatory than an affirming description of the Bago. I am not aware of anyone seriously questioning, doubting or assailing our identity, except ourselves.
It is my belief that the seeming paucity of historical records of the Bago has gotten many of us disturbed or agitated and led us further on to clamor for recognition and acceptance. Demanding recognition places us in a wrong if not funny and embarrassing situation. Recognition, just like respect and love, is something automatically and freely given to those who elicit such response. Can we imagine ourselves going around in public and asking people we meet to please recognize and respect us? I think the Bago has enough dignity and self respect to avoid assuming such an embarrassing posture. Again, nobody else is really demanding recognition for the Bago but us Bagos ourselves. So let us rise from this blindness and let us be content being the good and beautiful Bago that we truly are.
And if I may add, historians have actually been writing about the Bago even if they did not recognize it as a distinct tribe. As I have just cited, page 458 of the Philippine Census of 1903 was precisely referring to the Bago dialect in Bago land even if it called them Igorots. Here is another proof that historians were actually writing about the Bago. In Otley Beyer’s article The Non-Christian People of the Philippines, which I have also cited earlier, he was referring to an Igorot territory the bigger part of which is Bago land. He went on to write in that same article about those supposed Igorots : “Broad blue and white stripes, or plaid effects, are the favorite form of textile design, with a soft red used for decoration.” The Ibalois or the Kankanaeys don’t use such color scheme but this is actually the native textile design of the Bago. This was the color scheme of the attire of the Bagos from Sudipen when they did their native dances and rituals during the La Union Indigenous Peoples Night at the plaza of San Fernando, La Union on February 25, 2003.
Let me try an explanation why many historians seemed not to have noticed our existence, using a little physics and psychology. Let us imagine a piece of white board and let us go on to paint half of it black. What colors do we see? If we say that we only see black and white that would be correct because that is what our mind and our perception tell us. That is the psychology part of it. But from the viewpoint of physics , to say that there is only black and white, would be wrong. Between the black and the white is actually a transition band not readily perceptible. Should we enlarge or magnify this band we will see it to be gray which is exactly a mixture of white and black. The Bago is that transition band that many historians failed to recognize. This is also very much like traveling to Baguio from the lowlands where you just suddenly find yourself pulling out your jacket because it is already cold in the higher elevations. You did not perceive the point-by-point shift in temperature. Thus many historians with such perceptive and psychological bias failed to notice the transitional nature but distinct traits and identity of the Bago.
In view of all the foregoing it could be seen that the most reliable definition of the Bago is what we Bagos know ourselves to be and not the definition of historians, academicians and scholars. The simple fact that many of us are still clamoring for a definition of the Bago should clearly show that historians, academicians and scholars have failed us in this regard. The only acceptable definition of the Bago today is self-ascription of the Bagos themselves. While we are aware of our identity as far as we can remember and now having a legal basis for its confirmation in the IPRA, we still seem to want it formally laid down. And I hereby propose a seed definition for a more comprehensive one that could be done later. This definition is culled from our own deliberations in previous congresses as well as other Bago sources which should be sufficient to distinguish us from all the other ethnic groups and indigenous peoples of the Philippines. And, it is: The Bago are hilltribe dwellers in the border regions between Ilocos and Cordillera mountains who are the offspring of intermarriages as well as product of trade between mountain tribes of the Cordillera and the Iloko of the lowlands. They have evolved their own distinct culture and dialect, which distinguish them from their neighboring tribes and other adjacent ethnic groups.
Before concluding, allow me to pass on to you what I learned why we are called Bago or Bagbag-o. My informant is 87 years old Mr. Sergio Calletong of Cuenca, Pugo, La Union and he said that it was passed on to him too by the elders. He said that the event likely happened when the Tagudin Catholic Church was still relatively new. This must have been somewhere in the middle of the eighteenth century because the first baptismal church record therein, according to Rev. Carlos Desmet in his article in the August 1951 issue of The Little Apostle of the Mountain Province, was dated April 10, 1735. The priests then of Tagudin together with their sacristans made regular trips to the interior towns such as Sugpon or Alilem to hold mass or officiate in religious ceremonies. In one such trip where they had to spend the night in the visited town, the sacristan found himself joining an evening occasion where there was a group chanting which must be the day-eng or oggayam. And we know that even in other tribes there is always that choral refrain by the group that is chanted in response to the rendition of an individual chant. And the sacristan was struck by the continuous repetition of the group choral refrain , which was "babagoni ala laki." The sacristan however understood it as "babago kami a lallaki" so that he eventually asked the priest how come that they keep calling those community folks Igorot when they actually call themselves babago. The priest started using such ascription in his talks from the pulpit until it became common usage and evolved into the term Bago or Bagbag-o. This is believable and might have happened too. You be the judge.
Conclusion
In closing let me get back to a little of history. The Spaniards came with unbelievable cruelty and brought suffering to the country for more than three and a half centuries. They wrought destruction and irreversible damage to much of the culture of earlier Philippines. With rapacity, lust for gold and enslavement of people in their hearts they came proselytizing and professing a religion of love. A religion that asks of its followers to love others as they love themselves. Many of us naively failed to see those Spanish conquistadors for what they truly were. The Americans came, initially no better than the Spaniards, and after suppressing our new found freedom and independence eventually found the heart and the conscience to eventually grant us freedom. They did give us our democratic system of government and socio-economic infrastructure of education, civil service, public roads and buildings, a legal system, jurisprudence, body of laws, etc. While many of us complain that we are nonetheless still affected by their global reach and dominating influences until today, what is important is that we now have the freedom to decide for ourselves our future and destiny.
The Bago never did quite got rid of the stigma of being a people discriminated against by mainstream society and neglected by government through the years. Such second-class-citizen mentality has plagued us long enough to condition much of the Bago psyche today. Would we believe it now if someone would say that our emancipation from all these is at hand? We better believe it!
Some high minded individuals has gotten the United Nations not so many years ago to take a second look at the plight of the indigenous peoples of the world. And they were able to influence the world body toward beneficence and reforms for the benefit of indigenous peoples. Such movement has reached us in the Philippines and enabled the promulgation of the IPRA. And this is the door to our emancipation from our supposed adversity or disadvantaged condition. I would like to mention in passing that the Philippines on July 20, 2002, has made a historical milestone for being the first country in the world to formally grant title to ancestral domain claims of its indigenous peoples.
The correction of the wrong done to the Bago and for that matter, all the indigenous peoples of the country, is now being offered in a platter to us all. Sad to say, many of us do not even recognize this. It is nonetheless here and we all better move to improve our lot because no one will do it for us if we don't do it ourselves. We must hasten to act because the winds of change might come and deprive us of all these opportunities that we presently have before us.
One useful stance that we could possibly take is to regard the Bago as a house needing repair and rehabilitation. Let us take a very close look at every single part of such a house and determine which ones needs repair or replacement. Or determine whether some still good parts might be best replaced with recent devises or innovation. When we are done rehabilitating, we would hopefully have a reliable and sturdy abode that would house us confidently in our march into the future, bringing with us what are still good, valuable and useful but discarding everything else that are deadweight and of no further utility.
I would say that the Bago has his whole future before him and today is particularly rife for him to regain his fast fading cultural identity and ethnic character. Of course he can choose to continue to do what he used to do and will continue to get what he used to get. And one day soon, there would be no more Bago except in memory. Or he could choose to avail of the benefits of the IPRA which now provides him the means to take possession and control of his ancestral lands and domain as well as allows him to return to self-governance and his self-determination in economic, social and cultural matters. And it so happens that in so far as the IPRA is concerned, the Bago is fast asleep and unaware. And why is this so? The IPRA is now six years old and what has the Bago done? Nothing! Matmaturog tayo. It took the Bakun IPs five years to work for the issuance of the certificate of ancestral domain title of their 30,000 hectares domain. And what exactly is it that we need to do. We need to start organizing our tribal development councils in coordination with the NCIP field offices together with representatives of the Bago Cultural Society. Each Bago community will also have to complete a census of its inhabitants. This census will have to be turned in together with other requirements before the granting of any land or domain title. Then the tribal development councils would have to start documenting the history and land as well as domain boundaries of each Bago community. Then the Bago community must have to collectively formulate what would be called the ancestral domain sustainable development and protection plan (ADSDPP). The NCIP and Bago Cultural Society representatives should be able to give some help on this endeavor but the responsibility remains principally with the community.
I am particularly hopeful that aside from regaining possession and control of our ancestral lands and domains, we could also continue in a fuller practice and spirit of sintatako, which is probably the foremost cohesive trait, the main communal and social philosophy of the Bago. As important to restore as well is the democracy practiced in the Bago villages of old which is purer and healthier form of democracy for which they have been known to undertake many communal matters with one mind and unanimous consent. We can only do all these together, with a lot of other positive changes, with our collective will. Shall we now get awake, rise up and get together to build something that we could be proud of to turn over to those coming after us? Quo vadis Bago? Where goest thou? This ends my presentation and a good day to everyone.
bravenet.com