Saturday, May 21, 2011

PCSO Scandal, part 3: Margie Juico's defense Against Manoling Morato

I was'nt able to attend the Blogwatch interview with embattled PCSO chairman Margie Juico. I read the statement she gave and in the interest of fairness, I will publish it here (with permission of course from Blogwatch).

What I read is such a PR-tsy statement that really did not answer Manoling Morato's point-by-point  allegations, meaning, it must be entirely true.

Really, Margie Juico is really in deep s...t. She tries to picture this as a personal attack against her by no less than her friend, Manoling.

For one, Manoling and Margie Juico have been colleagues since the Ramos era. She did propound an answer about the hasty sale of the QI which, she says was a result of the findings of engineers.

Let me just point you to a Daily Tribune article which says that the sale should have gone through channels. It did not. see link.

The statement below is obviously a veiled attempt to obfuscate the issues hurled by former Chairman Manoling Morato against the Juicos.

Margie failed to impress the bloggers (some of those who went there told me that she was flip-flapping and every single time, she contradicted herself). Judging from what I read just now, I am definitely not convinced.

As a strategic communications professional, with years of involvement in crisis PR, this statement is clearly the handiwork of a publicist, not really something worth of a defense.

Yet, you decide my dear friends if really the Juicos had nothing to hide.

Statement by PCSO Chairman Margie Juico
Let me go straight to the point. I’ve decided to break my silence on the false and malicious accusations being peddled by a sourgraping individual that fancies himself as a crusader. I hope this will be my last statement on matters that only feed someone’s ego no end.
I will confine my comments to the more relevant issues he raised against the PCSO officials, my husband Philip and myself. Ordinarily, spouses protect and defend each other against the malevolence of our detractors. But this is not one of those instances. There is nothing to defend against.
I will not stoop to his level of ignorance nor dignify the accusations that might exacerbate his childlike behavior and narcissism. It is enough for me to say that his charges are full of hot air, self-serving , and reeking with hate. Nonetheless, I will address the issues for the umpteenth time more for the benefit of the general public or of the greater audience whom I may have failed to reach.
We were accused of causing the transfer of the PCSO offices from the Quezon Institute compound in Quezon City to the PICC in Manila for personal gain. Mayroon daw kaming commission at tatlong (3) condominium units sa itatayong condominiums sa pag-aahente ng QI. Our detractor dismissed the findings of the structural engineers from the DPWH and the Quezon City government that the buildings might collapose should a major earthquake occur.
Ang Quezon Institute compound ay hindi pag-aari ng PCSO o ng gobyerno. Ang mayari nito ay ang Philippine Tuberculosis Society, Inc (PTSI) na pinamumunuan bg kagalang-galang na si Nini Quezon Avanceno, butihing anak ng nasirang President Manuel L. Quezon.
Kung ito man ay ibinebenta sa isang pribadong kumpanya, hindi ko alam at wala rin akong pakialam. Sabi ng mamang tumutuligasa sa amin, kaibigan daw niya si Mrs. Quezon Avancena. Ganoon pala, why doesn’t he ask Mrs. Avancena whether the QI is for sale or not and if it is , may nangungumisyon ba ? At kung mayroon, sino? Madali naming malaman ang katotohanan. Instead of indulging in fantasies and weaving malicious stories, he should just ask Mrs. Avencena for the truth. But I guess that would be asking too much of a person who has a long history of weaving yarns and engaging in malicious speculations against those whom he couldn’t influence or those who dare disagree with him.
On the PCSO transfer. Who should I rather believe, the licensed structural engineers or the perennial detractor who is neither an authority nor an engineer at all? Am I to disregard the findings and recommendations of the licenses structural engineers merely on the say so of our detractor? What are his qualifications ? Is he a licensed structural engineer? If he thinks he is right and the structural engineers were wrong in their assessments, why doesn’t he formally certify the soundness of the PCSO’s building structures in the QI compound? Weird, isn’t ?
The other issues he raised last week and weeks before that do not deserve a comment except to say that in many of his statements he refers to his illustrious father. Yes, his late father was an honorable man. However to paraphrase a famous saying, “Unlike Father, unlike son” What a shame.
Thank you.