A: For more than two years, I have kept my silence, hoping I was wrong about the Arroyo government. Instead, the events have proven me right - she is corrupt and ruthless, and she will do anything to stay in power.

I leave now to join the fight for a credible government, though I will not benefit from this. The government and the military have tried to break me and my group for more than two years, linking us to the opposition and accusing us of accepting money to oust Arroyo. Arroyo and her cohorts have tried to break everyone who disagrees with them, and I am sure they will continue to do everything they can to break me.

This early I swear: I will not accept any position in government, either in this one or the next. There is no reward for me in this fight except the knowledge that should I die, I die in peace, for I am fighting for our people and our country.

The military is often painted as a bogeyman, and the prospects of a military takeover raised as a specter to frighten people into silence. Yet the past two successful revolutions in which the military participated show us that in both cases, the military only intervened, just enough to tip the scale of power. Then they went back to their barracks.

It is unfortunate that there are officers among the military who harbor political ambitions, and sometimes use the powers of their office-and the prestige of the military-to influence political events. But ordinary soldiers do not support such actions.

Politicians are quick to point at the seven attempted coups during the Aquino government, and our own short-lived activities, as attempts to take over the government. The government has called what we did in Oakwood a mutiny, but we had no plans to seize power, then or now. We thought then - naively - that exposing government anomalies would be enough to stop them from happening again.

This is not to deny the military's role during martial law, or the atrocities some of its members committed then, and continue to commit now. This is simply to point out that the military, as an institution, as a group, have always held the civilians in respect and followed civilian authority.

Past presidents and politicians have corrupted some military officers, and instituted a system that promotes and rewards the corrupt. But the ordinary soldier, when you get down to it, remains committed to serving his country. For regardless of what we are, and what we are said to be, everyday we leave home prepared to die, fighting not our own personal enemies, but the enemies of the people.

The role of the military is to protect the people. The protection extended to the State is given because it represents and takes care of the people. But the bottomline is that all the institutions we know - the executive, the legislative, the judiciary, and even media - enjoy what powers and prestige they have because they represent and serve the people.

But what we have now is a situation where these institutions no longer represent and serve the people. Neither do they enjoy the trust of those whom they claim to represent. In a situation where the State does not represent the people, it does not deserve the protection of the military.

We are now in a legal bind: the military is enjoined to protect the executive because the president claims she won the elections fairly and squarely. When this mandate was questioned, however, she hid behind Congress and used technicalities to protect herself. She insists that the people take as a fact something she has failed to prove, and she has closed all avenues for investigation.

What then is the basis for the protection she expects the military to extend to her, except the assumption that everything is normal until proven to be wrong, that a person is innocent until proven guilty? But when you refuse to allow others to prove you guilty, what can people do? And what is the legal basis to claim innocence, when there is no chance to prove you guilty?

We do not go into arguments like these because we fear anarchy. We fear that which we do not know, and the government is quick to exploit this fear by conjuring up visions of soldiers marching into the streets and taking over government, a military who is more violent, corrupt, and unresponsive to the people as this government is.

But the reality is what government fears: that everyone is a citizen first, and those soldiers who leave home everyday ready to die facing unknown enemies are more likely to side with the people against the government.

This has been proven twice, in the past two uprisings we have had. The government is raising the specter of a military takeover because that was what they planned against Estrada, had Estrada not left Malacanang. They fear a military whose officers will listen to the people, not to them. They fear officers whom they cannot bribe, or confuse with their twisted logic. They fear a group of people against whom technicalities will not work.