The news of the accident last 23 August shocked the families of Hong Kong tourists deeply. This was the deadliest attack on visitors in Philippine history.
The video footages of Hong Kong nationals held hostage taken by ABS-CBN and GMA shocked us into empathising with the victims. It was perhaps because, based on my scrutiny, the Arroyo government was able to negotiate with terrorists, who are always intimidating us by their threats, but , oh well, almost all negotiations were successful, evidently.
But why was the hostage stand-off on a commandeered Philippines bus ended in bloodshed and that it lasted for twelve hours? Where was the President when the thing turned out? Doesn’t the leader of the government have a duty to make certain that a particular problem is solved? Perhaps, if we are going to think about or discuss a problem in an intellectual way, without involving our emotions or feelings. But could we stand all that pointless intellectualising about the preference of his secretaries and advisers that the president should ignore the wishes of the majority to intervene personally to stop the problem as soon as possible? For myself, I think their bungling assessment of the situation was a sign of their lack of common sense. It was a crazy advice. See, the negotiators had demonstrated almost unbelievable incompetence in their handling of the problem, and this could be traced back to who took on them. What brains does he have in taking people into service? See, the Philippine National Police's assault team which tried to rescue the tourists from Hong Kong was inadequately trained, armed, and led.
Well, for me, no amount of damage control after that drama can disengage the smash up done or even just to soothe the aggravation felt by the Chinese bureaucrat and the rest of the Chinese society. Mr Aquino’s image has been ruined and he is now seen as an ineffectual chief by the rest of the world, not because of himself, but his own advisers and the media realm held and run by his connections.
Mr Aquino’s failure to do anything which might provide a solution to that problem at some point in and noticeable inattentiveness after the heartbreaking occurrence were a total image management disaster here and out of the country.
I think most Filipino voters have bad taste!
It was so scarey an occurrence, nine Hong Kong tourists were dead along with the discontented ex-policeman who seized their bus in a bid to get his post back. We'd have given it some serious consideration if we were Mr Aquino!
Most of us, understandably, are clear, that any negotiator has no control over strategies and options, he or she is involved in buying time for the hostage taker to consider other options—but had they been experienced and all set to that problem, such butchery of eight lives of Hong Kong tourists (and of Mendoza) could have been avoided. It was the mistreatment of the situation that caused that to happen.
I wonder how the negotiators actually communicated with the hostage taker. Was a dispassionate perspective kept? On TV, I observed that the police actions were negative.
There could have been other choices for the hostage taker. He could have negotiated with the police for a flee route, and could have laid down his arms—an M-16 assault rifle, small firearms, and grenades—to the police. But the saddest thing he did was he chose martyrdom, he killed the hostages. Was safety of the lives of the hostages prioritised? Well, we can surmise or wait for the Hong Kong police investigation result.
The drama began just about 10 A.M. that day of 23 August when Mendoza, wearing a military uniform and carrying a gun with a long barrel, flagged down the tourist bus and asked for a ride. He seized the bus carrying no less than twenty Hong Kong people and no less than three Filipino workers in the historic neighbourhood of Manila. He agreed to free nine people all through negotiations. That meant that Mendoza was at that time sane. So I wonder why such conflict we were seeing on TV went downhill when if truth be told Mendoza was not belligerent just then. They could have conciliated him rather.
But instead, policemen wearing flak jackets, clothing worn by the police to protect them from bullets and weapons, some clutching assault rifles, undertook to storm the bus. After about an hour of unsuccessful attempts, in which random barrage of bullets would be heard and bullet holes were sprayed in the side windows of the bus, the sniper fire claimed Mendoza’s life. I am afraid that there might be victims who were taken life by friendly fire. And how about if there had been victims who just acted as if they were lifeless to mislead the hostage taker?
By the way, does the government have a move to revitalise the culture of despondency and hopelessness that moved in a threatening way towards the late Rolando Mendoza after by all accounts being unjustly discharged from the police? I think this culture is Mr Aquino’s, too: he just wants to discharge people without due process. You remember, Mr Aquino wanted those appointees of former president Arroyo to leave their job. One very distinguished is the appointment of the present chief justice of the Supreme Court. And in regard to playing the blame game over corruption and other Philippines problems, Mr Aquino is the person who I admire and whose behaviour I try to copy in blaming other people especially Mrs Arroyo.
No comments:
Post a Comment