Wenceslao: Unfair, absurd claims

TEN days after the infamous Rizal Park hostage crisis and those absurd or unfair criticisms, theories and claims still abound, among them:

--That smile. Do you really think President Noynoy Aquino would make light of the post-tragedy situation by smiling during the inspection of the bus that was commandeered by ex-policeman Rolando Mendoza and where he killed eight of his hostages? So why the fuss about “the smile”? Then again, nitpicking doesn’t listen to reason.

Updates on President Benigno Aquino III's presidency

--“Missing” P-Noy. Related to this, P-Noy as ground commander.

Some wise guys asked: Where was the President at the height of last week’s hostage crisis? That was either an innocent query or one intended to spark speculations and insinuations. Of course, no president in his sane mind would play golf or go to bed in that situation.

But I would have liked Aquino to face the media immediately after the crisis was resolved. Or to have at least issued an official statement. I don’t buy the line, however, that the President should have been hands-on, meaning he should have acted like the ground commander. The hostage crisis was for the experts to resolve.

--Ombudsman’s fault. I agree with this point only on the aspect of the delay by the anti-graft body in resolving Mendoza’s case, pushing him to the edge. But flog the ombudsman’s office for refusing to humor Mendoza by giving in to his demand to dismiss his case? This is a legal process we are talking about and not mere child’s play.

Consider the number of unresolved cases lodged in the anti-graft office. Had the ombudsman given in to Mendoza’s demand, wouldn’t every accused be tempted to go hold people hostage so their cases would be dismissed, too?

--Negotiator subduing hostage-taker. This idea is based on the observation that Mendoza lowered his guard in the early stages of the crisis, especially while talking with the negotiators.

Why didn’t the police jump on the chance and either subdued Mendoza by grappling with him or ordering snipers to shoot him?

Sounds logical in theory but foolish had it been done. I mean the subduing part. As for the use of snipers in the early going, that’s not how a hostage-taking incident is resolved.

Authorities still needed to get a clearer picture of the incident before striking. Like, what firearms or explosives did Mendoza possess? Did he have an accomplice on board? Besides, snipers were still probably positioning themselves at that time.

(khanwens@yahoo.com/ my blog: cebuano.wordpress.com)