The PNP Chief pointed out that only 14 barangay chairmen had been issued PTCFORs (permits to carry firearms outside residence) and these were only "because of verified threats to their persons". Ebdane underscored that he has not authorized anybody to carry firearms "without going through the process of applying for and complying with the requirements for the issuance of PTCFORs".
In response to The STAR editorial "Armed and dangerous" the other day, in which our editors pointed out that the last thing we need is "more trigger-happy gunslingers", the PNP noted that there are 42,000 barangays in the country – and only the chairmen of 14 of these barangays have been issued permits.
Let’s hope that the PNP Director General and his men stick to their resolve. There will be growing "pressure" put on them in the lead-up to the 2004 elections to place weapons in the hands of barangay officials. The word must be: No way. A gun gives the wielder a "power-high", no matter how you may try to disguise that treacherous emotion which has the capability of turning wimps into monsters. "Have gun, will shoot" has been the sad and tragic experience of the past.
Even in the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), which, alas, seems to have fallen in recent years from public esteem, gunslinging was always frowned upon. During the era of the late, legendary NBI Director Jose Lukban, some of us trained to be "NBI special agents". Our instructor was the NBI fast-gun and pistol champion, Edgar Bond (yes, he was related to James Bond, but this was a Pinoy Bond). The training was to draw with speed but fire with accuracy – whether using right hand or left hand. Shoot, reload, shoot. Right-hand firing. Left-hand firing. Shooting from crouching position, from prone, while spinning around. After learning how to shoot, the next most important lesson was to learn NOT TO DRAW your gun. Even under extreme provocation. In sum, your propensity to use your weapon had to be curbed in such a way as to become automatic.
Once you felt it necessary to draw your gun, and you drew your weapon, on the other hand, it was essential "to shoot to kill". Otherwise, as was demonstrated so many times in the past, our NBI instructors pointed out, the other guy will kill you. (Nowadays, please don’t ask me to draw. With age, my reactions have slowed – but, in a pinch, who knows? You never can tell.)
The object lesson is that to put a pistol or automatic in the hands of an untrained barangay captain would be an invitation to disaster or for the barangay toughie to commit suicide. If he turns out to be a bully, he may try to bluff.
Thus, when he points his weapon but hesitates, his antagonist may knife him or beat him to death – or happen to be carrying a concealed revolver, too.
The Pro-Gun buffs claim that "Guns don’t kill – people do." They’re more correct than they realize.
I’ve noticed this tendency of Ebdane to be "too nice" in his replies to pointed queries, or even to his subordinates in general. You know the drill. In this cruel world, being nice is equated with weakness and gullibility.
When The STAR ran the front page story on September 6 that Ebdane was in favor of arming the barangays, all hell broke loose – and understandably so. I was out of town, but I’m informed that Senator Aquilino "Nene" Pimentel, Senator Rodolfo Biazon, and other solons castigated Ebdane for the very thought of "arming the barangays". Biazon, a gutsy former Armed Forces Chief of Staff and ex-Marine General, snorted that this move even indicated that the PNP cannot effectively do its job.
I hope this storm of reaction has registered on the PNP. As for General Ebdane, I trust "Jun" will stick to his contention that nobody is exempt from going through the proper "process" in securing a permit to carry. If you ask me, nobody should "carry" and all unauthorized firearms must be relentlessly mopped up.
Truly, whether barangay chairman or journalist, somebody with a gun under his belt is prone to the temptation of becoming "armed and dangerous". Bar none.
Mar said he had called to assert that the Philippines had stood fast and refused to concede on its opposition to the WTO imposing "investment rules" on this country and 69 other developing countries. The Philippine delegation, led by Roxas and including Agriculture Secretary Luis "Cito" Lorenzo Jr., also linked arms with its fellows in the Group of 21 in decrying the "farm subsidies" given by the developed and industrialized countries to their farmers to the detriment of growers and farmers in the deve-loping world.
What contributed to the Cancún Collapse is the undeniable fact that rich nations will never give up subsidizing their own farmers (did we expect them to commit political suicide at home?). It is a fact that the 30-nation Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) – meaning Europe, Japan, and the US, in effect – spend some $350 billion a year in trade-distorting agricultural subsidies. This is seven times more than their spending on "aid" to developing nations like us.
What was quite clear was the vehemence with which the European Union pushed the concept that all participating nations must yield to those rigid WTO investment "rules". It’s good we rejected this.
One of the other major bones of contention (raised by the Africans, mostly) was the $3.9 billion assigned by the US for cotton subsidies to their domestic growers. It was noted by protesters in Cancún that this amount is far bigger than the $2.2 billion the US gives in aid to South Asia (India, Pakistan and the subcontinent) and East Asia. The 650 million "rural poor" in Asia, I guess, will have to go on dreaming, or having fitful nightmares, about a brighter future.
Cancún has demonstrated that the divide between Rich and Poor is fated to remain for years to come. But wasn’t the idea of a level playing field in trade and production doomed from the start? The Big Boys will always try to boot the Little Boys in the butt.
Let’s not kid ourselves. There will be hard times to come in the wake of the Cancún debacle. But there’s a wonderful term coined by Indonesia’s late President Sukarno, for all his other faults and his womanizing, and this was berdikari or self-reliance. The trouble is that Bung Karno, by his extravagance and personal excesses, made berdikari a joke instead of a shining reality. Yet, it’s an idea to ponder, and seek to implement in this country which has no "investment" options left: Self-reliance.
To begin with, we must cut out our reliance on gossip.
Remember the PIATCO scandal? The Supreme Court ruled the PIATCO contract illegal and out of bounds – but has not yet rendered its final and executory decision. I trust the High Court has not forgotten this case, and will act on it with finality and without further delay.
I reminded Mar that when we were having breakfast in the Blair House during the President’s state visit to Washington DC, he had promised to get the Terminal 3 "open" and in operation by July. That month came and went, and it’s now mid-September. Terminal 3, in all its abandoned isolation, is still comatose, while the expensive equipment already installed inside the buildings is deteriorating.
Secretary Roxas had informed me, when I brought the matter up before he left for Mexico, that the Chengs – i.e., PIATCO Chairman Yong Cheng and his son, Jeffrey – were insisting on being "paid". I hear they’ve asking for something in the neighborhood of $430 million. Whaat? Is this true? The general contractor, Takenaka, is still owed about $70 million by PIATCO. Moreover, due to the delays in the construction, another $70 million may still be needed to complete the terminal. Probably we’re looking at a whopping P7.5 billion to get that darn terminal up and running. But we must get it running.
Roxas had better get cracking – if he’s planning to run for a Senate seat. The clock is ticking on his Terminal 3 project. He mustn’t get saddled with the monicker of Miserable Mar, the Light That Failed.
To avoid this, he shouldn’t get suckered by the PIATCO kids who gave us the saga of the now-missing Alfredo Liongson – remember, that mystery man from Pampanga and the Rotary Club?
Last Sunday, before we took off from Bangkok’s snazzy Don Muang International Airport, I had cause once again to admire that modern complex and contemplate on how far Thailand has left us behind. Our Thai International Airways Flight TG 624 very efficiently took off from a smooth and bump-free runway, with other jet aircraft coming in for a landing on a parallel runway – and half a dozen jumbo jets and Airbus 330s awaiting their turn, lights blinking patiently, to take off. The spacious tarmac and runways, with trees and gardens planted on every side giving Don Muang the appearance of both modernity and chlorophyll splendor, were in sharp contrast to our cramped NAIA, which is surrounded by squatter shanties and adjacent to a stinking estero.
Would you believe? When we came in for a landing, two lighted letters were even missing from our airport’s name: "NINOY AQUINO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT". One "N" was dark, and the "A" had disappeared.
The only completely-lighted word still shining from that battered NAIA 1 Terminal was the greeting, "MABUHAY". Sadly, I didn’t see anything to mabuhay about.