In sum, the speech is written like a report, chronologically stating what happened. However, notice the absence of the following:
1. There is some ambiguity on the issue of informing the chain of command. The only aspect that Pnoy revealed was that, there was coordination "but left the issue hanging if the coordination was "enough" or "more than enough."
2. Pnoy's statement belied the earlier statement given by his DILG secretary Mar Roxas who practically lied to the Nation when he said he did not know about the mission. This shows there is a distinct miscommunication between Pnoy and Mar Roxas.
3. Pnoy made no mention of the role reportedly taken by PNP chief Alan Purisima, who was reputedly the one who planned the mission and informed only the Executive secretary and the President directly, leaving Mar in the lurch.
4. Pnoy did not even mention the role of his DILG secretary in all of these. Why is that? In normal times, this shows the lack of trust between the President and the DILG. Likewise, it is also normal for the DILG secretary himself informing the President and not the other way around.
5. The speech is too "careful". There was deceit on the part of the MILF, and by the looks of it, the reason why they were able to massacre all these cops because the victims were made to believe that the MILF will not attack them due to the ongoing peace agreement between government and the MILF. Besides, there is at least two situations when both the PNP and the MILF cooperated with each other. Why, when the cops are after two high profile targets who are all international terrorists, the MILF acted against the cops.
Under normal circumstances, the protocol is for the commander to inform his "higher ups" before they execute.
MY questions are these:
1. Okey, the President is RIGHT when he honoured the dead. But, how about honouring their memories by giving them justice? Will the government demand reparations from the MILF?
2. What will happen to those who massacred those cops? Will they be surrendered and meted justice according to the laws of the Philippines?
3. The President did not give any answer if there is someone to be held accountable for this one. More than those sweet words, our President should have given concrete details and answers like, will he fire those leaders who took part in this botched mission?
I pity Mar Roxas. BY admitting that he's clueless as to what happened, Roxas was pictured like a baffoon, a clown, who is only there as a ceremonial head of one of the most important agencies of government.
Actually Mar Roxas has no place to go. Either way he loses.
If he admits, then, the public will demand for his head. If he feigns innocence, then, he will look like a very pitiful leader who is caught with his pants down or more hurtful is, he becomes the odd man out in the equation.
Worse, Mar was caught lying, something which an ambitious person does to protect only his reputation.