Today’s View: Bias Begets Arrogance Begets Irrationality

And when the real facts as they happened did not conform with the exactitude of his plans, his fascistic nature as a patronizing authority figure surfaced. He was afraid the media was bound to gather the real facts from the ground.  And this gave vent to his arrogant posturing and unreasonable utterances.  

By DON PAGUSARA
Davao Today

“Are you neutral? If you blush, you are not.” Davao Police Chief Ronaldo de la Rosa blew these words straight to the face of Irene Dagudog, a reporter of Davao Today. She was only trying to ask himwhy the police prevented the protesters from proceeding to the Sta. Ana Police Station where two of their colleagues were detained.

Earlier, at the height of the commotion that ensued at the rally in front of the DSWD Office, KarlosManlupig, a correspondent and photojournalist of the Philippine Daily Inquirer, was shouted at with insults:  “Why are you taking pictures of the protesters when you are supposed to photograph the injured policemen?”

And when he reasoned that he had already taken photos of the injured policemen, he was rudely chided, “Then why are you still here?”

AndManlupig replied,“I would like to ask the protesters some questions.”

But a sharp command came, “Get him out of here!”

And Manlupig was roughly pushed to the gate with their shields and sticks until his face was sandwiched between a shield and a gate bar and suffered a slight injury. When he tried to bring the matter up to the Police Chief he was scolded, “You’re in the middle of a commotion, so don’t expect special treatment!”

If you examine closely the words uttered — and the manner of their utterance — by Police Chief De la Rosa, you will never miss the loads of bias carried by the utterances, let alone the sheer arrogance with which they were made to humiliate their targets.

Clearly, Chief De la Rosa is guilty of arrogance and disrespect in dealing with the members of media.  But this arrogance derives from a built-in bias that mars his rational behavior.

In his prejudiced mind, he believes everything that he does as a law-enforcing agent is reasonable and justified.  As far as he is concerned his actions are always within the bounds of law and have no allowance for misdeed.

And when the real facts as they happened did not conform with the exactitude of his plans, his fascistic nature as a patronizing authority figure surfaced. He was afraid the media was bound to gather the real facts from the ground.  And this gave vent to his arrogant posturing and unreasonable utterances.

So, who is truly biased?  Is it the media practitioners or the police as evidenced by the words and actions of no less than Police Chief De la Rosa himself?

The so-called maximum tolerance as apolicy and code of conduct purportedly abided by state security forces during rallies and people’s mass action is but anempty slogan.  In fact, it is a raison d’tre that provides justifying  premise for violent dispersal and other violent acts by the police.

Look, is it this policy of  maximum tolerance that prompted Chief de la Rosa to deploy snipers on rooftops with their guns aimed steadily on the people massing in front of the DSWD Office?

It would not be surprising if with Chief de la Rosa’s subjective bias he actually  issued “secret orders” to these snipers to selectively gun down media men on the ground (a la Schindler’sList) when the opportune moment came!

After all, when the metaphorical “press the trigger” signal comes, what would dominate in the consciousness of these uniformed wolves is “to kill, kill, and overkill”!

And this was what happened to the hapless protester who was mauled virtually to his death by the policemen.   (Don Pagusara, davaotoday.com)