ILIGAN City ― The anchor of a morning radio program here was talking about some vitamins that could cure or somehow lessen the “tantrums” of kids.
With that, I texted him “What about the tantrum of an ex-president in an investigation of his war on drugs?”
Melvin, the anchor couldn't help laughing. And I understood it as an agreement of what I said because he commented that he watched it until 2:00 am.
I was talking about that presentation of former senator Antonio Trillanes IV about the bank accounts of the Duterte family, including his partner in criminology, no, I mean his life partner, Honeylet.
Trillanes had made some details on it like when the additions to these accounts came in, as in April and October of each year. And the other investigators caught on when the former president said that he was willing to sign bank waivers so those interested could look into these accounts. And one said that he would sign the waiver, “now na.” Or words to that effect.
“Anong kapalit, sampalin ko ‘yan before all of you!”' He was referring, to who else but Trillanes. And then there was the act of hitting the former senator with the microphone before him. But how can he hit the good, or is it bad senator when there was former senator Leila de Lima too sitting next to him? I was then reminded of my nerdy friend Mike who showed me a post on his social media that demonstrated that America, in fighting China, had to hit this country first before he could hit his favorite enemy, China.
Earlier though de Lima was asked whether she would like to “transfer” from her seat. But she answered. “No.” So we can make our own conclusions on that.
With that angry talk and action, the activity was suspended. And the “bank accounts”' matter was forgotten.
Maybe, that was a good strategy. And then I remembered another strategy by another “resource person” former head of the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office. In which she was crying when reading an affidavit. About some interaction with FPRRD regarding the implementation of the “war on drugs” and about doing away with some personalities in the PCSO that they did not like. She was crying and sobbing and wiping her eyes while reading such an affidavit.
Yet the topic wasn’t forgotten in the process. She was just allowed to proceed after she had gotten hold of herself. Meaning after the crying and the sobbing.
So, I ask now. Is a “tantrum” a better strategy than a “sobbing” or “sentimental” strategy? Or, are there other factors involved?
Email: nora.lady@yahoo.com or text 09073384874 | 09277983167
