With attention riveted on the pope himself, most people probably missed the fact that the pope mobile used by Pope Francis in Tacloban, where it was raining hard on account of tropical storm Amang, did not have any windshield. As a result, organizers had to scramble for some temporary measure with which to shield the pope from the lashing wind and rain.
In the end, they found a sheet of clear plastic, similar to those used as "trapal" on tricycles, and mounted this up front to where the windshield ought to have been to provide some measure of protection from the elements for the pope. To those who did notice, it seemed like a comic and irreverent twist to all the preparations that had been mounted to ensure that the papal visit would be as safe and as comfortable for the pope as can be.
What a sight it was to behold -- the pope in a raincoat, moving around the quadrants of people gathered at the airport, and on to Palo in a motorcade, standing and waving from inside a "proudly Philippine-made" pope mobile that had a cheap "trapal" for a windshield. What happened? Why did the pope mobile have no windshield? And if designed not to have one, why was it used in Tacloban where, it was known days ahead, a storm was headed.
From what most people learned, there were three such pope mobiles made for the papal visit. At least, from what most people saw, the pope mobile the pope used in his Manila events had a huge curved windshield that went from hood to ceiling, providing the pontiff with ample protection, and not just from the uncooperative weather.
From what had been reported in the days running up to the pope's visit, there were three pope mobiles made specifically for the momentous occasion. Why the one that had no windshield was the one sent to Tacloban is difficult to see. Who made that fateful decision? Who was responsible for deciding which pope mobile goes to where? Why have the organizers refused to take cognizance of this lapse?
For a huge lapse it was indeed. Not only was a puny plastic "trapal" insufficient to provide security and protection, it also was an insult to the dignity of the pope and the solemnity of the occasion. There he was, the leader of the entire Roman Catholic Church, going around in a vehicle with a "trapal" for a windshield, a "trapal" that was flapping and alternately bulging and depressing in the wind, like sails on a boat.
Hopefully, this was just an honest oversight and not part of some deliberate attempt to belittle and demean the Tacloban visit of the pope, as opposed to the grand and grandiose preparations that went into the Manila leg of the visit. Pardon the thought, as well, because for a visit that was deemed as historic as it was important, how can such an important detail be overlooked?