I DOWN WID FREUNDEL
Submitted by HAMILTON HILL
FM92.9 the voice of my choice reported it. Nationnews.com published it. PRIME MINISTER STUART SUPPORTS THE SPEAKER. ‘Hold your ground’ was the message from one comrade to another. Question is why shouldn’t he? Why should he not support his comrade? Why should his comrade not hold his ground? What now confronts this country is exactly what its citizens in some sick, twisted and demented way seem to enjoy. For in the midst of it all the Country at large jubilantly celebrated ERROL BARROW DAY.
Who cares that today represents a blatant reversal of every single progressive policy aimed at the advancement of poor Barbadians by the late Skipper? Who cares that his pet project called EDUCATION, the vessel crafted to sail any native Bajan regardless of colour, class or creed into the ocean of equality has now been ran aground off the coast of Jones beach? That John Connell or the other Senator whose name escapes memory at this time never came close to heaping this level of shame and embarrassment in the lap of a ruling party, but were still made to fall publicly on the sword of retribution does nothing to inspire today’s Bajan as to what real leadership is. We like who we got,and must take what we get.
We had a chance to send a clear message just last week. One hundred and thirty persons if that many participated in a march. What are the numbers on any given Thursday for Q IN THE COMMUNITY? That Barbadians did not come out and in their numbers stretch from St Michael’s Row to way passed Pelican, and in so doing send a clear message to this bunch is disturbing.
Since most Bajans seem to be done wid Freundel, I join the crowd and will even propose to go a step further. Freundel Stuart once said that history will record his administration as the best this country had ever seen. I propose that since we have made such a mockery of the memory of Errol Walton Barrow there should be a day set aside for Freundel Jerome Stuart. As a boy I remember we celebrated Guy Fawkes Day in Barbados and all he did was attempt to blow up parliament. FREUNDEL STUATR SUCCESSFULLY FUCK UP OURS.
Barbados Underground 
Walter
Quite frankly, the Opposition is engaging in pure theatre. In my opinion they have hopelessly bungled this matter. The Leader of the Opposition is too experienced in parliamentary procedure to make such elementary mistakes. The Opposition should have brought a motion of no confidence against the Speaker. Referral to the Committee of Privileges does not make sense; he did not breach any of the rules or Standing Orders of the House. He is alleged to have behaved in a manner in his private life that would tend to bring the office of Speaker into disrepute.
It does not matter if he is guilty or not, the mere fact that a lawsuit that does not appear to be frivolous has been filed against him. That alone should have been enough for him to step aside and set about to clear his name. The Speaker should not be embroiled in this type of controversy and continue to occupy the Chair.
My take, and I could be wrong, is that the Opposition does not want to remove the Speaker at this point, since they do not want to do anything to trigger an election out of fear that they might win. They just want to make him unelectable at the next elections. They will embarrass the hell out of him and they want nothing more.
The Opposition are afraid of an election. If they win they will have to set about the task of cleaning up the mess that the Dems would have left and that is not easy. They prefer to regain the Government when the economy starts to turn around. Unfortunately for them, this Government does not have any idea how to restart the engines of growth in the economy.
Right now Barbados is between a wolf and a cliff.
Sent from my iPad
>
LikeLike
@Walter Blackman January 22, 2015 at 11:59 …Interestingly enough, you overlook this very important and critical point completely. Why?…
Didn’t overlook it, rather left it as a logical extension of the the other remarks.
The DPP would still be the person to determine whether to indict Carrington because as long as the police are aware of a possible crime they can proceed accordingly. A civil matter has absolutely no bearing on a criminal complaint.
And the reason why I did not like the comparison is because the prosecutorial
latitude in a white-collar action is incomparable to that of a matter involving rape.
As I mentioned, what great public right would the criminal case really be correcting. Even in the event of non-payment a criminal judgement does not properly resolve the matter as Mr. Griffith does not have his money. And for all practical purposes Carrington’s reputation would be so tarnished that he would be finished as a politician and so too his law practice would suffer.
In the event of a non-payment then the civil process should take its course and liens placed on his possessions to fulfill the judgement. A mini Barrack.
The rape charge is a whole different ball game
There are a lot of public rights to be protected with a criminal conviction.
Let’s take your tale and presume that babysitter was also called Carrington.
Do you think we would be having these discussions? Can you contemplate our PM defending the actions with comments about this being a private matter? For a child molester? No, I don’t think so.
That sir, is why your comparison falls into a deep hole. There can be no ideal comparison between what we term as ‘white collar’ crime and hard core instances of physical pain and psychological debasement particularly for the matter you described.
To be honest Walter the comparison is wrong on every level. That it’s even reasonable that a mother would seek child support in the situation you describe is damning.
But as I said I accept this was for debate purposes ONLY.
LikeLike
@ DeeWord
Wrong again …as usual.
Why don’t you resist the ongoing temptation to take these obviously WRONG positions on BU nuh?
You don’t see what great public right would the criminal case really be correcting?
You see nothing wrong with stealing?
You see no issues with officers of the court betraying their fiduciary trust?
Steupsss…
LikeLike
@Bush Tea January 23, 2015 at 7:39 AM…I presume you read with one eye closed and the other half-open.
Again I explained the position carefully. I am not justifying stealing. I was comparing the instances described by Walter.
That you can read my remarks and conclude that I see nothing wrong with stealing is amusing.
I believe I clearly said:
“Even in the event of non-payment a criminal judgement does not properly resolve the matter as Mr. Griffith does not have his money…And for all practical purposes Carrington’s reputation would be so tarnished that he would be finished as a politician and so too his law practice would suffer…
the civil process should take its course and liens placed on his possessions to fulfill the judgement.”
As sensible and intelligent as you are you really want to debate that sending him to jail for what…(I’don’t know the guidelines so let me guess three months at most considering his stature) would serve some great public good that a forced sale of assets to repay the debt and all costs would not.
His law practice lick up, he outta parliament , off all sorts of boards, his reputation in the gutter.
David, said you went to Cawmere but considering my friends who went there I can’t believe you actually sit in a Wharton class and dissect English and analyze and things like that. Well sorry maybe you did, the Bushie way.
Don’t mek me laugh. Steupsss…
As usual sir, no problem.
LikeLike
Look DeeWord
Bushie is not really interested in arguing with you, but if you think that what you repeated below is “clear,” ….then frig you… 🙂
++++++++++++++
“Even in the event of non-payment a criminal judgement does not properly resolve the matter as Mr. Griffith does not have his money…And for all practical purposes Carrington’s reputation would be so tarnished that he would be finished as a politician and so too his law practice would suffer…
the civil process should take its course and liens placed on his possessions to fulfill the judgement.”
++++++++++++++++
shiite man… you sound like Ross, …a lotta words and ain’t saying a phang…
If you agree with Walter just say so …or hush up man…..
LikeLike
@ DeeWord January 23, 2015 at 8:32 AM
Dee Word, I can see where you are coming from and want us to go as far as the Speaker is concerned.
So tell us, DW, how should we go about giving Leroy Greenverbs and his sidekick T T their just desserts. After all Mr. small crook Carrington only ‘misappropriated’ just over 200 grand whereas the other corporate crooks have taken millions from innocent (even if some were greedy) policyholders.
Please Mr. Thoth, tell the CLICO pensioners what to do.
LikeLike
Even in a jurisdiction that wants matters heard on the merits of the case, in a default, before we get to an arguable case, the defendant must show a good excuse for the default and no prejudice to the claimant. I am certain the motion judge weighed all three prongs before making her decision, including the order which has given rise to the press coverage. The claimant’s age and wheel chair condition must play in the consideration of prejudfice. He cannot, even in the best of circumstances, wait around for another fourteen years to be heard. Also the motion judge can decide that on the papers, defendant has no likelihood of success. Therefore, let him bear further costs in pursuit of futility, if he so desires.
LikeLike
I am totally dumbfounded how knowledgeable men..who are supposedly pillars of this society could stoop to such levels of malignancy and immorality…. ya mean to a man in a wheelchair? Cud laud man, where is your sense of dignity and empathy?
As a reminder,these so called eschlons of our society, are handsomely paid to uphold integrity and be dignified in all their duties (private, public or otherwise).. How then can one say that after this incident one’s perception of the office held should\would not be tarnished?
PM Stuart should also know better than the stance he has taken on the matter…after all he stands as leader of our country….It is a down right shame what is transpiring today…one which is sour and detremental to our struggling country. We must remember our legacy. This is not an imperceptible incident as the Waldo Ramsey dog issue Mr.PM….be assure the world is looking on.
LikeLike
@millertheanunnaki January 23, 2015 at 8:54 AM …Dee Word, I can see where you are coming from and want us to go as far as the Speaker is concerned…So tell us, DW, how should we go about giving Leroy Greenverbs and his sidekick T T their just desserts. “—————-
Miller to be frank I really in going no way with Carrington. The discourse I put out was a response to a scenario Walter made. I disagreed with the comparison and stated why.
My basic point about Carrington in Walter’s scenario is that the criminal case is at the discretion of the DPP but the civil judgement is key because if the matter is in abeyance then Griffith and family screwed. Sending Carrington to jail and then Mr Griffith dies without his money is absolutely useless to me.
As far as CLICO is concerned that is white collar crime at its zenith but a lot of differences re the top dog.
He is shielded from an individual civil suit in general terms due to incorporation but based on the alleged malfeasance legal action should be brought.
This is not a matter of discretion by the DPP because simply stated he has to protect our citizens’ financial rights as a country and should be getting all evidence to make a case in a matter of alleged wide spread financial misconduct.
So either there is no such evidence or as the former PS in that Ministry suggested there is ample evidence but there is no appetite by the authorities to initiate proceedings.
The other course of action would be a class action suit (have not been following it so not sure what’s happening there) by policy holders against the CEO and company and their lawyers with evidence of malfeasance, corruption and illegal conversion of monies etc etc. Of course much easier said than accomplished.
So Miller I am not condoning stealing just indicating that punishment must be effective and not just following a legal path that leads to a useless resolution for the claimant.
If the resident BU sage Bushie (and his other sages) believes that a criminal action against Carrington will effect some additional punishment that a comprehensive civil action leading to asset forfeiture will not effectively achieve, then so be it.
There are not mutually exclusive, of course, so both can happen but I am absolutely focused on the getting a civil result.
LikeLike
Walter Blackman January 23, 2015 at 12:40 AM #
Caswell Franklyn January 22, 2015 at 11:50 PM #
“I don’t think that the PM advised Carrington to get a lawyer because a criminal charge is in the works. My take on it is even more sinister…If the judgement is set aside, the matter would be set down for trial and with a whole set of adjournments, Griffiths would meet his maker long before the case is heard.”
Even if this is so Mr. Griffiths has next of kin, perhaps siblings, spouse, children, grand children, great grand children, nieces, nephews, etc. If Mr. Griffiths does not receive his court ordered money before he dies, then his estate including anything owning to him goes to his next of kin, so the debt will still remain to be paid.
If my auntie left me house, land, and bank account (as in fact she did, hee!! hee!! hee!!) and any lawyer tried to take my gifts then I would make that lawyer, those lawyers regret the day they were born. And after I am dead I know that my children have enough intelligence and enough aggression to make any Bajan lawyer understand which god he is serving.
We have to learn to treat these lawyers as scruffily as they treat us.
Whenever I go to see any lawyer I always take my possee with me. One or two siblings and one or two adult children. We full up the lawyer office. The lawyer understands without being told that there are multiple witnesses to any and words, documents and transactions. And we never sign anything unless all ‘o we review it first.
This tends to keep lawyers very, very honest.
LikeLike
As a member and supporter of the Democratic Labour Party I am extremely disturbed,embarrassed and angry with Michael Carrington and PM Freundel Stuart.
I do not understand how Transparency International can continuously rate Barbados as one of the least corrupt countries in the Caribbean. I wonder if that group follows the happenings in Barbados.
Barbados at sometimes operates as a Third World Banana Republic.
A high ranking individual such as the speaker of our House of assembly is allegedly involved in nefarious activities,yet he is still allow to continue in that esteemed post.A travesty of high proportions.
Prime Minister Freundel Stuart wants us to believe he is a man of integrity,yet he defending an individual who is nothing but a common criminal.Robbing an elderly handicapped man of his family’s property. A despicable act.
Michael Carrington should be made to resign forthwith as speaker of our House of Assembly. He is worse than the common criminal.
LikeLike
DeeWord January 23, 2015 at 10:39 AM #
“As far as CLICO is concerned that is white collar crime at its zenith………
This is not a matter of discretion by the DPP because simply stated HE HAS TO protect our citizens’ financial rights as a country and should be getting all evidence to make a case in a matter of alleged wide spread financial misconduct.”
DeeWord ,
The above quotation is what you said about CLICO. I agree wholeheartedly with your comments.
Now let us take a look at how you are viewing Mr. Carrington’s situation.
First of all, I noticed that protecting “citizens’ financial rights” and “getting evidence of alleged financial misconduct” which you consider to be mandatory actions for the DPP in the CLICO situation are now downplayed in the Carrington case.
Instead, you start making reference to “prosecutorial latitude in a white-collar action”.
Finally, you concluded that “my basic point about Carrington in Walter’s scenario is that the criminal case is at the discretion of the DPP ………….”
Now, you have me confused.
Is there no citizen with a financial right in the Carrington case?
Why is there no need for the DPP to gather evidence of financial misconduct in this case?
LikeLike
@Walter Blackman January 23, 2015 at 12:28 PM #…Finally, you , the concluded that “my basic point about Carrington .” Now, you have me confused.
Real quick; simply stated Walter the Carrington matter is the type of social wrong that can be adequately handled in civil court. The DPP can surely be involved but in practical terms I think civil redress can hurt enough.
The CLICO matter is alleged as crass fraud and deep financial malfeasance to an entire class of citizens; that sir, is the type of things that a DPP should be sinking his/her teeth into.
Of course as in the Carrrington matter there is civil recourse and I too want to see civil redress which actually will have to be the way forward to get anything practical.
But such egregious (alleged) deep-seated misdeeds – which purport to involve government ministers and others of high positions in a virtual conspiracy to defraud- MUST be investigated by the state watchdog for criminal punishment.
If not then, when?
Sometimes a conviction is necessary and in others a civil suit will do the job perfectly. Often both are needed. That is CLICO.
Some of those wayward officers should be penalized and never allowed to have fiduciary responsibility again.
You know better than me how difficult it may be to claw back the millions of cash CLICO officers have already been paid during these alleged periods of malfeasance.
Walter, there is no comparison; nothing confusing there. And yes I do understand your technical point that a wrong is a wrong.
LikeLike
DeeWord
I follow your arguments but I must respectfully disagree. This matter ought to be reported to the police. Mind you, I do not have all the evidence as I am yet to hear Carrington’s version of events. However, going on what is already in the public domain, it would seem that Carrington was placed in a position of trust and he betrayed that trust in circumstances that could be adjudged to be criminal. He is not in the same position as a thief who snatches a handbag and runs away. He is not a common criminal and should be treated in accordance with his status.
He should be tried and if found guilty; he should be lost away in jail. The civil aspect of this matter can also go on. So far there is a judgment against him, and if he fails to obey the judge’s order, he should be jailed for contempt. Also the aggrieved party should get the court’s permission to sell Carrington’s assets to satisfy the debt.
Sent from my iPad
>
LikeLike
Caswell Franklyn January 23, 2015 at 2:49 PM #
DeeWord
He is not in the same position as a thief who snatches a handbag and runs away.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Man he ain’t got to run nah where. He got he ,Mercedes Benz.
LikeLike
Caswell Franklyn January 23, 2015 at 2:49 PM #
Exactly.
LikeLike
I haven’t heard one sensible argument in support of the Speaker.
LikeLike
Caswell @2.49pm
This a classic example of a logical fallacy
LikeLike
@Caswell Franklyn January 23, 2015 at 2:49 PM # I follow your arguments but I must respectfully disagree. This matter ought to be reported to the police.——-
Actually Caswell, based on your remarks and my previous rants I don’t see any disagreements with the positions noted.
What is different is that I am focused on the civil matter and could care less if he is arrested for criminal wrong-doing.
But you need to clarify for me the statement: ‘This matter ought to be reported to the police’.
Why so?
The police can (supposed to) act on their own accord for ANY alleged criminal offense as I understand the law.
If a story turn up in the Nation that I went to my doctor to get a gunshot wound attended to the police can turn up at my door to investigate a ‘possible’ criminal action regardless of whether a ‘report’ is made to them. Yes?
Based on the information in the public domain the DPP can request details from the court of this Carrington case and if he determines that a law has been broken he can get his team to initiate action towards a prosecution.
Mr. Griffith need not be the one to lodge the charge to the police.
Is that not how it works in BIM?
So what is stopping the DPP from exercising his power in this case?
LikeLike
Yawn!!
@ DeeWord
The police and DPP usually depend on evidence to pursue criminal charges in the court. “Something posted in the newspaper” does not constitute good evidence. They therefore usually START with a potential credible witness/victim and seek to build a case.
Even where such willing witnesses/victims exist, it may not be easy or practical to pursue a criminal matter in court due to the quality of evidence, unwillingness of witnesses etc.
shiite man…. what would you expect a PRACTICAL DPP to do where a KNOWN victim chooses NOT to pursue criminal charges? …arrest the victim and make them testify?
Wuh even when victims come forward and bring charges …you know how often they recant when things cool down and waste the damn police’s time?
steupsss….. any way you are playing an important role….
On your other NON-point that the “…matter is the type of social wrong that can be adequately handled in civil court.” you can’t possibly know how wrong you are….
The very genesis of our problems here in Barbados is exactly that attitude which seeks to excuse and decriminalize such social wickedness as the strong taking advantage of the weak, the rich of the poor and the healthy of the sick.
It is why parents are willing to settle for a couple thousand dollars not to press charges when some rich man rapes their under-aged daughter.
It is why we would excuse a politician who seeks and accepts bribes.
When we accept such low standards, where does it stop?
If the only price to be paid for being caught trying to rob a handicapped old man is to pay that man what is rightfully his anyway, ..why would ALL lawyers not just try the same shiite…?
…a fella like Ross would be smart enough to hand over the dough long before the trouble start with clients like this case….. Meanwhile, the typical Bajan who just complains quietly, (…or who himself has some shiite to hide and can’t afford to raise hell) would be easy pickings….
As Caswell says, the matter ought to be reported to the police AND a civil suit should be pursued to get back his money, …with Interest; ..AND all legal and other costs associated with his efforts…..as well as MAXIMUM embarrassment AND Debarment of the culprit.
LikeLike
@ DeeWord January 23, 2015 at 5:33 PM
“Mr. Griffith need not be the one to lodge the charge to the police.
Is that not how it works in BIM?”
“Quis custodiet ipsos custodes.”
Not as long as the chief guard is also a Griffith. Why do you think Mr. Parris can walk the streets in supreme confidence while being in ataraxia? Do you think it is only because he has pals in very high places?
Now what do you think would happen if Mr. Griffiths were to make a complaint against Mr. Crook for stealing (sorry, retaining client’s money for personal use) to the police?
To use a Walter Blackman’s analogy, wouldn’t it be like a case of a prostitute complaining that Donville Inniss raped her during rehearsal for an upcoming X-rated movie?
“Sin lies only in hurting other people unnecessarily. All other “sins” are invented nonsense.” ~Robert A. Heinlein.
“If moral behavior were simply following rules, we could program a computer to be moral.” ~Samuel P. Ginder
LikeLike
Here are the words from our honourable Prime Minister dating back from 7/12/2013 in an interview with the BBC:
Speaking under the theme ‘How Barbados maintains its clean image’, the Prime Minister maintained that “while the rules that are written down are very important, what is more important are the rules that are not written down. The rules that are not written down are the rules that hold the society together and one of those rule,s you can easily imagine, is doing the right thing”.
http://www.barbadosadvocate.com/newsitem.asp?more=local&NewsID=31491
LikeLike
@Bush Tea January 23, 2015 at 6:45 PM #…”Even where such willing witnesses/victims exist,… unwillingness of witnesses etc…
shiite man…. what would you expect a PRACTICAL DPP to do where a KNOWN victim chooses NOT to pursue criminal charges? ”
As I said earlier you read with one eye closed and the other half-open or as you would say, you really have nothing to say so you giving lot of long talk to nothing.
From outset I said the criminal matter is irrelevant to me as the civil matter was where the real effect would be achieved.
If you had taken even a modicum of time to read the damn posts you would appreciate and understand my comment of wasting time of the DPP etc.
Rather you post a riposte of me even though my comments stressed the best and most practical course for Griffith.
Now you come back here and tell me about the ‘practical DPP’. Steuupse.
I am not a lawyer so let me be simple: Whereas a civil matter can only proceed with two parties to the dispute a criminal matter can be completed or initiated by the Police only.
That’s obvious in every murder case and many others. Despite your rather puerile remark many people have been convicted of crimes based on evidence not provided by the victim. It all depends of course on the severity of the matter in the eyes of the police whether to pursue..
Here you wid this profound remark: “you know how often they recant when things cool down and waste the damn police’s times” to argue a point where evidence is sitting in the civil court and DPP can start there re his investigation IF he really wants to.
With one eye still closed, you pontificate “something posted in the newspaper” does not constitute good evidence” when I specifically spoke about a gun-shot which the police MUST investigate.
I said clearly: “…the police can turn up at my door to investigate a ‘possible’ criminal action to ensure it was not an illegal…”
That’s a serious matter. What type of gun, do you have a license, how were you shot….Steuupse. You can’t be serious.
If the report was of a death by gunshot that would still not constitute good evidence. Steuupse.
Bushie really. Stop trying to disagree for the sake of that. Cut the crap and read before you open your mouth and provide such brazen, tepid elemental nonsense.
This JA (me) has said enough. Your remarks are well below your usual high standards of wisdom and reasoning.
I dun wid that.
LikeLike
LOL @ DeeWord
Boss, you are making much ado about a mold hill….
This is just a simple matter of you being wrong.
…why do you keep on digging…? you are only providing more dirt for Bushie to bury you with…. 🙂 You started well…it is true, Bushie has nothing to say, which is why the bushman is here trolling with you and AC….
…but then it is all downhill for you…
1- “I said the criminal matter is irrelevant to me as the civil matter was where the real effect would be achieved”
WRONG
The civil matter is important to the client.
The criminal matter is CRITICAL to the whole society.
…besides, no one cares what is important to YOU….
2 – Reading your post don’t make it any more logical. YOU may be talking about the best course for Mr. Griffiths but Bushie is talking about the best course for BARBADOS. WRONG…
WRONG
Where are you living? MANY persons make criminal complaints to the police and when the accused makes restitution (or pays up a bribe) decide “not to pursue the matter” in court…
WRONG
What police investigate what gunshot what?!? wuh happen to the fellow that shoot he son…? Who was going to testify to the facts?
WRONG
What Bushie (and Caswell) called for is that people who are victims not only seek to get their due monies, BUT ALSO FEEL AGGRIEVED ENOUGH TO PRESS CRIMINAL CHARGES and force authorities to deal with the lotta shiite….
THAT is the mark of a righteous society….where doing what is RIGHT is important.
Up to Bushie,
..Arthur would have been charges over that cheque (and over CSME…)
..Bizzy would have been charged for admitting to bribery of both parties
..Mia would have been charged for biting
..Estwick would have been charged for brandishing..
..The speaker would be charged for wheelchair robbery…
and …
..You would be charged for seeking to mislead the blog…that Bushie erred.. 🙂
LikeLike
How could Kaymar Jordan have Marsha Hinds – Layne writing a full page column in Barbados Today and at the bottom of the articles she is tagged as a full time mommy and part time lecturer.
Lol, they conveniently forget to mention that she is the Public Relations Officer of the BLP League of Women.
Hinds- Layne then spends half of her article on politics and we are to believe that this is just some independent woman writing.
The word from Mottley to the BLP faithful is to infiltrate every media outlet and work from the inside .She already has the Nation columnists like Tennyson Joseph in her pocket and two moderators on Brass Tacks.
CNN has a program called ReliAble Sources where the spotlight is turned on the media. Such analysis of the media is needed in Barbados where we have media houses that believe they should not be held accountable.
LikeLike
My proposal,
That is just the start, but I seriously would vote for Bushie or Caswell before I would vote fuh any of the others in Parliament now.
This is now beyond a joke. And people are fed up.
LikeLike
Looking forward to HOT Calypsos this year!!!
LikeLike
Froonie is a Dee, Sickler is a Dee,
Kellman is Dee, and they killing we
Paul is a DEE, Estwick is a DEE
Boyce is a Dee and they killing we
Slap on de taxes, Fire de jobs
Sending home NCC work—ers, and they killing we
Sealy is a Dee, Carry-ing-a-ton is a Dee
Mara is a Dee and they killing we
Sugarcane not reaped, natural gas is short,
tax returns unpaid, and they killing we
I don’t know where we go-ing, country in a state
No money to pay de workers, and they killing we
Lowe is a Dee, Lash-ley is a Dee
Lashley is a Dee and they killing we
Oh gosh we cyan tek nuh more, my belly sore
Money tight, no jobs in sight and they killing we
Esther is a Dee, Paul is a Dee
Donville is a Dee and they killing we
Todd is a Dee, Benn is a Dee,
Blackett is a Dee and they killing we
The economy is sham-bles, we got rat-ings downgrade
Deslie is a Dee and they killing we
Where my count-ry going, where my people going eat
Things rougher than rough, because they kil-ling we.
LikeLike
@ Crusoe
Bushie as Deputy PM and Minister for Justice and Social Care
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
LOL ha ha ha
Don’t mek sport on the people’s blog Crusoe …please!
You think David looking to die from stress, high blood pressure, and heart palpitations? …..Bushie AND Caswell???
..wuh David look foolish to you?
Nah!
Here is the list…
David -PM , Defense and all the other ministries left back..
Walter -Deputy – Finance and business development
Caswell- Integrity and transparency
Lowdown Hoad -Agriculture and fisheries
Mia -Sport and culture
Pieceuhderock – Education, Family, Social Care
Pachamama – International affairs
BAFBFP – Trade and commerce
GP – Health and Ecclesiastes
Parliamentary Assistants
Islandgal –
Due Dilligence –
Ping Pong –
Opposition
Bushie – Whacking and general anti-brass-bowl-affairs
LikeLike
Bushie I hereby tender my resignation effective immediately!
LikeLike
@Bush Tea & Crusoe
Good joke early morning!
Point taken though, Barbadians ready to vote for anybody.
LikeLike
@ Islandgal
Bushie I hereby tender my resignation effective immediately!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not accepted.
Pure brass bowlery!!
….putting you in Caswell’s ministry.
LikeLike
Bush Tea January 24, 2015 at 6:51 AM
“Pachamama – International affairs”
You have just unwittingly proposed that we start World War 3:
The rest of the world versus Barbados.
LikeLike
@ Bush Tea January 23, 2015 at 11:12 PM….
Wha loss, who is me to attempt to mislead the blog…that Bushie erred…
Pobre mi, I am not so intellectually gifted to tackle the resident BU sage. You do a perfectly good job of that all by yourself. 🙂
As you pronounce correctly, of course: “The civil matter is important to the client…The criminal matter is CRITICAL to the whole society…besides, no one cares what is important to YOU….”
So, after a 14 year process your irrefutable correctness advises that the Barbadian society’s interest are so critical that an elderly, physically challenged man should ” FEEL AGGRIEVED ENOUGH TO PRESS CRIMINAL CHARGES and force authorities to deal with the lotta shiite”.
This despite the fact that the Bajan authorities have every ability to take the available, valid evidence and deal with this matter at criminal court with affidavits (or in person) from Mr. Griffith and others.
But that is not your type of righteous society clearly.
So as profound as you are to label it a ‘lotta shiite’ you still want this senior citizen to take on this task when attorneys at DPP office can and wouldn’t because of whatever pressures.
No call for the DPP to do his job but a shrill, ineffectual grand statement: “THAT is the mark of a righteous society….where doing what is RIGHT is important”
Profound Bushie. And right of course.
Keep up your steadfast righteous indignation for our society’s health as you have an absolute, irrefutably correct perspective of pretty pronouncements so full of sound and wondrous fury…that confound simple reality and flies in the face of -in the Griffith case- suitable impartial evidence.
LikeLike
Deeword…………we can well compare corrupt practices between the dinosaurs in the US and the salmon tot retriever politicians in Barbados who believe themselves invincible and untouchable. The corrupt politicians in the US know when they get caught, their ass is grass.
The salmon tot retrievers in Barbados know because both political parties DLP/BLP are corrupt, all individuals steal, lie, mislead their clients (most are lawyers) run porn and prostitutes, there are the child pedophiles, a real disgusting lot, they don’t stop until the grave beacons (Lionel Craig…..so you see, there is nothing like being a little corrupt, the politicians in Barbados have taken being corrupt to a whole new level, because there is no one to police them,…..
just check out the corrupt jackass Dumbville Inniss, trying to demoralize the police and stop them from doing their jobs because he believes his wife, who is very unremarkable, is too important to be reported for a traffic violation, when she could have given the police officer a kind word and be on her way, instead of rudeness……that shit is not excused in the US where she comes from, they would have dragged her ass out of the car for being rude, handcuffed her and drop her ass in it, any resistance would have easily been met with a bullet…..so you see DEEword, there is a big difference in the real world compared to Barbados.
Pacha…….as I said, there needs to be a list compiled of all the dishonest, lying thieving lawyers and politicians who mislead their clients and the countries taxpayers circulated around the island, on facebook and around the world, something has to be done in Barbados.
LikeLike
@ DeeWord
You make sense on cricket….
LikeLike
@ Walter
“Pachamama – International affairs”
You have just unwittingly proposed that we start World War 3:
The rest of the world versus Barbados.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
…and of course the rest of the world would lose… 🙂
…would serve their asses right too….considering the kind of world we have managed to put together.
But you know of course that it would also be hell between you and Caswell…
…just saying…
LOL ha ha ha
LikeLike
Bush Tea January 24, 2015 at 10:06 AM # @ Walter
“But you know of course that it would also be hell between you and Caswell…
…just saying…
LOL ha ha ha”
Bush Tea,
Of course, I know. I agree with you.
Caswell would produce the required evidence and documentation, and I would ensure that the “rogues and scoundrels” exercise their option to have their “day in court”.
Between Caswell and me, it would be hell alright.
LikeLike
For the life of me I can’t understand what this argument is about unless winning arguments are a balm to heal wounded egos. This is all much ado about nothing when was the last time that a matter lodged in Civil Court migrate to criminal court?
Presumably Griffith has competent attorneys who advised him to proceed down the path he chose and has effectively killed several birds with one stone to wit: Judgement for the plaintiff, political blows to Carrington and by extension his Party
.
In the final analysis the decision of the judge in this matter has been just as devastating to Carrington’s reputation in the public arena as any finding of criminal wrongdoing and is akin to death by a thousand cuts as he serves as a daily reminder to a disenchanted nation of the morality of their public representatives and also on the Party and Government of which he is a member.
LikeLike
@Sargeant,
Glad you are spending your Bajan dollars. CDN dollar closed at 80cents US on friday.
LikeLike
Sargeant January 24, 2015 at 12:04 PM #
“For the life of me I can’t understand what this argument is about ……
This is all much ado about nothing when was the last time that a matter lodged in Civil Court migrate to criminal court?
In the final analysis the decision of the judge in this matter has been just as devastating to Carrington’s reputation in the public arena as any finding of criminal wrongdoing…”
Sargeant,
As far as I am concerned, there is no argument. Caswell explained to me what I needed to understand.
Mr. Griffiths’ money is either available to be paid to him, or it is not. If it is, knowing the reputation of lawyers, most Bajans would say “Praise the Lord. Give the man his money and move on”.
If no money is available, and Mr. Carrington carried out the Judge’s order and rendered an account of “all” monies (oops, I mean no money) to the court, then such an action would demonstrate that a financial crime has been committed. He would be providing evidence of his guilt. Evidence provided in a civil court might then be used against him in a criminal court?
If Mr. Carrington refused to carry out the order of the Judge, he would be subject to a “contempt of court” charge.
This would create a situation of damned, if you do. Damned, if you don’t. In such a predicament, what is a “guilty” person to do? What advice can anyone offer such an unethical, pitiful, and hopeless soul?
Caswell has correctly pointed out that we have only heard one side of the story and are therefore not in any position to establish Mr. Carrington’s guilt.
However, in the Carrington case, the PM appears to be in a better position than all of us and has publicly pleaded with Mr. Carrington to get a lawyer.
Interestingly enough, in the “CLICO case” ,the PM appears to be in a worse position than all of us, and therefore is unable to offer any advice, help, encouragement, or solace to CLICO’s victims.
The strategy behind the PM’s recommendation of having a lawyer hired to represent Mr. Carrington, Caswell pointed out, is to get that troublesome and revealing ruling of the Judge pushed aside for a “convenient” length of time.
In essence, wa are all waiting to see which event occurs first out of the following:
1. Mr. Carrington renders an account of Mr. Griffiths’ funds to the court.
2. Mr. Carrington is charged with contempt of court
3. The Judge’s ruling is set aside
No one is arguing. We are simply waiting and watching.
LikeLike
Bush Tea
DD is honoured to be included with such esteemed minds.
Am so please that you refused to accept resignation from Islandgirl, whose level-headed thinking will be invaluable.
LikeLike
Lochiel’s Warning suggests coming events cast their shadows .I ventured early in my preamble that there is something called A Writ of Privilege.
LikeLike
YOU ALL talkin bout integrity? in politics? wid attornys? you all is dumb. the PM an many in his party proof ever since as liars; promises promises on Cllco British American; lies BIG LIEs. four seasons gonna start; more lies
a new QE hospital is damn lies announced in front the election. no finance crises before the liars get elected; lies pon lies from Central bank. not even pay workers their severance; kant pay tax refunds of vat
cant deal wid the tiefing reported by the General auditor
u think the BAR association will take action. strike Carrington out for tiefing from a wheel chair man? at 78 old only a low class shit head do that an he Speaker of Parlament…. bajans hang your heads for shame. unless we get rid of these liar theves we dun dun dun.
Freundel show proof he got no morals ; no balls . we doan need the sick peoples we suckered in to vote. we want them go. now. soon . an de liar Worrell guvnor of our bank rup bank
Fumble is the worse disaster to have we since aids. cure aids but no cure for Fumble …f#$%ing attorney. life in prison for sodomy an Fumble sodomised BIM. give the sod life in Dodds
LikeLike
Now we hear that Mark Maloney, sorry David Ellis I meant to say MISTER Mark Maloney , is building a Cement Plant near the Bridgetown Port. Wonder if he has planning permission?
LikeLike
Colonel
Whether or not he has planning permission at this stage does not matter; he will get it in the end. Remember, he who pays the piper calls the tune.
>
LikeLike
Caswell
That is so true. A rich Canadian man living in Gunsite Road, Britons Hill,and we all know who is the MP for that area, has laid claim to the,cul-de-sac public road which, leads to his home. He started to build some high walls at the side of the road, and even erecting a fence in front of one home. He cut a cart road at the top of his property to divert traffic from entering his now extended drive way. Complaints to the Parliamentary Representative have proved fruitless, except for a visit by a former MP for that area, an ex Prime Minister. Apparently the rich man had no planning permission, but was given 28 days to in which to do so. End of story.
We have not move very far from the plantation yard.
LikeLike
Lord Cristo had a Calypso called The Dumb Boy and the Parrot. Has it ever occurred to you that our Prime Minister fits both characters ? When he is not keeping his mouth tightly closed, he is Parrot-phrasing , Shakespeare, Chaucer and every other long dead fellow from the classics. Yesterday at some address, it was Aristotle. Hasn’t he got a vocabulary of his own.? Will history catalogue his speeches ,at those odd times when he speak, as “Back to the Cane field” . ” The Pig tails.” “Get a lawyer”. “Monstrous Stupidity”. “Temporary means…..”
LikeLike