Senator Caswell Franklyn Speaks – Mock Police Part 2

It is not my intention to engage in a tit-for-tat with the Honourable Prime Minister, Ms Mia Mottley. But I would consider it a dereliction of duty if I did not respond to what I consider to be erroneous assertions made by her while explaining her role in the creation of a second post of Deputy Commissioner in the Royal Barbados Police Force.

Ms Mottley maintains that she was entitled to create that post by virtue of the power she has, as Minister with responsibility for the Public Service, in accordance with section 13.(1) of the Public Service Act. I am of the view that the Minister of the Public Service has the power to create posts in the Public Service but that power is limited by section 6 of the Police Act which allows the Minister to create posts in the Force from Assistant Commissioner down to constable. I will leave that alone for the time being and concentrate on the power to create post generally.

Among other things, section 13.(1) states:

The Minister May by order

(a) establish offices in the Public Service;

(b) determine the number of persons who may be appointed to those offices…

However, that subsection does not give the Minister cart blanche to just create posts by the stroke of the pen without more. The power is circumscribed by section 13.(3) which states:

Subject to subsection (4), an order made under subsection (1) shall be subject to affirmative resolution.”

In order to give a complete picture, subsection (4) states:

Subsection (3) shall not apply to any order that relates to the qualifications required in respect of the offices in the Public Service.

The operative term in subsection (3) is “subject to affirmative resolution” which is defined at section 41.(5) of the Interpretation Act, Chapter 1 of the Laws of Barbados. It states:

The expression “subject to affirmative resolution” when used in relation to any statutory instruments or statutory documents shall mean that such instruments or documents shall not come into operation unless and until affirmed by a resolution of each House.

Even if the Prime Minister had the power to create a second post of Deputy Commissioner of Police, she would be required to lay the order in Parliament. And that order must be approved by both Houses before it is effective.

To my certain knowledge, as of the date of writing this rebuttal (May 18, 2020) the resolution to give effect to an order to create another post of Deputy Commissioner, has never been approved and does not appear on the Order Paper of either the House of Assembly or the Senate. This therefore means that legally there can be no second post of Deputy Commissioner of Police in the Royal Barbados Police Force.

Without wanting to appear arrogant, I believe that this matter is now beyond doubt and I don’t think that the PM should give another tit or tat but an apology would be appropriate.

138 comments

  • Vincent Codrington

    This submission appears to be quite tightly argued. I suggest that the procedures for rectifying this oversight be followed as soon as possible.
    Of course we recognize that it was an attempt to right a wrong. But we need to do the right things right.

    Just my two cents worth.

    Like

  • this matter was seemingly settled when the AG issued his mea culpa and promised to amend the Police Act notwithstanding the issue of legality of the order in reference the Public Service Act, laid but not affirmed by parliament, which the AG either forget or didnt think had relevance

    that is until the PM decided to speak on the matter and opened a can of worms so to speak.

    on the face of it, it appears that Franklyn has presented a strong case in rebuttal.

    but we shall soon hear from the Koolaid Kid

    Like

  • This matter is quite drained of all of its capacity for discussion. It is either completely lawful, or simply in need of rectification. I’ve been saying from the very beginning that it’s a non-issue. If it was a non-issue then, with each passing day it becomes even more so. It leaves persons to wonder what is the objective? It shall either be fixed if there is a need to, or left, if there is no need.

    Like

  • peterlawrencethompson

    @Khaleel Kothdiwala May 19, 2020 10:32 AM
    “I’ve been saying from the very beginning that it’s a non-issue.”
    ++++++++++++++++++
    A very disappointing response Khaleel. I had hoped that your generation was more resistant to the regrettable pattern of acting like Yard Fowls rather than exercising independent judgement.

    Liked by 1 person

  • We now have around 40 percent (!!!) unemployment.

    And what is the opposition doing, especially the Senator? They fight over the smallest details of civil service law instead of courageously discussing the question of wage cuts and dismissals in the civil service.

    If this continues, we will soon face a situation similar to that in Venezuela with this opposition.

    Like

  • @ PL Thompson May 19, 2020 10:41 AM
    “A very disappointing response Khaleel. I had hoped that your generation was more resistant to the regrettable pattern of acting like Yard Fowls rather than exercising independent judgement.”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++

    I am equally disappointed by this contemptuous response. What defines independent judgement? And more particularly, who defines independent judgement?

    Like

  • @ Khaleel Kothdiwala May 19, 2020 10:32 AM

    How about this KK (not the Koolaid Kid)?

    The appointment of the ‘second’ DCoP is both legal and valid as long as the instrument confirming that appointment carries the Public Seal used by the GG.

    Do you agree?

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Khaleel Kothdiwala,

    A citizen of Barbados, who is 18 years of age or older, and has resided in an electoral constituency for at least three months prior to the Qualifying Date.

    If you were an adult your presence on BU would be understandable but you are too young to be wasting time here.

    The adults are treating you with kid’s gloves…..so far.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Miller
    “The appointment of the ‘second’ DCoP is both legal and valid as long as the instrument confirming that appointment carries the Public Seal used by the GG.”
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    I cannot pass comment on hypothetical conditions in a vacuum. To do so, would be to blissfully ignore the inherent complexity of the scenario.

    Like

  • @Khaleel

    You and you alone do not decide what is a non issue.

    Liked by 2 people

  • @ David May 19, 2020 11:13 AM

    Unlike most people, I do not presume to impose myself upon others, so that intervention is lost on me. You make your own mind up. If 1000 comments later one can’t see the issue for what it is, then I can’t help you.

    Like

  • How can the subject matter be a non issue if the PM, AG, and other political opposition in the country see the value in responding to the Senator? A scan of traditional media will also support it has been occupying editors and the like. One should not oppose for the sake of it, soon credibility will diminish. Nothing wrong with supporting your party but be dispassionate in your interventions IF you want to have opinions given weight by Independent thinkers on the blog. Not every issue must be distilled with a political eye. Not every issue is a zero sum game.

    Liked by 2 people

  • @ David May 19, 2020 11:24 AM

    What you ignore is that all too often non-issues spend far too much time occupying the popular consciousness while substantive issues of real import are left by the wayside. Is that not partially why so little changes or will ever change?

    Like

  • @Khaleel

    Yours is purely subjective. The blogmaster does not consider himself the smartest guy on the blog but there is enough fog around a faulty process here that needs to be effectively resolved. Bear in mind this issue may appear sterile to some but when taken with a growing ethos of indiscipline within Civil Establishment/public service in recent years many of us have to prick our ears until we are satisfied a sincere effort is being made to attack these issues.

    Liked by 2 people

  • @ David

    Recent years? A straight line can be drawn from 1974 and before that and your “growing ethos of indiscipline”.

    Like

  • top male student in CSEC History, very good work in CSEC Economics and a prize for excellence in debating

    Like

  • @R
    I have complimented and I have criticize the man.
    The man refuses to stay in one box and I have tailored my comments to suit.
    HAGD

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ Hants at 11:57 AM

    A very good start. It is not the end of the journey. These are mere mile stones along the path to success/ wisdom. There is much more to be learnt.

    Like

  • @KK
    David was very gentle with you., almost fatherly.
    Please reread his comment and think about them.
    Sometimes silence is a good response

    Like

  • @David:

    “One should not oppose for the sake of it, soon credibility will diminish. Nothing wrong with supporting your party but be dispassionate in your interventions IF you want to have opinions given weight by Independent thinkers on the blog. Not every issue must be distilled with a political eye. Not every issue is a zero sum game.”

    Thanks David. Hopefully he will listen,but it is doubtful. If he does not listen to you, the long knives will soon come out. I am reminded of “Common sense ain’t so Common”.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Vincent Codrington,

    K K is clearly very intelligent and has accomplished a lot so far but he should avoid BU politics.

    There is a thin line between yard chicken and party supporter.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Khaleel Kothdiwala May 19, 2020 11:33 AM

    It is good to know that the young intellectuals support Mia Mottley. On the other hand, those who don’t know their decimal places are better off with DLP.

    Please do not become discouraged by the phalanx of blue grandees here on BU. They fear your sharp mind.

    Like

  • david

    I see it as the young man KK just expressing his views that it is a non issue.

    Just that, his opinion, like everyone else does here on BU.

    I am sure he is well aware that he is not the one that determines what is a non issue but can he not have /share his opinion if that what he feels about the topic?

    Like

  • John2
    Agree. What does age have to do with an opinion? There’s no need for the name calling either, he is young and willing to blog under his name. Unlike the majority of us. Some of the same accusers, however, tolerate and support lie after lie from grown ups on the blog.

    Like

  • All those sweeping powers went to Mia’s head…..yo

    Kahleel can’t even vote yet, but he will learn and i hope he does without negative consequences. It’s always better to be on the outside looking in, you get a better sense of clarity and learn more; but, you cannot be looking up to corrupt politicians, lawyers, ministers or anyone else who is nonprogressive and do not have the best interests of the majority population who look just like them at heart, have no good intentions for the people as a collective and think everyone around them are potential fowls.

    there is no future in any of that….as there has been not enough in the last 60 years, that is one of the reasons everything is now degraded to a point that is harder to move away from, if he asks the elders in his community he would get a better sense of what life was like in the 60s and 70s, he himself should have found better when he came along, never settle for mediocrity from any government to whom you have to pay a salary….

    a keen mind digests information and uses a functioning brain to PROCESS all the information analytically and critically…that way you can never go wrong, it’s called information useful in making informed decisions..

    …..focus less on paper achievement, they too can be admired as they can be useful in further achievement and to get them requires much effort. but they are useful only in the paper world., networking is much more powerful and is required even if you have a ton of paper…

    …Most people don’t even know that everyone has a naturally BUILTIN intelligence that cannot be replaced and it goes hand in hand with COMMONSENSE…..combine that with your paper knowledge and it’s a win win…but the paper is not better than nor more significant than the intelligence with which you were born and is available to use, all you have to do is tap right in..

    and oh…ya never stop learning..

    my good deed for the day, someone just gave me a badass pep talk

    Like

  • “Some of the same accusers, however, tolerate and support lie after lie from grown ups on the blog.”

    ah trying to analyze this one…SO.

    ..why does Fowl Enuff support LIES from Mia and Dale…the servants of the people..

    …supports theft of taxpayer’s money

    …theft of pensioner’s money

    ….supports criminals like maloney, cow bizzy, bjerkham etc ROBBING THE PEOPLE…year after year…

    …supports CORRUPTION in the judiciary as well as political interference

    and last but not least

    supports interference in the taxpayer funded POLICE FORCE…don’t mind all that shite about Royal….cousin can go to hell….Bajan taxpayers fund that police force, so why can’t Fowl Enuff have respect for it….as a grown ass woman….and have some respect for her own people who HAVE TO FUND EVERYTHING ON THE ISLAND…

    Like

  • The PM is a good leader and much loved by the people One therefore hates to see a chink in her armour. I am not a lawyer but what was glaringly obvious was the fact the AG acknowledged a mistake was made and will be corrected. The PM’s response therefore did two (2) things raised questions about the AG’s legal knowledge if the PM is right or showed the extent the PM will go to protect her own if wrong.
    One can reasoned that this matter is also being noted by the criminal underbelly of this country who might very well lose respect for the very things we want them to uphold, law and order plus the AG.
    Another variable that has been overlooked is that the ‘Deputy Assistant Commissioner’ is very well qualified to function at the level under contention.
    However every effort should be made to avoid promotion conflicts in the Police Force because these officers can be asked to put their lives on the line. A matter like Covid-19 is just a minor blimp for them. There are front line workers therefore putting any resentment in their midst should be avoided.
    In summary, the error can and should be corrected and the need and tone used to proclaim rightness controlled. Human beings are fallible and will make mistakes but perceived errors like this can negatively impact our society. Though subject to interpretation, the law is evidence base. There should therefore not be a whiff of possible scandal in matters like this

    Liked by 1 person

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @David well stated above at 11:24 AM. I must admit that like you I was taken aback when he choose to label the matter as a “non-issue”. I relegated him at that moment to ‘sycophant’ rather than rational political neophyte … one hopes, however, that he develops to be more reasoned and thoughtful!

    But that apart, wait a minute folks are we SERIOUSLY questioning the lad’s youthful political exuberance as a negative? What’s that about!

    How quickly we forget it seems… did not Liz Thompson, Mia Mottley, David Thompson and to a lesser degree David Commissiong not all display similar preternatural tendencies in another era … that’s the one I know directly and there is NOTHING about the lad besides the now vast reach of social media that sets him apart from any of them.

    Could anyone tell the Senator killing David or the whipper-snapper, sharp Liz to chill because they were too young and green behind the ears … LOL

    Water will find it’s natural level .. and so too do political aspirants… sometimes they have to do what @Pieces would saintly describe as lot of ‘derriere smooching’ to get to their sustainable level … ideally this lad doesn’t have to become a ‘Pope’ of smooching in order to get where he wants to!

    Like

  • “How quickly we forget it seems… did not Liz Thompson, Mia Mottley, David Thompson and to a lesser degree David Commissiong not all display similar preternatural tendencies in another era ”

    Did not work out well for most of the people though….so that is a nonstarter..plus a different era…

    he has people who can guide him, two generations before did not have that level of intelligence nor the tools needed, this is the information age….maybe if that era of politicians weren’t so anal and full of shit like true colonial slaves…maybe, but that was different times..

    Like

  • peterlawrencethompson

    @Khaleel Kothdiwala May 19, 2020 10:48 AM
    “What defines independent judgement?”
    ++++++++++++++++++++++
    1. Facts
    2. Logic
    3. Empathy

    It’s not complicated…

    Like

  • NorthernObserver

    @KK
    “It leaves persons to wonder what is the objective?”[quote]
    did you know the pensions for the public service, are based solely on the FINAL year of earnings?
    Most private plans require a contribution from both the employee and employer, and the pensions are based on an average of the final 3 years of earnings.
    The Senator even alluded to this, in the prior thread.

    Many moons ago, I worked for a large chemical conglomerate. I got to attend a senior management meeting at HQ. I was flabbergasted. Instead of discussing how we might limit the liability of a product prone to early life-cycle failure, they discussed how to INCREASE its sales!!! That night I called my mentor, who was of the vintage of most attendees, seeking explanation. Without hesitation, he replied “pensions”. And, ‘the decision to enter that business was put forth and approved by many in the room’. Then “when they retire, it will be your job to clean it up. Until then, they are maximizing their pensions”. Truthfully, at age 28, the concept of pensions, had not entered my mind. Nor the impact on their earnings (read performance bonuses) should we curtail sales without a ready replacement.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Piece the Prophet

    Your help please with an item here Honourable One

    Like

  • Before de ole man AND (now) PROPHET continues (and to all BU bloggers who wish to speak to de ole man, please do not forget to address me by my honorific heheheheh) I will take another moment to highlight a very salient thread of thought from DpD

    He says and I quote

    “…Water will find it’s natural level .. and so too do political aspirants… sometimes they have to do what @Pieces would saintly describe as lot of ‘derriere smooching’ to get to their sustainable level … ideally this lad doesn’t have to become a ‘Pope’ of smooching in order to get where he wants to!…”

    Few people understand the power of Barbados Underground!

    It is for this reason that the 15 of the Mugabe Defence Force have been sent to BU TO KILL ALL DISSENT!

    And by dissent, what de ole man means is that, while 1 or 2 remarks against Mugabe Mottley are permitted to get by, THE CONSTANT, REPETITIVE, INCESSANT, CONTINUOUS COMMENTS AGAINST Mugabe by some of you here (heheheheheheheh) are very much disliked.

    De ole man has been warning people like Tron, ye olde sexton, to stop his anti-Mugabe jesting for a long time now, but does he listen to de ole man WHOM HE NOW CALLS PROPHET!

    NOOOOOOOO! he continues to make these slide remarks that highlight he great leader Mugabe!

    But Mugabe is monitoring Tron’s house phone and his computer and his smart phone and all the inciting conversations that Tron continues to have on his official Facebook Page heheheheheh

    Man-Chile want to be a politician and to all intents and purposes will become one. But he has not be trained to be a patriot, he has been coached in the divisive an hominem that the DLP and BLP breeds

    What he has done here on BU is begin that career!

    He continues to use his youth as a shield that permits him to insult those of you who he can insult, (heheheheheheheh de ole man is impervious to insults) cause wunna frighten to cuss he likkle Over ripe Man Chile, while earning the notice of Mugabe Mottley.

    His type IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE because he does not know any better as well as the fact that he does not see any reason to change given that he is goaded on by the other 14.

    When de ole man is gone from this sphere, he will remain here

    In looking at him now and in his future de ole Prophet is reminded of the poem by Khalil Gibran titled “said a Sheet of Snow White Paper…”

    “…Said a sheet of snow-white paper, “Pure was I created, and pure will I remain for ever. I would rather be burnt and turn to white ashes than suffer darkness to touch me or the unclean to come near me.”

    The ink-bottle heard what the paper was saying, and it laughed in its dark heart; but it never dared to approach her. And the multi-coloured pencils heard her also, and they too never came near her.

    And the snow-white sheet of paper did remain pure and chaste for ever, pure and chaste — and empty…”

    Khaleel prefers to suffer the darkness that is Mugabe Mottley, he will relish in the unclean swill of this despot content in his uncleanliness AND THEREFORE WE MUST LEAVE HIM BE

    Like

  • @ Senator Caswell Franklyn

    De ole man get carried away trying to explain to the bloggers here the Man-Chile Distraction

    But de ole man will mention that these two articles will exceed all counts for all others of the articles on this blog

    De rest does get sidetracked regularly but heheheheheheh de ole man doan get sidetracked.

    You said and I quote “…Even if the Prime Minister had the power to create a second post of Deputy Commissioner of Police, she would be required to lay the order in Parliament.

    And that order must be approved by both Houses before it is effective…”

    People heah say dat de ole man is closely attached to you anteriorly heheheheheheh.

    And dem wonders why I like you so.

    Whu de ole man could be a DLP-ite of a Mugabe Defense Force man or a ISO Talibanist so why you Patriot Franklyn?

    Cause you does keep it real!!!

    “…she would be required to lay the order in Parliament and that order must be approved by both Houses before it is effective…”

    Any reasonable and reasoning bajan can understand that statement but de ole man continues to support you as you point out that the people need to be made aware that their interest ARE NOT MUGABE’s interest and if one goes to sleep for a moment ALL IS LOST UNDER THIS DICTATOR!!

    Like

  • @ Senator Caswell Franklyn

    So de grandson sent this and here is what de ole man understands about this Affirmative Action thing

    So if i understand correctly

    “Section 41.(5) of the Interpretation Act, Chapter 1 of the Laws of Barbados. It states:

    The expression “subject to affirmative resolution” when used in relation to any statutory instruments or statutory documents shall mean that such instruments or documents shall not come into operation unless and until affirmed by a resolution of each House….”

    So once again Mugabe has been encouraging the 30 hoares to brek de Laws of Barbados?

    But dat is Mugabe just showing she real colours Senator

    Like

  • where all de rest?

    You censoring de ole man because my other comments are not what you want to see bout you golden boys right?

    heheheheheheheheh 3

    3 of dem you holding back

    heheheheheheheheheeh

    But you calling youself George Linnaeus Banks

    Like

  • If Ms. Mockley can create a mock leader of the opposition and all the associated trappings like mock opposition senators and a mock parliament, what’s the problem with a mock police?

    Like

  • @ senator Franklyn

    You said and I quote

    “…To my certain knowledge, as of the date of writing this rebuttal (May 18, 2020) the resolution to give effect to an order to create another post of Deputy Commissioner, has never been approved and does not appear on the Order Paper of either the House of Assembly or the Senate.

    This therefore means that legally there can be no second post of Deputy Commissioner of Police in the Royal Barbados Police Force…”

    Liked by 1 person

  • ” Strict guardians of our heritage
    Firm craftsmen of our fate “

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Piece the Prophet May 20, 2020 2:03 AM

    You live in an alternative reality. I use neither smartphone nor facebook.

    Like

  • @ John May 20, 2020 3:53 AM
    “If Ms. Mockley can create a mock leader of the opposition and all the associated trappings like mock opposition senators and a mock parliament, what’s the problem with a mock police?”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Have you, the BU mathematical genius, managed to figure how to get a ‘Majority’ from a ‘total’ of ONE?

    We have a new whiz kid on the BU block called KK who has managed to cut the leader of the opposition into TWO ‘half-persons’; with 50 % representing the majority of members NOT supporting the government and the other 50% supporting the half-man LoO.

    Liked by 1 person

  • 30-0!!!

    Get a majority from that!!

    Nothing from Nothing leaves Nothing.

    Or, ZERO is ZERO!!

    Even Billy Preston knows that!!

    Like

  • As the ones who first encouraged your rejoinder to the Mugabe of our times, we must admit that this area of law is wholly unfamilar to us.

    Your arguments seem to hold some merit. However, as you already know, that this is not so much of a strict legal matter as it is political.

    However, nobody has to tell you that you will always have our critical support. You, not your leader.

    Like

  • @ Millsy
    “Have you, the BU mathematical genius, managed to figure how to get a ‘Majority’ from a ‘total’ of ONE?

    We have a new whiz kid on the BU block called KK who has managed to cut the leader of the opposition into TWO ‘half-persons’; with 50 % representing the majority of members NOT supporting the government and the other 50% supporting the half-man LoO.”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    HM Loyal Barbados Opposition is wholly politically illegitimate, but entirely constitutional.

    That fact is based on a very simple mathematical principle Millsy. You can derive a majority of any number. Strictly speaking of course, mathematically that reads that it is possible to calculate the value of more than 50% of any integer. If there are no MPs who do NOT support the Government, it is quite obvious that there can be no Opposition Leader, as no one opposes the Gov’t. If there are 9 members who do not support the government, the Governor General shall have cause to appoint the person who commands the confidence of 5 of those members or more. 50% of 9 is 4.5; one cannot obviously have parts of a person, and so the starting point is 5. If there is one member who does not support the government, mathematically the Leader of the Opposition would be the person who commands the confidence of more than 0.5 of that person. In reality, we know we can’t have fractions of people. However, the math holds. The LoO will be the person who enjoys the confidence of more than 0.5. 1 is more than 0.5, not so? Therefore, it doesn’t require a doctoral degree in this area of mathematics to figure out that 1 qualifies as a majority of 1, and in the case of persons is the only possible majority. A constitutional crisis would more likely arise in the case of an even number of Opposition MPs. While political maneuvering could ameliorate that in most cases, that is most difficult if there are only 2 persons on the Opposition benches. Had Kellman wished to be LoO, an immediate impasse would have occurred as it was only he and Thompson and as we have seen there cannot be fractions of a person. So that would be a crisis. However, no possible crisis could arise with an odd number of persons (1 is an odd number, correct Millsy?), unless there were more than two persons vying for the LoO position, and a plurality was achieved but no majority of the whole.

    The math Millsy is pelucidly clear and remarkably simple.

    But that does not take away from the political illegitimacy of the Official Opposition and its appointees. While the law relies upon mathematics, the same cannot be said for politics. While mathematics involves at its higher levels, relative truths, it is founded upon unwavering axioms of truth. In politics however, truth tends to be entirely relative.

    Like

  • Strictly speaking of course, mathematically that reads that it is possible to calculate the value of more than 50% of any integer.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Is zero an integer?

    What is 50% of zero?

    Like

  • It is 30-0, not 29-1, or 28-2, or more possibly 27-3.

    Like

  • Yes John, zero is an integer. A neutral integer, as it is neither positive nor negative, but an integer nonetheless. And a simple calculation reveals that 50% of 0 is indeed zero, as would be any percentage of it, due to the nature of that integer. There is little consequence to the electoral result when choosing an Opposition Leader. It must be done based upon the composition of the House at the time of appointment and not a point in the past. Clearly, I am not a partisan of the Opposition and I reiterate that they are political illegitimates, but I am sufficiently honest to admit that legally the position of Atherley and his senators is unimpeachable.

    Like

  • @John May 20, 2020 11:06 AM “What is 50% of zero?”

    50% of zero is half of zero, and just for you it is written like this, like half of a circle, thusly:

    D

    Like

  • 30-0 is a nullity!!

    … and Reverent Joe was at pains after he was “sworn in” by the GG to portray himself as a supporter of the BLP
    s programs … on national TV!!

    Nullity, mock, take your pick!!

    Like

  • Joke is another word that comes to mind

    Like

  • @ John May 20, 2020 11:56 AM
    “… and Reverent Joe was at pains after he was “sworn in” by the GG to portray himself as a supporter of the BLP’s programs … on national TV!!”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    You raise a good point here. Not only is his political legitimacy questioned because he was not elected to oppose the party on whose platform he ran, but also because his crossing of the floor at that time remains inexplicable. Some high professed notion of providing opposition representation is weak, particularly because of the timing. The Official Opposition, yes is constituted to provide opposition and thus stabilise democracy, but primarily, and in law they are constituted of persons who do not SUPPORT the government. The goodly Bishop lost his ability to support the platform on which he ran and won very quickly and without explanation. That question will continue to plague him and his neophytic party.

    Like

  • It must be done based upon the composition of the House at the time of appointment and not a point in the past.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    There was no opposition for the Reverent Joe to cross the floor to because Parliament had been pro-rogued by Freundel and did not exist at the time he was sworn in as leader of the opposition!!

    There was no floor to cross!!

    ZERO IS ZERO!!

    IF you go and search you will find the few times when the precedent of zero opposition has been set and how it was dealt with.

    Reverent Joe and what flows from him was and is mock.

    Like

  • @ Khaleel Kothdiwala May 20, 2020 10:12 AM
    “HM Loyal Barbados Opposition is wholly politically illegitimate, but entirely constitutional
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    How can an ‘act’ in Parliament be “wholly politically illegitimate” when it is entirely constitutional?

    That’s what Parliament is all about. Exercising the Constitution in the most political way.

    Politics is about people; not ‘men’ on a checkers board.

    If the Constitution is based on mathematics why does it have to be amended so often to reflect the requirements of the people or their elected representative or to correct a glaring deficiency, as in this case?

    You have Not yet told us what the BLP administration did that was so disappointing (in less than 1 week in Parliament) to make Bishop Atherl(e)y cross the floor to sit as a lone wolf on the anti-government single bench only to be considered “politically illegitimate” in the eyes of a political foetus of a yard-fowl?

    If the LoO is considered “politically illegitimate” can we surmise, politically speaking, that 50% of the man is still ‘politically legitimate’ since his partisan heart is still on the red side of his (human) body?

    Mathematics is based on the ‘immutable’ laws of the universe. Law is based on the politics of people prone to err.

    “The Law is made for man, not man for the law. When a law ceases to serve its purpose, it is either amended or changed.”

    Like

  • All that can be honestly said is that the constitutionality of the “GOB” is yet to be tested in a court of law.

    It may be open to a citizen (or the DLP, or Solutions or the UPP) after the next election to apply to the courts to have the Mockley government declared unconstitutional and any contract it entered in to be null and void!!

    Like

  • You have Not yet told us what the BLP administration did that was so disappointing (in less than 1 week in Parliament) to make Bishop Atherl(e)y cross the floor to sit as a lone wolf on the anti-government single bench only to be considered “politically illegitimate” in the eyes of a political foetus of a yard-fowl?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    It was impossible to cross the floor because no Parliament existed!!

    The Reverent earned the post through some other unknown means!!

    Like

  • @ Miller

    As always you are fastidious in your pursuit of mastering the art of mischaracterisation and misconstruing.

    How has the provision of the Constitution related to the appointment of the Leader of the Opposition ceased to serve its purpose? It has served its purpose quite well. There is an LoO presently not so? Where is the deficiency?

    You would have to ask the good Bishop or Senator Franklyn about the motivation for his action. I have not yet been able to master my powers of telepathy.

    Like

  • Khaleel
    What an expert observation and precise description of the Milluh.🤣🤣🤣

    Like

  • @ Khaleel Kothdiwala May 20, 2020 12:32 PM

    If you don’t know the “motivation for his action” how then can you consider the Bishop’s decision to become the duly and Constitutionally well-appointed Leader of the Opposition to be “politically illegitimate”?

    What is so politically illegitimate about that if ‘partisan’ political parties are not recognised in the Constitution?

    Frankly speaking, why should we ask Senator Franklyn about the motivation behind the good Bishop’s political decision? Senator Franklyn is a creature of the LoO; not the other way round.

    The question to you still remains: If not the goodly Bishop to perform the role of the LoO, then who?
    The GG to fulfil the role of the LoO and to recommend Caswell Franklyn for appointment to the Senate?

    Like

  • @ Enuff May 20, 2020 1:05 PM

    Where did you just arrive from, blow fly?

    Weren’t you sent to Coventry to do penance for your ‘proven’ lies?

    Like

  • I find it strange that a man working in a New York PR and Marketing office in which there were only two black members of staff – the other one being a graphic artist – both from the Caribbean, and all this man can find to boost about is being the black chairman of a conference in which all the other participants were white. Not a single word from the BU commentariat, which tells you everything. Some of us may find this embarrassing.
    By the way, where is @Mariposa?

    Like

  • Piece the Prophet

    @ Senator Caswell Franklyn

    You opened your once again, sterling contribution to safeguarding the Constitution of Barbados, with these words.

    “…It is not my intention to engage in a tit-for-tat with the Honourable Prime Minister, Ms Mia Mottley. But I would consider it a dereliction of duty if I did not respond to what I consider to be erroneous assertions made by her while explaining her role in the creation of a second post of Deputy Commissioner in the Royal Barbados Police Force…”

    And thereafter you continued to systematically debunk the ineptitude that has characterised this government’s actions EVERY DAY SINCE MAY 24TH 2018!

    Many people (and sheeple) here continue to forget (or are oblivious of) the common theme that runs through the Mugabe Mottley administration – DESPOTISM!!

    But those of us WHO DO NOT FORGET will remind them of places where the Constitution was changed in days WHILE THIS ISSUE WAS ALLOWED TO DEGENERATE into the illegality of THO DEPUTY COMMISSIONERS OF POLICE!

    Here is another instance of the Dictator at work

    Like

  • @ Millsy

    I repeat, how has the Constitution as it stands failed us with respect to the appointment of an LoO?

    Anyhow, the political illegitimacy of the Official Opposition in this case is founded upon two points:

    a. He was elected on a BLP policy platform and party ticket. The Constitution does not bind him upon entry to Parliament to remain there nor does it treat to political parties, but practically we all know that he is elected by his constituents to serve as a BLP MP, and it’s simple as that.

    b. He left the government benches not because he had a fundamental disagreement with the Prime Minister or Cabinet as Haynes and his group of 3 would have, or Trotman in the next term, or Mascoll or indeed Arthur and Agard. He was there one day, and to the public gone the next. His actions remain without political explanation.

    The absence of a clearly articulated motive (leading thus to speculation), coupled with his leaving a party to which he had just the week before pledged fealty makes him politically illegitimate. Ask any member of the public and they will almost invariably tell you that the Democratic Labour Party is the “real” Opposition. This issue will continue to plague them for as long as they are on the scene.

    Like

  • @ Khaleel Kothdiwala May 20, 2020 1:34 PM

    No sweetie, Khaleel, my dear!

    The goodly Bishop (a man of the cloth) was elected, as an “MP”, to represent ALL the constituents of SMW; and not as a “BLP MP”.

    Did you see any signs of political party red paraphernalia next to his name on the ballot paper?

    Why are you imputing ‘bad’ motives to the Bishop’s actions?

    How do you know, for all practical purposes, he was not asked by his former party leader to do the ‘Constitutionally right thing and perform the function of the LoO?
    Every Lower House needs a LoO to work, don’t you think?

    How do you know that the GG did not ask him to function in that capacity in order to avoid performing the job herself?

    How do you know the Bishop did not take on the job out of pure patriotism and as a sacrifice to the BLP?

    Barbados was not ready for a ONE Party democracy. So some ‘One’ had to play the part of a political Judas and take the bit in the mouth of the LoO.

    But then you are too politically-naïve and starry-eyed to appreciate real politricks.

    Like

  • Millsy you continue to mislead.

    I made mention clearly of the fact that de jure he is not elected on BLP ticket as there is no such field on our ballots nor recognition of party by the Constitution. But that is the de facto reality that only the most naïve cannot see.

    At what point in my commentary did I impute “bad motives” to Atherley. I made the point and it remains that he has not provided a suitable and sufficient explanation for his actions. It doesn’t matter to me what I know or don’t. My contention is the public does not know and is speculating and will continue to do so.

    I have already completely rubbished your nonsensical claims that the whole house will fall without an LoO and do not intend to revisit that concluded point.

    His continued inability to explain his actions extends his illegitimacy and will hamper him continually going forward.

    One last thing, your speculation about the possible reasons for his crossing the floor does not explain his formation of a political party. Hmmmm.

    Like

  • @ Piecey

    Kindly explain to little old me how amending the Constitution to correct what is unfair in barring Barbadians from being able to serve this country is an example of “breaking the law”. Boy, I didn’t realise that a government passing a legitimate constitutional amendmemt approved by 2/3 of both houses (and thus including at very least 2 non-Government Senators) is breaking the law. Well look how I does learn suh much.

    Like

  • Piece the Prophet

    @ Senator Caswell Franklyn

    In continuing to review what you carefully crafted for the consideration of readers de ole man notes you said

    “…Ms Mottley maintains that she was entitled to create that post by virtue of the power she has, as Minister with responsibility for the Public Service, in accordance with section 13.(1) of the Public Service Act…”

    There are many misconceptions that Mugabe Mottley claims an entitlement of!

    First and foremost is her claim to be Prime Minister for Life!

    Once people recognize that claim at the core of her despotic existence THEN ALL ACTIONS THAT ENSUE THEREAFTER, become evident!!!

    Most misguided people attribute these fowl ups to her being new on the job yet they incredulously forget tha Mugabe Mottley has been at the wheel continuously FOR DONKEYS YEARS!! whether as the Opposition or the government in power!

    Therefore it is ludicrous that people even want to entertain the thought of her being incompetent after all these 29 years in politics!

    That would mean 29 years where she has learnt NOTHING

    OR AS DE OLE MAN HAS BEEN SHOWING – SHE IS A DICTATOR

    Here is a reminder

    Like

  • One would think that the success of White Oak in negotiating the debt restructuring and the almost universal praise heard thereafter would have humbled the Anti-Mottley cultists. Alas!

    Like

  • Maybe if TAXPAYERS were not FORCED to fund White Hoax at such an exorbitant price, maybe, but please note even before the plague, the island was still in dire straits, whitehoax and their large multimillion payments notwithstanding and all those large amounts already paid, the island should not be having any economic hiccups pre nor post plague….at that price….and it has now been 2 full years they have been retained…is there no end to them sucking on taxpayers? how many more years, they were in Grenada for 9 months they boasted…

    Like

  • And if they are so successful, why are they still on retainer at taxpayer’s expense.

    Like

  • Clearly the billions of dollars saved over the next years has done nothing to erode the phenomenal idea that the best international expertise is not worth their comparably lower cost. Sad!

    Like

  • I am holding you to those BILLIONS IN FUTURE SAVINGS…remember those are only projections, not written in stone and subject to change at any time, particularly now, but Whitehoax keeps on sucking..

    Like

  • side note:
    I am now convinced that KK is Lorenzo assisted byb a spellchecker and proofreader.

    Like

  • @ Khaleel Kothdiwala May 20, 2020 2:25 PM
    “One last thing, your speculation about the possible reasons for his crossing the floor does not explain his formation of a political party.”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Maybe the god-fearing Bishop’s crossing the floor and forming his own party was done for the same de facto and “politically illegitimate” reason as Dr Richard C. Haynes.

    Why are you so much against the ONE man who is able to command the support of those members who do not support the government?

    How can the man with such 100% majority supporting Parliament be deemed “politically illegitimate” as if he is some outside bastard of a child under the ancien régime of the Bajan cultural landscape?

    Here is what the Bishop told Senator Caswell to tell you:
    ‘He will reveal his reasons for his illegitimate political behaviour when the people of Barbados- of all political colours- are apprised of what is contained in the red valise’.

    Until then the PM has as much “political legitimacy” as the god-fearing Bishop performing his Constitutionally-ordained role as LoO.
    After all, He Lord Bishop of the then BLP Opposition was instrumental in fabricating the contents of the electioneering downfall of the DLP.

    We don’t expect you to touch that issue even with a bargepole as long as the Parliament is from the Weymouth pasture.

    Now continue to duck and avoid the bull of deception contained in that red valise.

    Like

  • Gazzerts i thought mistakenly you had learned sense during the covid 19 pandemic with your reasoned positions but you back to your assenine comments. Let me make it clear Khaleel who has been kicking your pals the three stooges ass namely Piece aka Franklyn poochlicker, Waru the fraud and liar and Miller the anti Mottley shite talker IS NOT ME CAPICHE JUST FOR YOUR CLARITY.If this is your only contribution tl the topic i advise you to stay off the blog.

    Like

  • Wuhloss…ah just won 400 dollars off the fowls, they can’t help themselves, i bet someone that they are so one dimentional and tunnel visioned they will come back with the same old shite, no new material at all…guess what…ah won my bet…lol…at least alyuh are of some use to me if not to not to anyone else but political masters..unless ya go help minorities work the land…

    alyuh lucky i don’t have a slavemaster mentality but am quite capable of selling ya asses from right behind ya computers….and it’s not even illegal…lol

    ah thought i would have made that money off Fowl Enuff but she won’t come out….stupid Lawsuit Lorenza just made me rich, i should have known..

    Like

  • Piece the Prophet

    So Senator Franklyn I Piece the Prophet contine to derive such daily pleasure from your writings as you continue to represent the Rights of the People of Barbados BEING TRAMPLED BY THIS DESPOT MUGABE!

    You said, and I quote

    “…I am of the view that the Minister of the Public Service has the power to create posts in the Public Service but that power is limited by section 6 of the Police Act which allows the Minister to create posts in the Force from Assistant Commissioner down to constable…”

    Are you familiar with the quote from Edmund Burke that goes

    “…Many of the greatest tyrants on the records of history have begun their reigns in the fairest manner.

    But the truth is, this unnatural power corrupts both the heart and the understanding…”

    This descent into despotism has been dressed in the nicest of words

    “Mia Cares”

    But, for those who comprehend the nature of Mugabe Mottley, we know that “Mia Scares” is the correct term to be used.

    De ole man is just relying on history and internet copy and pastes to bring home these consistent patterns to BU readers

    “…
    By giving the government (of Mugabe Mottley) unlimited powers, the most arbitrary rule (like the Constitution or the Public Act) can be made legal; and in this way a democracy (of Mugabe Mottley for Life) may set up the most complete despotism imaginable.

    Friedrich August von Hayek (with insertions by Piece the Prophet)

    Like

  • Piece the Prophet

    @ Commander Theophillus Gazerts

    You noticed!

    They have consolidated their efforts in the responses of the Man-Chile.

    So for those topics that he does not know about he blogs on and his emotional disposition shows through.

    After all he is only 16.

    When he does so, he rambles, for example, the matter of Ezra Alleyne, his constitutional genius, being debarred, LONG BEFORE HE WAS BORN!

    He was all up inside Ezra’s pooch until de ole man debunked Ezra’s pristine credibility BY MENTIONING THE DEBARMENT and Brother Hants provider the amount of $34,000 and the year

    So he jump that shit sorry ship.

    So now they are feeding him material UNDER THE REASON THAT

    “…Man-Chile aka Koolaid Kid, is so politically wise, AT 16, he conversing with BU men in long pants”

    Look at how he know all these topics, ent he brilliant?”

    Big words affliction jes like he Boss Mugabe

    Dont know one shy$e but does talk big and got people confused by the misdirection

    heheheheheh

    Like

  • @ Millsy

    I don’t know why I bother with you lol.

    You clearly missed what I said about there being a clear, identifiable, very public fundamental disagreement which underpinned the floor-crossing of various persons over the years, the most analogous being Dr Haynes, simply because both went on to lead third parties. It is well known the reasons that Dr Haynes left the DLP benches. His and Sandi’s disagreement on Finance are matters of public record. I of course was not there but I am quite sure that you in your maturity must’ve been around in ’89 to be able to know that.

    Contrast that with what obtained in May/June 2018. On the 24th May around 11pm, Bishop Atherley stood on a platform at the Bay Street Esplanade bathed in red. In the wee hours of the 25th May, Bishop Atherley was sat at a table next to Carol Roberts at 111 Roebuck Street speaking about persons who “bought into the philosophy and policies of the Barbados Labour Party”. He spoke about how with his team they were a fantastic team, they had their odd “spit and spat” as to be expected, but they stuck together because they believed in the mission. He spoke about his hope to use his position in GOVERNMENT to ensure that the job situation is improved so that his people in SMW could get jobs as well as other things he would like to achieve on the GOVERNMENT benches.

    Now I am not one to characterise the Bishop as ironically some terrible Judas but it causes the public to wonder what changed in the 5 days between which he said that and that he notified the PM of his intention to cross. The answer doesn’t really matter to me, but it is something that will continue to plague him. Yes, anyone that switches allegiance will have a treasure trove of old statements to pull at in which they say the exact opposite to what they are now saying. However, I know of very few cases of such (and successful cases) where there is a complete transmogrification in 5 days.

    The point remains that the mystery surrounding the Bishop’s move will plague him right out of the House.

    That you cannot understand or comprehend the distinction that exists sometimes between legal permissibility and political legitimacy is entirely expected.

    You do make me laugh when you try to distract to your favourite subject: Mottley’s fashion accessories. That is not a discussion for right now firstly, and secondly, I have dealt with you all and that sufficiently and I don’t think you really wish to continue that moot point. Embarrassment only results.

    By the way: “Why are you so much against the ONE man who is able to command the support of those members who do not support the government?” – I nearly gave myself a hernia laughing at this 🤣🤣🤣🤣. That is so incredibly rich from one of the most starry-eyed lieutenants of the “Death to Mottley” brigade 😂😂😂

    Like

  • Easiest $400 i ever made Piece, am on to something here, we can actually predict what the dumb fowls will do and say next…alyuh done know i love to share, so am encouraging everyone to get on board, there is money to be made….make sure we get paid for all the shite fowls spew….and they spew a lot, so we know who they target.

    it’s called being entreprenurial…..

    damn…

    there is money to be made from their useless rambling talk …been on BU talking for too long, that’s why this happened…let’s call it reparations for shite talk..

    Like

  • And next time alyuh low intellect fowls want to address me it will be as Mrs. Rich Liar & Fraud…thank you very much….

    Like

  • I can’t believe i gave these a whole week until another scandal though, am getting way too generous….Miller are you seeing this.

    Like

  • @ Khaleel KothdiwalaMay 20, 2020 4:24 PM

    You are clearly too intellectually innocent to spot sarcasm in its lowest ‘below-the-belt’ form.

    We are putting it to you that your boss lady with her red fashion accessory of political subterfuge has NO more standing in the dock of political legitimacy than the ‘poor’ turncoat of a ‘red’ man you are prosecuting.

    Why do you try your utmost intellectual best to obfuscate and evade the issue of the big red bag which has become more famous than Margaret Thatcher’s handbag?

    How could you have dealt with something when you do not know what is contained in that well-displayed red handbag so heavily laden as to make the EU come to a ‘misleading’ position on Bim being a “non-compliant tax haven”?

    What else you are going to say to protect your client from exposure by the Light of Truth?

    Claim that the contents of the red bag was nothing more than a phantom pregnancy of the politically ectopic red colour kind?

    “A pure hand needs no glove to cover it.”
    (With or without the accessory of an ‘imitation’ red handbag made by D.T).

    Like

  • Waru the fraud and liar i was not responding to sny of your shite talk. I was responding to Gazzerts.You know i do not usually respond to your lies.What breaking expose you have next? The last bombshell you dropped about stranded bajans fell flat since as Khaleel told you that was old news and quick so you shift.YOU ARE A NOTORIOUS LIAR AND DRAMA QUEEN NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. Perhaps like Piece aka franklyn poochlicker you need to take your medication
    ZThis is a dead issue in my opinion not sure why Dsvid BU brought this back up.This will not help Rev Atherley or Mr Frsnklyn or the political nightwatchman win any seat come 2023 lives be spared in my view.

    Like

  • @ Millie May 20, 2020 6:23 PM

    Again, your inability to comprehend my earlier submissions on the subject of prosecution of corruption is entirely expected. You all remain quite confounding. The “Death to Mottley” brigade spews out ad nauseam baseless claims of authoritarianism and despotism yet you all are simultaneously unable to see that a Prime Minister or any other member of the political class cannot direct the CoP in operational matters nor the DPP with respect to the laying or dropping of charges. That you are incapable of detecting that irony is similarly expected.

    Mia Mottley derives her political legitimacy in the same way that every single other Prime Minister who has won an election derives it, i.e. by virtue of that fact. No one can question the legitimacy of Tom Adams’ victory in 76 or Arthur in 94. However when you have much narrower victories that dampens your legitimacy but it remains to some extent nonetheless (’91 and 2013). However, when you are elected with 74% of votes cast, with turnout relatively low only because Dems didn’t turn out and have won all 30 seats that is an awful lot of political legitimacy. When you have won every single election since 1994 and carved out a safe electoral seat in a previously more or less marginal seat, your political legitimacy is bolstered even further. Contrast that with a “swing politician” brought in by the tide of the swing crossing the floor without any clear reason and more to the point breaking from a party with historic support. I don’t expect you to understand therefore how laughable that comparison is.

    Your insistence on utilising the EU as the yardstick of justice against our cruel regime is hilarious. Are WARU’s local “minority parasites” not descended from your great fount of justice in Europe. My advice to you is that you say the things you wish to post out loud first. Sometimes when we say things in our head they sound perfectly correct but then only when you air them out loud are you able to realise how ridiculous it sounds.

    I however don’t hold out much hope that you will understand any of these.

    Like

  • @ Lorenzo

    Win seats? You mean save their deposits.

    Like

  • @ Khaleel Kothdiwala May 20, 2020 7:39 PM

    You are absolutely right that the law enforcement deficits are not the fault of our beloved government, but of the officials appointed by the DLP, the CoP and DPP. So it’s abundantly clear who is protecting whom.The DLP is once again guilty. The accusation that the government is covering up for Donville Inniss is also ridiculous because the US Department of Justice itself praises the excellent cooperation with the authorities in Barbados. This communication is certainly not through the CoP and DPP, but directly through our honourable government.

    You are also right in your assessment of the sanctions. Nevertheless, we should use the Donville Inniss case here as ammunition against the DLP. To strike at the DLP is always right. The people do not want to hear rational factual explanations, but plausible stories.

    Like

  • @ Tron

    If nothing else, your command of satire does make me laugh lol.

    Like

  • “This will not help Rev Atherley or Mr Frsnklyn or the political nightwatchman win any seat come 2023 lives be spared in my view.”

    yall are going to soon be dropping like flies if there is community spread and that is what you are concerned about, you got 2023 put down somewhere.

    ……so which class fowl are you, the elite class or the lower class, although the plague cares not about distinction..it got alyuh coming to explain all over the place, that must be why this thread is short on fowls tonight…..bouncing from one scandal to next, before one could even finish another scandal starts….we could make a movie or write a book….one way or the next we will be making money…lol

    Like

  • @ Khaleel Kothdiwala May 20, 2020 7:39 PM

    You call it “irony”.

    We see it as total disappointment and a major let down for a country once considered punching above its weight in the division of third world countries.

    Barbados has really gone to the dogs when the rule of Law has walked through that ‘red’ door of no return.

    Enough of your double speak, what are you actually saying here KK?

    Are you letting the cat out of the bag by saying that your boss lady and/or her chief legal advisor in the locus of the ‘effectve’ complainant actually revealed the mountain of evidence stored in the red valise and those entrusted with the Constitutional powers of investigation have done diddly-squat because they were appointed under the previous administration responsible for those deeds of alleged corruption as documented in the deeds of evidence in the same red valise?

    No wonder the EU has taken such a dim view and rigid stance against your banana republic populated by an army of monkeys handling the guns of law enforcement!

    Like

  • @ Millie

    “The rule of law has walked through the ‘red’ door of no return” – that’s delusional even by your standards.

    I’ll try this one more time. The Prime Minister nor any other politician may direct the DPP in her role of deciding whether to pursue a case or the COP on an operational matter. To do that would be to grossly violate democratic norms and the same rule of law. Yet your motley crew would like her to so do.

    On pain of appearing to be a stuck vinyl, I really would like to see some folks facing the criminal courts here and more than that lodging at HM’s convenience in St Philip. And I would like to see it happen soon. But I do not accept that a government should violate democratic norms in order to pursue their opponents. That is a principle without exception Millie.

    And I remind you Miller that the EU takes a dim view not of my country but of the country in which all of us reside and who are all affected by the imperious actions of unaccountable organizations. So you can hate the Prime Minister with every fibre of your being as you do but it is particularly shameful that you would masochistically support actions that will accrue to your and our collective detriment. That is sad but it is not unexpected. What is you all’s motto? Death to Mottley at all costs no matter who is affected. That is rather righteous of you, that you would be willing to sacrifice yourselves in the rabid pursuit of your agenda of hatred.

    As always I await your non-forthcoming answer to my basic questions. You all aren’t terribly good at doing that, are you?

    Like

  • While Khaleel wastes his energy…the ship is sinking, ah know they did something stupid and was trying for a coverup, we always know, we have been on BU long Enuff and know how those fowls think…but never, ever in my wildest dreams did i think it was something so RECKLESS AND DANGEROUS….ah always know when the fowls can only see me in front their faces and in their dreams….that something really vile happened…but it was more than one thing this time…

    ya really need to stop with the hatred thing and accusing bloggers though, no one has to hate a lying corrupt government, they already successfully hate themselves, they are so full of self-hatred that they ENDANGER THEIR OWN PEOPLE…who elected them and pay their salaries…rather than protect them, no one can hate Mia and Co more than they hate themselves….so find another silly teenage accusation, something that actually works and don’t backfire on you this time….it appears you did not even know it had already backfired.

    Like

  • Miller and Piece…since am always the government punching bag, via their yardfowls, for whenever THEY FCUK UP something…am making sure to make some money from it all going foward…my instincts were on point with this….ca-ching……that is me cashing in..

    Like

  • From the Senator

    Like

  • Thanks David.

    It is now beyond doubt that the second post of Deputy Commissioner does not exist in law. That being the case how could someone still function in that office, in a law enforcement agency at that.

    Like

  • @ Khaleel Kothdiwala May 20, 2020 9:04 PM
    “The rule of law has walked through the ‘red’ door of no return” – that’s delusional even by your standards.
    I’ll try this one more time. The Prime Minister nor any other politician may direct the DPP in her role of deciding whether to pursue a case or the COP on an operational matter. To do that would be to grossly violate democratic norms and the same rule of law. Yet your motley crew would like her to so do.”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    You keep exposing your Achilles heel and making yourself an easy target in combat.

    Your are simply being hypocritical here by using red herrings to catch a whale which is not ‘biting’ your partisan political bait.

    Who is asking for any partisan ‘political interference’ in any police operational matters or some interdiction in the functioning of the DPP?

    Isn’t there always a plea from the law enforcement agencies to the citizenry to bring to their attention any evidence or cases of criminal activity; whether blue or white collar?

    Didn’t the previous PM himself made a plea to the public to bring any evidence of wrong doing by those entrusted to serve the public to the relevant law enforcement agencies?

    We are not the ones who made the grand charges of corruption against the previous administration.

    We are not the one with the evidence stored in any red bag.

    We are simply asking that the evidence stored in the red bag be passed on to the relevant authorities (even if by means of Crimstoppers) and let justice takes it course.

    You are the one demanding the EU show equity to Barbados instead of their conviction without a trial?

    Isn’t this the same thing you are doing to the last administration?

    Making allegations without providing the proof before conviction?

    No one hates your “motley” politician as you keep harping on.

    What the public (especially taxpayers) want is fairness and transparency in the administration of their affairs; not political interference in the enforcement of the Law.

    In other words, simply live up to the promises made to the electorate and, more importantly, the taxpayers whose hard-earned money, allegedly, was mis-appropriated by the previous cabal of DLP crooks.

    Do you get it now, puerile political punk?

    “When someone accuses you of doing something you’re not doing, it’s usually because they’re the ones doing it.”

    “Even the false accusations of a person of dubious morality can taint the reputation of an upright servant.”― Hock G. Tjoa, The Ingenious Judge Dee

    Like

  • Piece the Prophet

    The Honourable One among the Dishonourable and Dishoned Ones has taken to blocking de ole man’s submissions

    Why dat?

    Heheheheh

    Like

  • So what did alyuh do with Fowl Enuff….is she in QUA RAN TINE..

    Like

  • I always find it rather amusing when persons speak to matters, such as these which take place in relative quiet, without having the faintest idea or the association with what’s happening. And to do so authoratively is even more mirthful. But then again behind the pseudonym you could even be the DPP or COP her/himself so who knows. You might be well primed to speak to the subject. You all are a laughable coterie. But what else might one expect from DtM Brigade?

    Like